dalvin200
Sep 12, 05:15 AM
6pm BST, on what channel? :p
BBC TWELVE :P
BBC TWELVE :P
Burgess07
Apr 29, 03:53 PM
1. Dang, I liked the sliders. Wish Apple would set an option in the system preferences to enable/disable them.
2. Scrollbars still disappear for me.
2. Scrollbars still disappear for me.
IBradMac
Apr 15, 08:24 PM
thats a lot of ports. :eek:
blanding
Dec 26, 07:33 AM
oh, i already received it ,i like it very much.
more...
DoFoT9
May 14, 12:21 AM
the temps haven't been that high (70C or under). i have changed the voltages, but maybe not enough. that's one of those things you have to play with.
but it looks like 2 of my rigs are down now. i might be driving back to fix them tomorrow night i guess. i'll put both of them back to 3.5 ghz and hopefully they'll stay stable.
my asus has been rock solid compared to the other 2 though. staying at 3.5-3.6 ghz
oh thats not very hot! might be the PSU struggling maybe?
but it looks like 2 of my rigs are down now. i might be driving back to fix them tomorrow night i guess. i'll put both of them back to 3.5 ghz and hopefully they'll stay stable.
my asus has been rock solid compared to the other 2 though. staying at 3.5-3.6 ghz
oh thats not very hot! might be the PSU struggling maybe?
this is funah
Mar 17, 07:17 AM
The fact that you feel good about yourself after doing this, to the point where you come on here to gloat, speaks volumes about your character.
Pretty grotesque.
somebody's jealous. :p
Pretty grotesque.
somebody's jealous. :p
more...
MrMoore
Mar 25, 10:25 AM
Wow! 10 years. I remember installing it on a Power Mac G3. Saying "Cool" and booting back to OS 9 ;)
I though it was sleek looking, but when I need to do real "work", I went back to "classic" OS. It wasn't until 10.2 (Jaguar) that I became full time OS X user and also put Windows in the bin. Haven't look back since. :D
I though it was sleek looking, but when I need to do real "work", I went back to "classic" OS. It wasn't until 10.2 (Jaguar) that I became full time OS X user and also put Windows in the bin. Haven't look back since. :D
CalBoy
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
more...
rown hair with highlights,
rown hair with red highlights
more...
honey blonde highlights on rown hair. Consider honey blonde, ginger,; Consider honey blonde, ginger,. maclaptop. Apr 28, 10:48 PM. Great pictures.
honey blonde highlights on rown hair. +honey+rown+highlights; +honey+rown+highlights. Pez555. May 4, 07:45 AM. disappointing if true.
more...
Color: Blonde, Golden Blonde,
Long Hair With Blonde
more...
Honey Blonde Highlights In
londe hair highlights 2011.
more...
honey blonde highlights on
Tags: bangs, londe highlights
honey blonde highlights on rown hair. honey-londe highlights
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
more...
Rocketman
Dec 13, 10:38 AM
I really hope LTE is on all handsets going forward whether fully deployed or not. It will be deployed. While I am wishing for unicorns here, I also wish both AT&T and Verizon would let the other carriers customers roam on their LTE network, possibly for a monthly fee or a bucket of GB fee. Let's pay them what they are due, but let's have consumer convenience as the primary goal for a change.
BTW the reason the rumor is wrong is it says LTE only. In reality it will be data only, no voice specific transceiver. All ops will be by IP including VoIP for voice. It will still be able to drop from 4G to 3G level service to assure access.
Rocketman
BTW the reason the rumor is wrong is it says LTE only. In reality it will be data only, no voice specific transceiver. All ops will be by IP including VoIP for voice. It will still be able to drop from 4G to 3G level service to assure access.
Rocketman
Full of Win
Apr 29, 04:45 PM
I heard microsoft is making some changes to its next OS release too. Apparently the blue screen of death will be a black screen of death in Windows 8.
btw- does anyone know why the current version is named Windows 7? Why 7?
As for Lion, I am looking forward to having the ability to switch to an iOS appearance for apps. It will be nice to organize then like that. The idea has grown on me.
To stay ahead of the 6 in 10.6. When the XBOX 2 was released, the rumor was that it was called the 360, as to put it on equal naming as the Playstation 3. Microsoft did not want to be '2' and them '3', so they added a number that started with 3.
btw- does anyone know why the current version is named Windows 7? Why 7?
As for Lion, I am looking forward to having the ability to switch to an iOS appearance for apps. It will be nice to organize then like that. The idea has grown on me.
To stay ahead of the 6 in 10.6. When the XBOX 2 was released, the rumor was that it was called the 360, as to put it on equal naming as the Playstation 3. Microsoft did not want to be '2' and them '3', so they added a number that started with 3.
more...
iphones4evry1
Oct 6, 07:49 PM
Good !
I'm getting sick and tired of AT&T's decline in coverage and spotty coverage. When I had my RAZR phone, I used to have great coverage everywhere on AT&T, but over the past year AT&T's coverage and quality of coverage has declined BIG TIME. I'm sick and tired of it! I hope Verizon launches a HUGE campaign showing all the spots on the map where AT&T has lousy coverage and it motivates AT&T to get off their laurels and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad:
I'm getting sick and tired of AT&T's decline in coverage and spotty coverage. When I had my RAZR phone, I used to have great coverage everywhere on AT&T, but over the past year AT&T's coverage and quality of coverage has declined BIG TIME. I'm sick and tired of it! I hope Verizon launches a HUGE campaign showing all the spots on the map where AT&T has lousy coverage and it motivates AT&T to get off their laurels and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad:
lmalave
Oct 20, 09:59 AM
When will we see these numbers broken out into business/enterprise vs. consumer?
Seriously, Apple is pretty much a non-factor in the enterprise. There simply is no integration, no large-scale server application use other than web, and few enterprise-ready applications. There's no Biztalk/Websphere/SQL/Oracle running on Apple outside of a few educational institutions. Microsoft and IBM own the enterprise and considering Apple in an enterprise outside of some limited marketing/advertising/media/audio verticals is absurd. I personally deal with 130 companies that have 500-250k computers and Apple is simply not a factor at all.
However, in the consumer world it's a very different story. Apple has the potential to continue making huge inroads into the consumer/home user/SOHO segments where the lack of enterprise applications means little if anything.
I'd like to see the numbers of how Apple compares in the home segment rather than just the overall. Why can't we see this broken out?
Hmm...well another thread mentioned a survey that something like 18% of consumers are considering buying a Mac. I'll bet in the lasest quarter, Apple broke 10% in the consumer market. This is a good strategy for Apple. Macs have a chance to make inroads in the consumer market, whereas they have no chance in the corporate market. Even things like XServe and XRaid are marketed to industries where the Apple is still relatively strong (e.g. video production, scientific research).
Seriously, Apple is pretty much a non-factor in the enterprise. There simply is no integration, no large-scale server application use other than web, and few enterprise-ready applications. There's no Biztalk/Websphere/SQL/Oracle running on Apple outside of a few educational institutions. Microsoft and IBM own the enterprise and considering Apple in an enterprise outside of some limited marketing/advertising/media/audio verticals is absurd. I personally deal with 130 companies that have 500-250k computers and Apple is simply not a factor at all.
However, in the consumer world it's a very different story. Apple has the potential to continue making huge inroads into the consumer/home user/SOHO segments where the lack of enterprise applications means little if anything.
I'd like to see the numbers of how Apple compares in the home segment rather than just the overall. Why can't we see this broken out?
Hmm...well another thread mentioned a survey that something like 18% of consumers are considering buying a Mac. I'll bet in the lasest quarter, Apple broke 10% in the consumer market. This is a good strategy for Apple. Macs have a chance to make inroads in the consumer market, whereas they have no chance in the corporate market. Even things like XServe and XRaid are marketed to industries where the Apple is still relatively strong (e.g. video production, scientific research).
more...
Stella
Nov 16, 01:11 PM
I threw up in my mouth a little bit™ for a month with the Intel switch.
I may have to hospitalized if this actually happens.
You should understand the technology a bit more before making assumptions about "evil x86 processors" ( thats Intel and AMD ). The intel processors ( now ) are way better than IBM could produce.
There absolutely nothing wrong with AMD. In recent times they have fallen back a bit ( didn't produce better processors than the AMD64 ) - but thats the way its always been - AMD get ahead of Intel , and vice-versa.
For a long time AMD desktop processsors were cheaper and better than Intels. This has changed since the latest Intel processors. AMD mobile processors have always been second best.
Two years ago, I would have taken an AMD desktop over Intel.
( Yes, I realise this is about mobile processors )
I may have to hospitalized if this actually happens.
You should understand the technology a bit more before making assumptions about "evil x86 processors" ( thats Intel and AMD ). The intel processors ( now ) are way better than IBM could produce.
There absolutely nothing wrong with AMD. In recent times they have fallen back a bit ( didn't produce better processors than the AMD64 ) - but thats the way its always been - AMD get ahead of Intel , and vice-versa.
For a long time AMD desktop processsors were cheaper and better than Intels. This has changed since the latest Intel processors. AMD mobile processors have always been second best.
Two years ago, I would have taken an AMD desktop over Intel.
( Yes, I realise this is about mobile processors )
jettredmont
Sep 25, 07:40 PM
All except for a few itsy bitsy tiny details.
A: Apple didn't create the event, It is a photography event put on by someone else.
Not to mention, it is a photography event that happens once every two years, which means this is Aperture's first time available during Photokina!
A: Apple didn't create the event, It is a photography event put on by someone else.
Not to mention, it is a photography event that happens once every two years, which means this is Aperture's first time available during Photokina!
more...
TBDNET
Oct 6, 11:46 AM
First, Apple must build an iPhone that will work on Verizon's CDMA network (iPhone is GSM & HPDA), OR Verizon must upgrade their network to handle GSM/HDMA. I don't thing either will ever happen.
Isn't Verizon's 4G network going to be GSM?
on another note if it is wouldn't their coverage also be spotty?
Isn't Verizon's 4G network going to be GSM?
on another note if it is wouldn't their coverage also be spotty?
thesheep
Aug 23, 08:26 AM
I bought a new 23" display last week, from the UK Apple Store website. I rang them before I ordered to check that it would be one with the new specs. They confirmed that it would be.
Now the monitor has arrived and it has serial number 2A6171XXXXX. Apparently manufactured in April 2006. I just rang technical support and they said it isn't one with the new specs. They didn't know if there was a new model number, or when they're getting the new specs in, or anything at all really.
If anyone is very keen to get the new version in the UK, I suggest you wait a while and try to be extremely specific when you do order.
Other than that it seems to be a really great display and I'm probably not going to bother sending it back.
However, I do have one issue with it. It seems that certain shades of bright green are much more saturated and more 'garish' on the display than they are on my Powerbook display. If I look at the same image on both, the difference is really noticeable. Not really sure what to do about it. I imagine it is probably the display that's inaccurate, rather than the powerbook, but I can't be sure. Anyone had any experiences like this? It is particularly noticeable on 'yellowy-green' colours, which look much more garish on the cinema display.
Now the monitor has arrived and it has serial number 2A6171XXXXX. Apparently manufactured in April 2006. I just rang technical support and they said it isn't one with the new specs. They didn't know if there was a new model number, or when they're getting the new specs in, or anything at all really.
If anyone is very keen to get the new version in the UK, I suggest you wait a while and try to be extremely specific when you do order.
Other than that it seems to be a really great display and I'm probably not going to bother sending it back.
However, I do have one issue with it. It seems that certain shades of bright green are much more saturated and more 'garish' on the display than they are on my Powerbook display. If I look at the same image on both, the difference is really noticeable. Not really sure what to do about it. I imagine it is probably the display that's inaccurate, rather than the powerbook, but I can't be sure. Anyone had any experiences like this? It is particularly noticeable on 'yellowy-green' colours, which look much more garish on the cinema display.
more...
dethmaShine
Apr 12, 07:06 AM
For the anti-virus, yes, for office no you get the complete version, as well as MS live.
Depending on where you buy, you actually can get more "full" versions of applications then you do with a mac. I'm not knocking apple or iLife, they're great apps, but you cannot say that a new PC is unusable until you download a lot of apps and such. Dell, HP, etc all come with office and/or other apps. Yeah there's crapware installed and I won't dispute that, but you also get full version apps
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows7/products/features
I don't think so. Really office for free?
Depending on where you buy, you actually can get more "full" versions of applications then you do with a mac. I'm not knocking apple or iLife, they're great apps, but you cannot say that a new PC is unusable until you download a lot of apps and such. Dell, HP, etc all come with office and/or other apps. Yeah there's crapware installed and I won't dispute that, but you also get full version apps
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows7/products/features
I don't think so. Really office for free?
Warbrain
Sep 12, 08:47 AM
Maybe with Disney coming on board it will be called iTOONS! ;)
Um, Disney owns a ton of companies that don't make cartoons.
Um, Disney owns a ton of companies that don't make cartoons.
bpaluzzi
May 4, 04:26 AM
yes, that would make it more expensive. in fact, what we're essentially talking about here is nothing more than a 'slate' tablet PC, which has been around forever. they're making a comeback thanks to the ipad, and i hope they will become the standard, for the higher end tablets anyways. they are more expensive than ipads, but they're actual computers that run full operating systems. they have touch and they have pen input.
that's a direction Apple should have gone in a long time ago. i hope, hope, hope they will go there in the future.
They've been around for a long time, and noone has bought them. And for good reason: they're awful. They try to do two things (touch and full OS), and the result is that they don't do either well (and that's being generous). And they're not making a comeback in any way. Companies that have traditionally made slates are ditching them for iPad-esque tablets.
that's a direction Apple should have gone in a long time ago. i hope, hope, hope they will go there in the future.
They've been around for a long time, and noone has bought them. And for good reason: they're awful. They try to do two things (touch and full OS), and the result is that they don't do either well (and that's being generous). And they're not making a comeback in any way. Companies that have traditionally made slates are ditching them for iPad-esque tablets.
jarednt1
Sep 8, 10:34 AM
Kanye West is supposed to be the SMARTEST man in the music bus. Seems to me to be the most ignorant.
If you don't like Bush fine, but he HAD NO RIGHT to say what he said especially in the venue that he was in.
His ignorant comments cost donated money to the victims plan and simple.
If you don't like Bush fine, but he HAD NO RIGHT to say what he said especially in the venue that he was in.
His ignorant comments cost donated money to the victims plan and simple.
pohl
Mar 28, 05:02 PM
I predict that the revenue bump experienced by award winners in previous years will pale in comparison to the bump received by 2011 winners in conjunction with the placement they'll get in the app store following the award. And the 2012 bump will eclipse that.
Nekbeth
Apr 28, 09:38 AM
wlh99, let me tell you precisely what I want to achieve, so there is no more confusion.
Two views;
View 1 is the ticker and a button underneath (button start.
View 2 is display (label) with the timer running and a button underneath (button Cancel)
Button Cancel will have two maybe three funtions ( stop the timer, reset it or just reset it at once and call View1 so the user can reuse the timer over again. That's it, I want to add that function to my App for 1.1 or it could be 1.4 if don't get to study now hahaa.
I'll take care of the alarms, sounds and those details if it reaches to zero, that I know already.
By the way, what's with 3rd person reference? the OP? you can call me Nekbeth or Chrystian, it's a lot more polite. Maybe you guys have a way to refer to someone , I don't know.
Two views;
View 1 is the ticker and a button underneath (button start.
View 2 is display (label) with the timer running and a button underneath (button Cancel)
Button Cancel will have two maybe three funtions ( stop the timer, reset it or just reset it at once and call View1 so the user can reuse the timer over again. That's it, I want to add that function to my App for 1.1 or it could be 1.4 if don't get to study now hahaa.
I'll take care of the alarms, sounds and those details if it reaches to zero, that I know already.
By the way, what's with 3rd person reference? the OP? you can call me Nekbeth or Chrystian, it's a lot more polite. Maybe you guys have a way to refer to someone , I don't know.
michaelrjohnson
Aug 7, 02:26 PM
Very nice to see. Can't complain.
ivladster
Mar 28, 04:20 PM
Welcome to 1984.
You know there are plenty of other platforms and OS, so no it's not 1984, it's 2011!
You know there are plenty of other platforms and OS, so no it's not 1984, it's 2011!
No comments:
Post a Comment