xrockislife3016
Sep 30, 03:00 PM
Bloggers often struggle to gain acceptance as a valid and legitimate source of news, and with this stunt (see link) Gizmodo have helped to undermine those who have worked so hard to gain credibility within an elitist industry.
I'm not without a sense of humour, but when Giz started screwing with a live presentation they crossed a line. This type of behaviour shouldn't be condoned in my opinion and a strong signal should be sent out to those responsible. Who's to say that they wouldn't interfere with an Apple event? What do you make of their actions?
http://gizmodo.com/343348/confessions-the-meanest-thing-gizmodo-did-at-ces
When i found that gizmodo did this i lmao. But dude i guess its a little childish. But hey not like a remote is gonna do much with a laptop
I'm not without a sense of humour, but when Giz started screwing with a live presentation they crossed a line. This type of behaviour shouldn't be condoned in my opinion and a strong signal should be sent out to those responsible. Who's to say that they wouldn't interfere with an Apple event? What do you make of their actions?
http://gizmodo.com/343348/confessions-the-meanest-thing-gizmodo-did-at-ces
When i found that gizmodo did this i lmao. But dude i guess its a little childish. But hey not like a remote is gonna do much with a laptop
twoodcc
May 2, 10:16 PM
well i think i finally got my home built system running at 4.0 ghz. it has been a long journey, to say the least. but it's folding away a bigadv unit and 2 GPUs. hopefully this will last all week since i'll be away
eawmp1
May 6, 10:17 AM
This is a little ridiculous. Is it really a big deal to answer simple questions about firearms?
And that is the problem. Any question about guns to certain segments of the population degenerates into the ridiculous.
And that is the problem. Any question about guns to certain segments of the population degenerates into the ridiculous.
OdduWon
Oct 11, 02:41 AM
cover flow is going to look great on the ipod cinema. with cell under the hood the downloading games fom you wii will be easy.
applekid
Apr 3, 09:06 PM
My question now turns to this: how do I get Microsoft to give up this information?? The cops are not able to get any info, Microsoft is giving me a run-around. I'm open to any ideas, if anyone knows a phone number for someone higher up the food chain at Microsoft, that would be great. I'm just really pissed off that someone is still using my 360 and Microsoft won't do anything to help.
For any realistic chance of getting Microsoft to help you, you need to carry out a lawsuit.
So pawn shop people have been renting this home? Kind of odd.
For any realistic chance of getting Microsoft to help you, you need to carry out a lawsuit.
So pawn shop people have been renting this home? Kind of odd.
deejemon
Jan 14, 09:55 PM
*
roadbloc
Apr 29, 04:54 PM
I liked it how it was before, with the sliders... :(
richard4339
Nov 17, 10:12 AM
My presario v2000 has amd2.0ghz turion64. It is the same thickness as my wife's g4 ibook. It isn't near as hot as powerbooks.
-Chuck
I have the exact same laptop as yours (well, I did. It's leaving my ownership tonight!), and my first through when I got the new MBP C2D is that the MBP runs cooler than it.
But, I will give you this; my Compaq runs hot, but not always. It's pretty rare when it gets extremely hot, but it is almost always warm. The new MBP, on the other hand, seems like that while it can get hot, it runs cooler overall than my old Compaq.
-Chuck
I have the exact same laptop as yours (well, I did. It's leaving my ownership tonight!), and my first through when I got the new MBP C2D is that the MBP runs cooler than it.
But, I will give you this; my Compaq runs hot, but not always. It's pretty rare when it gets extremely hot, but it is almost always warm. The new MBP, on the other hand, seems like that while it can get hot, it runs cooler overall than my old Compaq.
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.
Heart Rate Chart
Resting Pulse Rate; Pulse Rate
phil ex wife | Heart rate
Mass Index (BMI) Chart
Resting+heart+rate+norms
the heart rate and pulse
and or heart rate chart)
Heart Rate Reduction and
Resting heart rate and
Ideal Resting Heart Rate
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.
snberk103
Apr 15, 02:38 PM
...
If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.
...
My only claim is that something the TSA is doing is working to help prevent hijackings. This was in response to some arguments that nothing airport security was doing was in fact useful. If you go back, you will see I quoted both TSA and European stats, not just TSA. And that while there may have been no passenger hijackings in the 90s in the USA, there were a couple in Europe, and one in Japan. And then nothing in Europe and Japan or the USA since 9/11. Which I believe is due to increased airport security, similar to what the TSA does.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not advocating for the current screening, just refuting some baseless arguments that it's a total waste of money ("baseless" as in - "it's my opinion, and I'm not presenting any evidence to support it"). Opinions are fine, and everyone is entitled to them. Just don't expect me to accept an opinion as fact, if I can support my opposing opinion with at least some evidence.
(I'm using Japan and Europe 'cause they also have a tradition of terrorist organizations targeting their planes, and because they "harmonized" their screening standards to the TSA. No choice, if they wanted to continue flying their planes into or over US airspace. Other countries may have also harmonized (like Canada) but either they don't have a tradition of terrorism, or I don't have enough info about them.)
If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.
...
My only claim is that something the TSA is doing is working to help prevent hijackings. This was in response to some arguments that nothing airport security was doing was in fact useful. If you go back, you will see I quoted both TSA and European stats, not just TSA. And that while there may have been no passenger hijackings in the 90s in the USA, there were a couple in Europe, and one in Japan. And then nothing in Europe and Japan or the USA since 9/11. Which I believe is due to increased airport security, similar to what the TSA does.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not advocating for the current screening, just refuting some baseless arguments that it's a total waste of money ("baseless" as in - "it's my opinion, and I'm not presenting any evidence to support it"). Opinions are fine, and everyone is entitled to them. Just don't expect me to accept an opinion as fact, if I can support my opposing opinion with at least some evidence.
(I'm using Japan and Europe 'cause they also have a tradition of terrorist organizations targeting their planes, and because they "harmonized" their screening standards to the TSA. No choice, if they wanted to continue flying their planes into or over US airspace. Other countries may have also harmonized (like Canada) but either they don't have a tradition of terrorism, or I don't have enough info about them.)
MacRumors
Nov 23, 04:14 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
On November 24th Apple will be holding their annual Day After Thanksgiving sale (U.S. only) which is a one day event. What's notable about this event is that Apple rarely discounts their products, normally strictly following their manufactuer suggested retail prices. That being said, once sales tax and/or shipping costs and factored in, individual customers may still do better when purchasing from other online retailers.
Like last year (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=1934318&postcount=69), Apple will only be offering savings on specific products. A preliminary list available at this time reveals the following sales:
$11 off of iPods and iPod nanos
$20 off of Adobe Elements
$69 for .Mac
Unspecified discounts on the MacBook and Shure headphones
Final prices and offers will be posted when made available. The sale will be offered at their retail stores as well as the online Apple Store.
On November 24th Apple will be holding their annual Day After Thanksgiving sale (U.S. only) which is a one day event. What's notable about this event is that Apple rarely discounts their products, normally strictly following their manufactuer suggested retail prices. That being said, once sales tax and/or shipping costs and factored in, individual customers may still do better when purchasing from other online retailers.
Like last year (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=1934318&postcount=69), Apple will only be offering savings on specific products. A preliminary list available at this time reveals the following sales:
$11 off of iPods and iPod nanos
$20 off of Adobe Elements
$69 for .Mac
Unspecified discounts on the MacBook and Shure headphones
Final prices and offers will be posted when made available. The sale will be offered at their retail stores as well as the online Apple Store.
MattSepeta
Apr 27, 04:19 PM
am I the only one to think that separate restroom from men and women are an obsolete relic of the past?
put stalls in. that should be enough for privacy. full separate facility don't make any sense logically, technically and economically.
Interesting take, but I can see in 1080p the impending sexual harassment lawsuits.
put stalls in. that should be enough for privacy. full separate facility don't make any sense logically, technically and economically.
Interesting take, but I can see in 1080p the impending sexual harassment lawsuits.
Stang68
Jan 14, 11:43 AM
I will still be extremely happy if the only thing he announces is 802.1x capability for the iPhone/touch. Maybe it will come in the form of the 1.1.3 update! But, on to other things:
Obviously a MacBook Air (stupid name)
Movie Rentals
I dont think a 3G iPhone announcement this early because then not many people would buy the phone until the 3G version actually comes out.
iPhone/touch SDK demo.
Finishes with a song by The Killers...:D
Obviously a MacBook Air (stupid name)
Movie Rentals
I dont think a 3G iPhone announcement this early because then not many people would buy the phone until the 3G version actually comes out.
iPhone/touch SDK demo.
Finishes with a song by The Killers...:D
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.
p0intblank
Sep 12, 08:23 AM
damn..
since they haven't take down apple store for update, does that mean no new product? just new service? i'm waiting for a MB/MBP update
The store will probably go down within an hour before Steve's keynote. I'm guessing the iTunes Music Store is down this early because this update takes a lot longer than the Web site.
since they haven't take down apple store for update, does that mean no new product? just new service? i'm waiting for a MB/MBP update
The store will probably go down within an hour before Steve's keynote. I'm guessing the iTunes Music Store is down this early because this update takes a lot longer than the Web site.
MasterHowl
Mar 24, 03:09 PM
Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you, happy birthday dear Mac OS X, happy birthday to you :apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple:
ritmomundo
Mar 18, 06:11 PM
Ok fair enough, that was poorly phrased. What I meant was "It seems that some smart phone owners feel some kind of envy to me because I own an iPhone 4."
Lol, serious? Sorry bro, sounds pretty much the same to me. You're still assuming that because someone compares features with you, or comments on your phone, that they are jealous of you because of your phone.
Lol, serious? Sorry bro, sounds pretty much the same to me. You're still assuming that because someone compares features with you, or comments on your phone, that they are jealous of you because of your phone.
OneMike
Apr 8, 10:38 PM
installing the HD into your macbook pro? i'd like to know how that goes. i've seen some issues with the 1tb drives not fitting just right. (too thick)
highest I've ever been able to install is a 750GB.
Yes I put it in the pro. It fit without any issue. Smooth as the stock drive and ssd installs. So far I'm very happy with it.
It is thicker 12.5 compared to the norm 9.5, but current MBPs can handle it. I can confirm 17-inch, but I did a lot of research before buying and have read about success with the 15 and 13 inch models too.
Currently letting all my data xfer over.
highest I've ever been able to install is a 750GB.
Yes I put it in the pro. It fit without any issue. Smooth as the stock drive and ssd installs. So far I'm very happy with it.
It is thicker 12.5 compared to the norm 9.5, but current MBPs can handle it. I can confirm 17-inch, but I did a lot of research before buying and have read about success with the 15 and 13 inch models too.
Currently letting all my data xfer over.
Flowbee
Nov 16, 01:09 PM
please no page 1 vs page 2 comments... :)
OK... This should be on page 3. :p
[Damn you, longofest!]
OK... This should be on page 3. :p
[Damn you, longofest!]
Clive At Five
Oct 3, 02:24 PM
This will be the last "really impressive" processor upgrade for 2+ years into the future. Remaining improvements will be in features, communications, integration, sooftware, etc.
I disagree. While the "MHz War" is likely drawing to a close, the "Multicore War" is just starting. Within the next 2 years, I'd be willing to bet just about anything that we'll be seeing single CPUs with 4 cores (for sure), 8 cores, and the beginning rumblings of 16 core CPUs. If you ask me, the past 4 years have yeilded very little progress in terms of CPU speed. A 3.0 GHz Pentium 4 is comparable to a 2.0 GHz Yonah... and now that we've ventured into Multicore Land, I guarantee that there will be huge processor speed increases.
OSX wil be updaed to 10.5 of course as this is the central theme of 1-07. Related to this we will see updates of iApps to take advantage of new features and increased integration.
I don't think Leopard will be out yet. I don't have any reason to back that up, I just don't think that Apple is in a huge rush to get it out. I'm pretty sure they'll want to polish it down to the last detail in lieu of Vista coming out. The better Leopard looks when compared to Vista, the more praise Apple will get for it. You have no idea how many people I've talked to are planning on waiting 6-12 months after its release before buying Vista. Those months are Apple's big chance to convert a lot of PC users while they bask in the sunlight of a job well done. They're not going to release a rush-job.
-Clive
I disagree. While the "MHz War" is likely drawing to a close, the "Multicore War" is just starting. Within the next 2 years, I'd be willing to bet just about anything that we'll be seeing single CPUs with 4 cores (for sure), 8 cores, and the beginning rumblings of 16 core CPUs. If you ask me, the past 4 years have yeilded very little progress in terms of CPU speed. A 3.0 GHz Pentium 4 is comparable to a 2.0 GHz Yonah... and now that we've ventured into Multicore Land, I guarantee that there will be huge processor speed increases.
OSX wil be updaed to 10.5 of course as this is the central theme of 1-07. Related to this we will see updates of iApps to take advantage of new features and increased integration.
I don't think Leopard will be out yet. I don't have any reason to back that up, I just don't think that Apple is in a huge rush to get it out. I'm pretty sure they'll want to polish it down to the last detail in lieu of Vista coming out. The better Leopard looks when compared to Vista, the more praise Apple will get for it. You have no idea how many people I've talked to are planning on waiting 6-12 months after its release before buying Vista. Those months are Apple's big chance to convert a lot of PC users while they bask in the sunlight of a job well done. They're not going to release a rush-job.
-Clive
wnurse
Aug 8, 12:25 AM
Did you bother to read my whole post? Or were you too excited upon you first glorious revelation?
And maybe I'm not familiar enough with the LCD production process, but I understood that the pixel size was part of the panel so a 24 inch slab would have more pixels than a 23 inch slab. Both monitors have the same resolution.
I also asked how Dell claims greater contrast ratio and brightness (800:1 and 300cd/m2 on the 20 inch) than the Apple? Either someone's lying, or they aren't using identical parts.
edit: BTW, I'm just asking some simple questions trying to clear up my own confusion, there's no need to be a prick
Who said anything about Dell claiming greater contrast. Which of my post said that Dell claimed greater contrast ratio and brightness?. I would never make that claim (The dell website claims that the Dell 24 inch is 700:1 contrast, same as the Apple panels, which just got that upgrade while the Dell panels where that for a while). As to brightness, Dell 24 inch is 400 cd/m2 while the apple 23 inch is also 400 cd/m2. I'm neither a Dell fanboy nor an apple fanboy (as i so fondly point out time after time, i have a apple power G5 mac with a 20 inch Dell monitor). I would never make claims such as Dell monitor is better than Apple monitor unless I knew that to be true.. I pointed out that they used the same panels. Yes, the size may be different but they come off the same manufacturing line. To see Dell specs, here is the link for the 24 inch http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=222-0863
They are the same panels except notice Dell has more features which puzzles me greatly. Apple wants to charge a premium for their monitor and that is fine with me but come on!!!.. have more features than the other guy please!!!.. you know how annonying it is for a Dell fanboy to come up to you and say.. hey, our monitor is the same but mine is better and cheaper (better in terms of more features, not brightness or contrast). If you think features don't matter, you are living in la la land. I like the fact that i can hook up more things to my Dell monitor than i could have with an apple monitor. If the apple monitor was more versatile and offered more features, i'd consider paying the premium but i am not gonna get an overpriced apple monitor cause stevie says so.. I don't see him offering me rides on his boat.. why the hell should i get trapped in his reality distortion field?. Give me something better and i will gladly hand over my money to Stevie so he can get a bigger boat (and without any complaints).
As to my first glorius revelation, you must be a newbie. you should search for my name in other apple forums. I don't suffer fools gladly (or people who reply to a post too quickly). When i post, i do not expect an instantaneous response. It's ok to google the information before you respond. I can wait!!. If you don't know or understand, say so but do not try to make a point about something you don't know about. You replied to one of my post about how wrong I was that dell and apple were using the same panel and now you claim you don't know about the lcd production process?.. and you complain about me being mean?.. you leave yourself open to such an attack when you start making statements you have no idea are true or not.
Google is a great resource.. I don't know everything either (i wish i did but unfortunately, time is finite and my brain only has so much capacity).. but I always research stuff on google before posting. It helps (also helps to view the company you are bashing website to see their monitor specs before posting).
BTW, since the apple 30 inch is definetly a better value than Dell 30 inch (although i am sure Michael will not take that lying down.. watch for dell to suddenly drop prices on their monitors) i am soliciting funds to my "get a apple 30 inch monitor" foundation. I get the feeling i will not be seeing your dollar. Oh well. Maybe I haven't antagonized everyone in all the forums and i can get some donations to my wonderful foundation (whoose sole purpose is to get me a 30 inch apple monitor).
And maybe I'm not familiar enough with the LCD production process, but I understood that the pixel size was part of the panel so a 24 inch slab would have more pixels than a 23 inch slab. Both monitors have the same resolution.
I also asked how Dell claims greater contrast ratio and brightness (800:1 and 300cd/m2 on the 20 inch) than the Apple? Either someone's lying, or they aren't using identical parts.
edit: BTW, I'm just asking some simple questions trying to clear up my own confusion, there's no need to be a prick
Who said anything about Dell claiming greater contrast. Which of my post said that Dell claimed greater contrast ratio and brightness?. I would never make that claim (The dell website claims that the Dell 24 inch is 700:1 contrast, same as the Apple panels, which just got that upgrade while the Dell panels where that for a while). As to brightness, Dell 24 inch is 400 cd/m2 while the apple 23 inch is also 400 cd/m2. I'm neither a Dell fanboy nor an apple fanboy (as i so fondly point out time after time, i have a apple power G5 mac with a 20 inch Dell monitor). I would never make claims such as Dell monitor is better than Apple monitor unless I knew that to be true.. I pointed out that they used the same panels. Yes, the size may be different but they come off the same manufacturing line. To see Dell specs, here is the link for the 24 inch http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=222-0863
They are the same panels except notice Dell has more features which puzzles me greatly. Apple wants to charge a premium for their monitor and that is fine with me but come on!!!.. have more features than the other guy please!!!.. you know how annonying it is for a Dell fanboy to come up to you and say.. hey, our monitor is the same but mine is better and cheaper (better in terms of more features, not brightness or contrast). If you think features don't matter, you are living in la la land. I like the fact that i can hook up more things to my Dell monitor than i could have with an apple monitor. If the apple monitor was more versatile and offered more features, i'd consider paying the premium but i am not gonna get an overpriced apple monitor cause stevie says so.. I don't see him offering me rides on his boat.. why the hell should i get trapped in his reality distortion field?. Give me something better and i will gladly hand over my money to Stevie so he can get a bigger boat (and without any complaints).
As to my first glorius revelation, you must be a newbie. you should search for my name in other apple forums. I don't suffer fools gladly (or people who reply to a post too quickly). When i post, i do not expect an instantaneous response. It's ok to google the information before you respond. I can wait!!. If you don't know or understand, say so but do not try to make a point about something you don't know about. You replied to one of my post about how wrong I was that dell and apple were using the same panel and now you claim you don't know about the lcd production process?.. and you complain about me being mean?.. you leave yourself open to such an attack when you start making statements you have no idea are true or not.
Google is a great resource.. I don't know everything either (i wish i did but unfortunately, time is finite and my brain only has so much capacity).. but I always research stuff on google before posting. It helps (also helps to view the company you are bashing website to see their monitor specs before posting).
BTW, since the apple 30 inch is definetly a better value than Dell 30 inch (although i am sure Michael will not take that lying down.. watch for dell to suddenly drop prices on their monitors) i am soliciting funds to my "get a apple 30 inch monitor" foundation. I get the feeling i will not be seeing your dollar. Oh well. Maybe I haven't antagonized everyone in all the forums and i can get some donations to my wonderful foundation (whoose sole purpose is to get me a 30 inch apple monitor).
SeaFox
Oct 28, 11:23 PM
A) It's not the OSS community that's trying to crack Apple's DRM. Lets get that straight. These people have nothing to do with that community. These guys are just pirates using the source that is out there.
That's true. But they are the ones who are going bellyache continually about Apple not having the software available anymore. "Why can't I get the Darwin source code?" "This is unfair, they used BSD stuff and now they aren't sharing!" "Why haven't they released 10.4.9?" (when it comes out)
They aren't going to look at it from Apple's perspective. They aren't going to say. "Well, gee thanks Apple for trying to share the software with us. We're sorry you're getting screwed over by Wintel hackers who are too cheap to just buy a Mac." They're going too say. Well, we're sorry that's happening but you have to just put up with it as part of having your stuff available. They'll make Apple out to be evil when this is all a reactionary measure. Apple wants to release Darwin as open source, otherwise they could have just released the first version and then closed the source after that (they can legally do that, just because it was open source and you released it once doesn't mean you have to keep doing it). Apple would never be able to use any newer BSD components after that, they would begin maintaining their software as a fork pretty much. They only pulled it because someone keeps hacking to run it on plain beige box Wintels. And the OSS people aren't going to look at those hackers as the ones responsible for the source being pulled.
Many OSS people are the free as in speech types, but I feel most are a combination of the free as in speech and as in beer types. They wants software to be free for use and they don't think it should have a pricetag attached. These are the ones always saying Apple should have to release Aqua too just because the Darwin part of OSX is released.
Edit:
Oh ****! Thanks Apple! Now, how am I supposed to get Mac OS X to run on my old Linux box?
See? There they are now. "Oh, ****! Thanks Apple!" Who's fault is it the source was pulled again?
That's true. But they are the ones who are going bellyache continually about Apple not having the software available anymore. "Why can't I get the Darwin source code?" "This is unfair, they used BSD stuff and now they aren't sharing!" "Why haven't they released 10.4.9?" (when it comes out)
They aren't going to look at it from Apple's perspective. They aren't going to say. "Well, gee thanks Apple for trying to share the software with us. We're sorry you're getting screwed over by Wintel hackers who are too cheap to just buy a Mac." They're going too say. Well, we're sorry that's happening but you have to just put up with it as part of having your stuff available. They'll make Apple out to be evil when this is all a reactionary measure. Apple wants to release Darwin as open source, otherwise they could have just released the first version and then closed the source after that (they can legally do that, just because it was open source and you released it once doesn't mean you have to keep doing it). Apple would never be able to use any newer BSD components after that, they would begin maintaining their software as a fork pretty much. They only pulled it because someone keeps hacking to run it on plain beige box Wintels. And the OSS people aren't going to look at those hackers as the ones responsible for the source being pulled.
Many OSS people are the free as in speech types, but I feel most are a combination of the free as in speech and as in beer types. They wants software to be free for use and they don't think it should have a pricetag attached. These are the ones always saying Apple should have to release Aqua too just because the Darwin part of OSX is released.
Edit:
Oh ****! Thanks Apple! Now, how am I supposed to get Mac OS X to run on my old Linux box?
See? There they are now. "Oh, ****! Thanks Apple!" Who's fault is it the source was pulled again?
*LTD*
Apr 23, 06:09 PM
Read the first line.
Hack the computers, not the iPhones.
In which case nearly *all* your personal data is vulnerable. Cell tower tracking is not a special case, and relatively not especially more dangerous or compromising than anything else you've got stored on your computer.
Again, there's no egregious violation taking place here, and it's not especially worse than any other way to keep tabs on someone.
Let's reserve the lynching for when we actually find out what this tracking data is for specifically and how widespread the issue is with other companies (i.e., Google, MS, etc.)
If there is no actual cause for concern to the average person (which there really isn't), I fail to see that need to take a flip over it.
Anyway, that's all Il'll post about this for now. I really don't have a lot more to say. This topic is already way off-course, mostly my fault.
You must not read many of LTD's posts.
Admiring a winner is *very* wrong. Sorry.
Apple makes a lot of the competition look pretty damn stupid on a continual basis, but you can't call attention to it too often, because you'll end up stepping one someone's toes.
My view is: wear thicker boots.
The latest in my rogues gallery of idiots is RIM (first prize for laying the Playbook egg.)
Hack the computers, not the iPhones.
In which case nearly *all* your personal data is vulnerable. Cell tower tracking is not a special case, and relatively not especially more dangerous or compromising than anything else you've got stored on your computer.
Again, there's no egregious violation taking place here, and it's not especially worse than any other way to keep tabs on someone.
Let's reserve the lynching for when we actually find out what this tracking data is for specifically and how widespread the issue is with other companies (i.e., Google, MS, etc.)
If there is no actual cause for concern to the average person (which there really isn't), I fail to see that need to take a flip over it.
Anyway, that's all Il'll post about this for now. I really don't have a lot more to say. This topic is already way off-course, mostly my fault.
You must not read many of LTD's posts.
Admiring a winner is *very* wrong. Sorry.
Apple makes a lot of the competition look pretty damn stupid on a continual basis, but you can't call attention to it too often, because you'll end up stepping one someone's toes.
My view is: wear thicker boots.
The latest in my rogues gallery of idiots is RIM (first prize for laying the Playbook egg.)
Nukey
Sep 24, 09:09 AM
What a bunch of losers. That guy probably worked really hard on his presentation, and to have it screwed up by a bunch of wannabe-journalists trying to act "cool" for their "blog" is ridiculous. If I were in charge of any of these types of events I'd show these guys the door, permanently. People who think it was funny obviously haven't been on the presenter side of things before.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario