MattSepeta
Mar 23, 01:51 PM
You've been doing it since the 1940s without congressional approval. Why so concerned about it now? Why this particular president? Were you personally concerned when it was done in Bosnia or Iraq? Do you realise that missiles have been launched into Pakistan from drones for many years, yet no declaration of war on Pakistan...
Or are you just parroting the latest conservative reason to oppose Obama's actions? Obama: whatever he's for, I'm against. Is that it?
It sure is easy to peg me isn't it? Too bad if you go back over my posts you will find more than enough denouncing involvement in Iraq / Afghanistan.
So, in answer to your accusatory traps/questions:
-Why so concerned about it now?
selena gomez 2011 hairstyles.
selena gomez 2011 hairstyles.
selena gomez 2011 hairstyles.
Selena Gomez - 2011 Billboard
selena gomez 2011 photoshoot.
selena gomez 2011 pics.
selena gomez 2011 hair. selena
selena gomez 2011 hairstyles.
selena gomez 2011 pics. selena
selena gomez 2011 pictures.
justin bieber and selena gomez
selena gomez 2011 hair. selena
selena gomez images 2011.
selena gomez 2011 photoshoot.
selena gomez 2011 photoshoot.
selena gomez 2011 april.
selena gomez 2011 who says.
selena gomez 2011 wallpaper.
Or are you just parroting the latest conservative reason to oppose Obama's actions? Obama: whatever he's for, I'm against. Is that it?
It sure is easy to peg me isn't it? Too bad if you go back over my posts you will find more than enough denouncing involvement in Iraq / Afghanistan.
So, in answer to your accusatory traps/questions:
-Why so concerned about it now?
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 03:55 AM
Lmfao!!!! That is the DUMBEST thing I've ever heard in my entire life. Yeah, gay people can live together but no sex! Hmm, doesn't that kind of go against the whole point of being gay? I'm sorry that's the only response I can come up with, it's just that the ignorance in your post is too overwhelming for the average person to comprehend.
Many here know that I'm a heterosexual who took and keeps a vow to be a lifelong virgin. So I don't have sex. Does that mean that being heterosexual is pointless? I don't know. But I do know that some good things are better than sexual pleasure.
Say two same-sex-attracted people are roommates. Does that imply that they should have sex with each other? No, they may be roommates who live together only to share living expenses. Some may think likemyorbs is assuming something that's plainly false. They may think LMO assumes that every same-sex-attracted feels same-sex-attracted to anybody else of the same sex.
Same-sex-attracted people can live celibately together. My two "gay" friends did that for about 30 years before they "married" each other in Las Vegas. Although I believe that "gay" sex is always gravely immoral, I admire my two buddies for their self-control. I'll bet they didn't ask each other, "We're not having sex with each other? What's the point of being gay? Since we're not having it, let's live separately."
Many here know that I'm a heterosexual who took and keeps a vow to be a lifelong virgin. So I don't have sex. Does that mean that being heterosexual is pointless? I don't know. But I do know that some good things are better than sexual pleasure.
Say two same-sex-attracted people are roommates. Does that imply that they should have sex with each other? No, they may be roommates who live together only to share living expenses. Some may think likemyorbs is assuming something that's plainly false. They may think LMO assumes that every same-sex-attracted feels same-sex-attracted to anybody else of the same sex.
Same-sex-attracted people can live celibately together. My two "gay" friends did that for about 30 years before they "married" each other in Las Vegas. Although I believe that "gay" sex is always gravely immoral, I admire my two buddies for their self-control. I'll bet they didn't ask each other, "We're not having sex with each other? What's the point of being gay? Since we're not having it, let's live separately."
Edot
Aug 7, 10:11 PM
Computers were invented ages ago... I see nothing new. :rolleyes:
Acorn
Apr 9, 07:25 PM
The backlit keyboard thing kinda makes me laugh. Every macbook Ive ever owned has not had the backlit keyboard. I even bought a aluminum unibody and still got screwed out of a backlit keyboard. Finally I got a 2010 mac pro and got the backlit keyboard. what did i do? enjoy it for 2 days then turn it off to save battery life. the keyboard light is always off now and the brightness is set to minimum. so much for that.
guzhogi
Sep 13, 08:53 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
This is a bit of a chicken and the egg problem. Hardware companies don't want to release multicore hardware b/c no software is out to support it and software people don't want to ship multiprocessor software b/c no multiproc hardware is out. Since there are a few multiproc computers out now, some software companies might start multithreading their apps, most people probably don't have it them yet.
Also, some apps won't really benefit from being multithreaded. Take a basic calculator. Why would you really need it to take advantage of multiproc computers? It isn't that processor heavy to do 2+2. AV software, like iTunes, Final Cut Pro, etc., could greatly benefit from multiproc systems. One core can do the audio while the other does the video for FC or iTunes could use one core for playing music and the other for ripping.
Something I'd like to see is to have AV stuff offloaded to the sound or graphics card to speed it up. I've heard of a company called Aspex Semiconductors (www.aspex-semi.com) that designs PCI cards that speed up MPEG encoding. Might be nice for video pros.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
This is a bit of a chicken and the egg problem. Hardware companies don't want to release multicore hardware b/c no software is out to support it and software people don't want to ship multiprocessor software b/c no multiproc hardware is out. Since there are a few multiproc computers out now, some software companies might start multithreading their apps, most people probably don't have it them yet.
Also, some apps won't really benefit from being multithreaded. Take a basic calculator. Why would you really need it to take advantage of multiproc computers? It isn't that processor heavy to do 2+2. AV software, like iTunes, Final Cut Pro, etc., could greatly benefit from multiproc systems. One core can do the audio while the other does the video for FC or iTunes could use one core for playing music and the other for ripping.
Something I'd like to see is to have AV stuff offloaded to the sound or graphics card to speed it up. I've heard of a company called Aspex Semiconductors (www.aspex-semi.com) that designs PCI cards that speed up MPEG encoding. Might be nice for video pros.
Popeye206
Mar 31, 03:47 PM
Adobe showing how the iPad is only for consumption and not worth their time. (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/30/adobe.photoshop.for.ipad.to.get.layers/)
Yeah... that's why they are "wasting their time" building a prototype. :rolleyes:
Adobe see's 15 million seats and growing fast.
Yeah... that's why they are "wasting their time" building a prototype. :rolleyes:
Adobe see's 15 million seats and growing fast.
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 09:40 AM
Well next time say what you mean. It makes more sense. ;)
I did but instead of saying core at the end I said processor :D Which is the same thing so i didnt think it would matter. :p
I did but instead of saying core at the end I said processor :D Which is the same thing so i didnt think it would matter. :p
zacman
Apr 19, 02:22 PM
So the interesting fact is:
Verizon iPhone release didn't help Apple to stop losing marketshare although everyone said the deal will quadruple iPhone sales. :rolleyes:
iPhone Q1/11: 19 million (+ 2.5 million)
Android Q1/11: 38 million (+8 million)
Ouch. No wonder they are now sueing HTC and Samsung. If you can't beat them in the market, beat them in court. Apple must have learned that from Nokia (like they learned the choppy animations when you start third party apps in iOS 4.3.2 from Symbian).
Verizon iPhone release didn't help Apple to stop losing marketshare although everyone said the deal will quadruple iPhone sales. :rolleyes:
iPhone Q1/11: 19 million (+ 2.5 million)
Android Q1/11: 38 million (+8 million)
Ouch. No wonder they are now sueing HTC and Samsung. If you can't beat them in the market, beat them in court. Apple must have learned that from Nokia (like they learned the choppy animations when you start third party apps in iOS 4.3.2 from Symbian).
hayesk
Mar 23, 10:08 AM
Sorry, completely forgot about that.
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
iOS doesn't suck in terms of true multitasking because it doesn't use "true" multitasking. iOS excels at using a form of multitasking that is appropriate for the hardware it is running on.
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
iOS doesn't suck in terms of true multitasking because it doesn't use "true" multitasking. iOS excels at using a form of multitasking that is appropriate for the hardware it is running on.
zacman
Apr 6, 04:01 PM
Market share isn't everything.
I'm sure you'll be the first to dance happy around when in the future finally some 5 year old Android apps/games will get ported to iOS like it is now with Windows/MacOS.
I'm sure you'll be the first to dance happy around when in the future finally some 5 year old Android apps/games will get ported to iOS like it is now with Windows/MacOS.
rockthecasbah
Jul 27, 01:35 PM
This means that Apple could easily upgrade the existing Intel-based Macs to the newer processor with no design changes.
Not many people seem to be making too much of a deal about this, but i don't like the sound of that. It's great for upgrading a Mini or iMac, but i really want fresh new designs for the Mac Pro and MacBook Pro. If that is the case, Apple may just wait longer for a design change just because they can! It's not like i'd turn one away, but the current designs are tiring... Oh well i'll still be excited if my "fears" are true, but i really want a fresh design.
Am i the only one that seems to think that WWDC is getting clogged up with TOO many things? I mean sure the more Apple products released/updated the better, but this keynote seems to be taking a lot of emphasis off of Leopard previews (according to the rumors) to focus more on new products. iPods galore, Mac Pros, MBPs, Mac Mini (maybe), whatever at this point, i mean where are we really fitting in Leopard other than a quick flash!?!
Not many people seem to be making too much of a deal about this, but i don't like the sound of that. It's great for upgrading a Mini or iMac, but i really want fresh new designs for the Mac Pro and MacBook Pro. If that is the case, Apple may just wait longer for a design change just because they can! It's not like i'd turn one away, but the current designs are tiring... Oh well i'll still be excited if my "fears" are true, but i really want a fresh design.
Am i the only one that seems to think that WWDC is getting clogged up with TOO many things? I mean sure the more Apple products released/updated the better, but this keynote seems to be taking a lot of emphasis off of Leopard previews (according to the rumors) to focus more on new products. iPods galore, Mac Pros, MBPs, Mac Mini (maybe), whatever at this point, i mean where are we really fitting in Leopard other than a quick flash!?!
ChickenSwartz
Aug 7, 11:22 AM
Assuming they're released, they'd probably bring the Apple Store back online around 2:00pm.
(They traditionally take it down during a keynote...)
The store is down.
(They traditionally take it down during a keynote...)
The store is down.
HBOC
Apr 7, 10:24 PM
haha. Now they will have to upsell more BS to make up for this loss. I can see them advertising to connect your PS3 or XBOX 360 to your TV/monitor and hook up an ethernet cable for $149 again... :rolleyes:
NAG
Mar 31, 02:56 PM
If there's any truth to the Google Android prototype phone being Blackberry-like, then Google is merely pulling a Microsoft by copying Apple's success. Otherwise, why wouldn't Google have continued down that path?
What do you mean "if"? (http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/12/a-visual-tour-of-androids-ui/)
What do you mean "if"? (http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/12/a-visual-tour-of-androids-ui/)
Vantage Point
Apr 27, 08:15 AM
So if I lose my iPhone and log into to my Mobile.me account I can see the iphones location and if it is moving. This is a nice feature to find your missing phone and track it - like leaving it in someones car, taxi or train. So I always knew this feature existed and considered it a feature.
Anyway, remember the gov't is looking for any hook to real in in Apple. They are a shining example of how a company should work - design products that people didn't even know they needed and sell them to a demanding public for nice profit without unions and turn a nice profit. Don't kid yourself on this.
Anyway, remember the gov't is looking for any hook to real in in Apple. They are a shining example of how a company should work - design products that people didn't even know they needed and sell them to a demanding public for nice profit without unions and turn a nice profit. Don't kid yourself on this.
orthodoc
Nov 28, 08:22 PM
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Getting squeezed out of a revenue stream is just part of being in business. Either adapt or go away. Nothing entitles them to a portion of the iPod sales. They make their money off of the sale of the actual music they produce. Should they get a portion of each computer sold as well? After all, the computer is used to both download and play the music. Dumb argument.
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Getting squeezed out of a revenue stream is just part of being in business. Either adapt or go away. Nothing entitles them to a portion of the iPod sales. They make their money off of the sale of the actual music they produce. Should they get a portion of each computer sold as well? After all, the computer is used to both download and play the music. Dumb argument.
Zadillo
Aug 7, 09:34 PM
Safari appears to be brushed metal. Go here (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/dashboard.html) and go to about 1/6 of the way through.
Perhaps sometime between now and Spring 2007 they might find the time to change that.
Perhaps sometime between now and Spring 2007 they might find the time to change that.
hulugu
Mar 22, 11:29 PM
Don't tell me a flagship armed with 100 Tomahawk missiles and full targeting information just happened to be passing.
According to the Associated Press, the missiles came from British, French, and US ships. The US has two guided missile destroyers in the area, each capable of launching numerous Tomahawks.
As for targeting information, it's my understanding that between TERCOM (terrain mapping) and GPS it's relatively easy to input targeting information. Plus, many of the Tomahawk targets were static, their positions in the databases that could be as Reagan's days.
According to the Associated Press, the missiles came from British, French, and US ships. The US has two guided missile destroyers in the area, each capable of launching numerous Tomahawks.
As for targeting information, it's my understanding that between TERCOM (terrain mapping) and GPS it's relatively easy to input targeting information. Plus, many of the Tomahawk targets were static, their positions in the databases that could be as Reagan's days.
progx
Apr 25, 04:02 PM
Wow! There are some VERY stupid people out there. Any phone that transmits GPS or has to locate the next available tower signal is GOING TO TRACK your phone.
Your computer's IP address is a tracking tool as well. Let's sue everyone for trying to make other people's lives easier.
Your computer's IP address is a tracking tool as well. Let's sue everyone for trying to make other people's lives easier.
gnasher729
Aug 17, 10:34 AM
It doesn't matter what the tests are if you are doing it for comparison. As long as it is done the same on both machines, who cares?
That is wrong.
Lets say I wrote some Altivec code to make some function faster on a 400 MHz G4, because on that machine it made a noticable difference. After porting to Intel, with the slowest machine (1.66 GHz Core Solo) being at least six times faster, I didn't bother. If you measure that code, you won't find too much difference in speed. It is the code that matters that matters.
That is wrong.
Lets say I wrote some Altivec code to make some function faster on a 400 MHz G4, because on that machine it made a noticable difference. After porting to Intel, with the slowest machine (1.66 GHz Core Solo) being at least six times faster, I didn't bother. If you measure that code, you won't find too much difference in speed. It is the code that matters that matters.
relimw
Sep 13, 12:36 PM
How much more 'blind' do you want it? All the programmer has to do at this point is use multiple threads. Even if they don't, multiple cores will be automatically used for system and other processes.
Splitting one thread so that it ran cocurent with itself is a recipie for massive trouble. Mac OS X is about as blind as any system out there for the programmer. There may be some more optimizations that the system could make in it's own handling of multiprocessing, but from a programmer's perspective it doesn't matter how many cores the system has. (Unless you really want it to.)
Programming in pthreads is a bear (at least to me) an easier method would be nice. However, when I was looking up something today I came across OpenMP (http://www.openmp.org/) which seems to greatly simply setting up threads and the like. I suppose I was just thinking of run-time parallelization.
Splitting one thread so that it ran cocurent with itself is a recipie for massive trouble. Mac OS X is about as blind as any system out there for the programmer. There may be some more optimizations that the system could make in it's own handling of multiprocessing, but from a programmer's perspective it doesn't matter how many cores the system has. (Unless you really want it to.)
Programming in pthreads is a bear (at least to me) an easier method would be nice. However, when I was looking up something today I came across OpenMP (http://www.openmp.org/) which seems to greatly simply setting up threads and the like. I suppose I was just thinking of run-time parallelization.
ergle2
Sep 20, 06:44 PM
I should have been more thorough in my previous reply. What I really like about these frequent updates are the following:
1. The motherboard has socketed processors (except for the laptops).
Yeah, an upgradable processor socket is a wonderful thing :)
It's a shame the laptops are soldered, but it makes sense given the design...
2. Even though Intel is updating processors every 6 months or so, the motherboard and chipset seem to support the next processor version.
Yonah can be replaced with Merom.
Woodcrest can be replaced with Clovertown.
Your computer does not become obsolete in 6 months. Instead, it gains new life if you decide that you need the new processor.
Every 12 to 18 months or so a new chipset may become necessary. Only then does your computer lose the upgrade potential. If you buy Merom, you may not be able to upgrade to the next processor. Likewise if you buy Clovertown. New chipsets will be required beyond Merom and Clovertown.
In any event, this is based on trailing history of just 1 year. Future events may unfold differently.
Yeah -- tho' some of this might not please some due to philosophy.
Bear in mind part of the Mac philosophy from the start was "no user servicable parts inside" -- think of it as the computing equivalent of a toaster, in a sense. Jobs and Raskin were both proponents of that concept, and it lives in in some of the userbase.
I suspect that part of the userbase would prefer being able to sell an old system and buy a new one.
Now, that's not my worldview, but it's definitely out there.
Going back, often newer processors are release, at least initially, in multiple forms of package. Take the Pentium-4, which appeared for some versions as both a S478 and S775 (I think? or was there one inbetween?) chip. So even when there's a new chipset, it's not always required, it'll just give you some whizz-band new features.
With Merom, you're likely right, since that's part of the mobile line, and Intel sells the mobile line by platform (well, you can get it OEM too, but it's a lot cheaper if you just buy the platform).
1. The motherboard has socketed processors (except for the laptops).
Yeah, an upgradable processor socket is a wonderful thing :)
It's a shame the laptops are soldered, but it makes sense given the design...
2. Even though Intel is updating processors every 6 months or so, the motherboard and chipset seem to support the next processor version.
Yonah can be replaced with Merom.
Woodcrest can be replaced with Clovertown.
Your computer does not become obsolete in 6 months. Instead, it gains new life if you decide that you need the new processor.
Every 12 to 18 months or so a new chipset may become necessary. Only then does your computer lose the upgrade potential. If you buy Merom, you may not be able to upgrade to the next processor. Likewise if you buy Clovertown. New chipsets will be required beyond Merom and Clovertown.
In any event, this is based on trailing history of just 1 year. Future events may unfold differently.
Yeah -- tho' some of this might not please some due to philosophy.
Bear in mind part of the Mac philosophy from the start was "no user servicable parts inside" -- think of it as the computing equivalent of a toaster, in a sense. Jobs and Raskin were both proponents of that concept, and it lives in in some of the userbase.
I suspect that part of the userbase would prefer being able to sell an old system and buy a new one.
Now, that's not my worldview, but it's definitely out there.
Going back, often newer processors are release, at least initially, in multiple forms of package. Take the Pentium-4, which appeared for some versions as both a S478 and S775 (I think? or was there one inbetween?) chip. So even when there's a new chipset, it's not always required, it'll just give you some whizz-band new features.
With Merom, you're likely right, since that's part of the mobile line, and Intel sells the mobile line by platform (well, you can get it OEM too, but it's a lot cheaper if you just buy the platform).
camomac
Jul 20, 02:39 PM
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
haha, then Doctor Q's signature could be-
"Oh do pay attention 007. In the wrong hands, this Octopussy could be very dangerous."
LOL.:D
haha, then Doctor Q's signature could be-
"Oh do pay attention 007. In the wrong hands, this Octopussy could be very dangerous."
LOL.:D
suneohair
Sep 13, 06:26 PM
clock speed isn't everything. workload dependant of course.
You are right. However, you try to tell consumers "Well we are moving to 2.4Ghz chips" after you just had 2.66Ghz and 3.0Ghz chips. It isnt going to work.
If today, Dell decided to move there whole line back to 1Ghz processors, nobody would buy. Unfortunetly the Ghz myth is a strong as its ever been. Taking a step backward is not an option.
Another example would be this: Today Apple decides to go back to plain, bulky ipods, no color, no photos. Just monochrome and music. Would anybody go for it? Probably not. You just can't step back in tech today.
Don't get me wrong, I am sure the octo core would out perform the current quad anyday given the right apps. But when people see that Ghz number go down...
You are right. However, you try to tell consumers "Well we are moving to 2.4Ghz chips" after you just had 2.66Ghz and 3.0Ghz chips. It isnt going to work.
If today, Dell decided to move there whole line back to 1Ghz processors, nobody would buy. Unfortunetly the Ghz myth is a strong as its ever been. Taking a step backward is not an option.
Another example would be this: Today Apple decides to go back to plain, bulky ipods, no color, no photos. Just monochrome and music. Would anybody go for it? Probably not. You just can't step back in tech today.
Don't get me wrong, I am sure the octo core would out perform the current quad anyday given the right apps. But when people see that Ghz number go down...