prady16
Nov 16, 01:00 PM
Please don't confuse the customer with too many options!
Stick with either Intel or AMD, not both!
Stick with either Intel or AMD, not both!
dsnort
Oct 19, 05:31 PM
When one considers Dell's quality of their computers, why are they still #1?
I love my Macbook, but I gotta admit, my Dell Inspiron never just shutdown in the middle of a sen
I love my Macbook, but I gotta admit, my Dell Inspiron never just shutdown in the middle of a sen
Music-Man
Sep 12, 08:12 AM
what time is the event on in Australian ESTD ?????
3am :(
I was just getting ready to go to bed for a couple of hours before 3 but I'm a little hyped now.
Bloody Apple
3am :(
I was just getting ready to go to bed for a couple of hours before 3 but I'm a little hyped now.
Bloody Apple
dc52nv
Apr 7, 01:50 AM
About damn time too...
Looking forward to shooting with this new gear...
my pants are ruined!
Looking forward to shooting with this new gear...
my pants are ruined!
more...
sarge
Oct 19, 05:37 PM
Right now, we have a 2k sqft vault lined end to end w/rolling racks filled w/tape and have effectively run out of room for anything else. That represents 10 years of 24/7 programming. Now imagine archives that are 50 - 100 years old and you've got serious issues to contend with. Our whole operation is going to move to tapeless in the next 5 years. If I go out now and shoot native 720/24P on my HVX, one hour of footage costs me 32G's worth of drive space. 24x32=768Gigs per day!!! For me, those drives cannot come fast enough.
Also, all those films that are coming out on DVD now were made from 35mm prints which allows for the beautiful image quality you're getting on your home theatre. This is why we need a digital format with enough integrity to move into the future with.
I second that 4:4:4 color space!
Also, all those films that are coming out on DVD now were made from 35mm prints which allows for the beautiful image quality you're getting on your home theatre. This is why we need a digital format with enough integrity to move into the future with.
I second that 4:4:4 color space!
Clive At Five
Oct 19, 02:20 PM
With each and every release of a new OS (going back beyond Windows), Microsoft has made hyperbolic claims about how good it was going to be. As anyone who's followed this for a while knows, Microsoft's claims rarely live up to reality.
I don't doubt this, but from someone who has been using Windows since 3.1.1, take my word that Vista is a gigantic improvement over XP. While I agree that MS's claims of grandure aren't justified, there's no denying that Vista is a noteworthy upgrade (rather than an 8-month downgrade until SP1 surfaces).
Unfortunately for Microsoft, their "good enough" philosophy also works for a lot of their customers. They're used to not being motivated by newer and theoretically better.
You're half right and half wrong. Some people wouldn't even consider upgrading (whether it's because they don't know what Vista is / how it's different or due to apathy). More people, however, will (one way or another) become convinced that an upgrade is necessary. They're also convinced that whatever slop MS puts on their plate is good enough (as you suggested). They say, "This upgrade from XP to Vista is good enough for MS so it's good enough for me. No need to explore the other options."
All that being said, Microsoft will sell a zillion copies of Vista. Most of those will be through the OEM pipeline. The OEMs will buy it because they don't have a choice. This is how each and every version of Windows has become a "success." It's Microsoft's dirty little secret.
And sadly, it doesn't matter how they're sold. Once people start using Vista and see that it's an improvement over what they've been using. They won't consider a switch to the Mac. People talk often about iLemmings, but it really goes QUITE understated the number of MS Lemmings there are. (Think "1984" ad.) MS has great power over those who are unconscious to the computing world. Vista is not going to change that. The only thing that will drive people to the Mac is their becoming "conscious." That is much harder to do and Apple deserves MUCH applause for the amount of waking up they've done to the MS Lemmings.
-Clive
I don't doubt this, but from someone who has been using Windows since 3.1.1, take my word that Vista is a gigantic improvement over XP. While I agree that MS's claims of grandure aren't justified, there's no denying that Vista is a noteworthy upgrade (rather than an 8-month downgrade until SP1 surfaces).
Unfortunately for Microsoft, their "good enough" philosophy also works for a lot of their customers. They're used to not being motivated by newer and theoretically better.
You're half right and half wrong. Some people wouldn't even consider upgrading (whether it's because they don't know what Vista is / how it's different or due to apathy). More people, however, will (one way or another) become convinced that an upgrade is necessary. They're also convinced that whatever slop MS puts on their plate is good enough (as you suggested). They say, "This upgrade from XP to Vista is good enough for MS so it's good enough for me. No need to explore the other options."
All that being said, Microsoft will sell a zillion copies of Vista. Most of those will be through the OEM pipeline. The OEMs will buy it because they don't have a choice. This is how each and every version of Windows has become a "success." It's Microsoft's dirty little secret.
And sadly, it doesn't matter how they're sold. Once people start using Vista and see that it's an improvement over what they've been using. They won't consider a switch to the Mac. People talk often about iLemmings, but it really goes QUITE understated the number of MS Lemmings there are. (Think "1984" ad.) MS has great power over those who are unconscious to the computing world. Vista is not going to change that. The only thing that will drive people to the Mac is their becoming "conscious." That is much harder to do and Apple deserves MUCH applause for the amount of waking up they've done to the MS Lemmings.
-Clive
more...
NDA74
Jan 12, 09:01 PM
Anyone who leaps to a conclusion over this is foolish and shooting themselves in the foot. Print media is dead in its current form so you'll never see events banning people just because they have an online presence.
No, you will not. But what you will see are event planners being much more selective about who they credential, until the only media you see at events are the same big media companies that have always been there, except now they're online instead of in print. Same monopolies, different medium.
No, you will not. But what you will see are event planners being much more selective about who they credential, until the only media you see at events are the same big media companies that have always been there, except now they're online instead of in print. Same monopolies, different medium.
slh06
Sep 12, 08:04 AM
I think their going to change the name iTunes Music Store to Showtime. Makes sense?:cool:
more...
srxtr
Apr 25, 01:32 PM
I don't understand people who think the next iPhone should be called 4S (and some think 4GS, wth?)
I think the reason why Apple called the current generation iPhone 4 because it's the 4th iPhone. Just because they tacked on an 'S' at the end of 3G doesn't mean the next should be 4S.
And even if they DID call it the 4S, the iPhone after that would be iPhone 6, not 5...
Don't you agree?
I think the reason why Apple called the current generation iPhone 4 because it's the 4th iPhone. Just because they tacked on an 'S' at the end of 3G doesn't mean the next should be 4S.
And even if they DID call it the 4S, the iPhone after that would be iPhone 6, not 5...
Don't you agree?
iJohnHenry
Apr 16, 05:17 PM
Make more sense. This sentence of yours makes none.
Even a Merriam-Webster is of no value to me, if we don't agree on which word we should use to encapsulate you.
I might have better luck with the Urban Dictionary (www.urbandictionary.com).
Even a Merriam-Webster is of no value to me, if we don't agree on which word we should use to encapsulate you.
I might have better luck with the Urban Dictionary (www.urbandictionary.com).
more...
CaoCao
Apr 22, 08:20 PM
You mean because they passed laws against homosexuality?
While I find that a little simplistic, if you really want to run with that theory that's your choice.
Homosexuality in ancient Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Rome)
Homosexuality in ancient Rome features dispassionately in many literary works, poems, graffiti and in comments, for example, on the sexual predilections of single emperors: Edward Gibbon famously observed that "of the first fifteen emperors Claudius was the only one whose taste in love was entirely correct". Surviving graphic representations are, on the other hand, rarer in ancient Rome than in classical Greece. Attitudes toward homosexuality changed over time ranging from the matter-of-fact acceptance of Republican Rome and the pagan Empire to rising condemnation, exampled by the Athenian Sextus Empiricus, who asserted that άρρενομιζία was outlawed in Rome� and in Athens, too!� and Cyprian.
The term homosexuality is anachronistic for the ancient world, since there is no single word in either Latin or ancient Greek with the same meaning as the modern concept of homosexuality, nor was there any sense that a man was defined by his gender choices in love-making; "in the ancient world so few people cared to categorize their contemporaries on the basis of the gender to which they were erotically attracted that no dichotomy to express this distinction was in common use", James Boswell has noted.
...
Later Empire
The rise of statutes legislating against homosexuality begins during the social crisis of the 3rd century, when a series of laws were promulgated regulating various aspects of homosexual relations, from the statutory rape of minors to gay marriages. By the sixth century homosexual relations were expressly prohibited for the first time, as Procopius notes.
On a related note, a search of the string "homo" in the article The Decline of Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_rome) comes up with zero results.
You gotta do better than that bassfingers. :rolleyes:
homosexuality≠bisexuality
While I find that a little simplistic, if you really want to run with that theory that's your choice.
Homosexuality in ancient Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Rome)
Homosexuality in ancient Rome features dispassionately in many literary works, poems, graffiti and in comments, for example, on the sexual predilections of single emperors: Edward Gibbon famously observed that "of the first fifteen emperors Claudius was the only one whose taste in love was entirely correct". Surviving graphic representations are, on the other hand, rarer in ancient Rome than in classical Greece. Attitudes toward homosexuality changed over time ranging from the matter-of-fact acceptance of Republican Rome and the pagan Empire to rising condemnation, exampled by the Athenian Sextus Empiricus, who asserted that άρρενομιζία was outlawed in Rome� and in Athens, too!� and Cyprian.
The term homosexuality is anachronistic for the ancient world, since there is no single word in either Latin or ancient Greek with the same meaning as the modern concept of homosexuality, nor was there any sense that a man was defined by his gender choices in love-making; "in the ancient world so few people cared to categorize their contemporaries on the basis of the gender to which they were erotically attracted that no dichotomy to express this distinction was in common use", James Boswell has noted.
...
Later Empire
The rise of statutes legislating against homosexuality begins during the social crisis of the 3rd century, when a series of laws were promulgated regulating various aspects of homosexual relations, from the statutory rape of minors to gay marriages. By the sixth century homosexual relations were expressly prohibited for the first time, as Procopius notes.
On a related note, a search of the string "homo" in the article The Decline of Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_rome) comes up with zero results.
You gotta do better than that bassfingers. :rolleyes:
homosexuality≠bisexuality
Stevenup7002
Jan 14, 06:37 PM
If anyone sitting in the front row of macworld, or works backstage there, please, bring your apple remotes and reak havok during a demo presentation. But seriously, DONT
-Steve
-Steve
more...
MacBoobsPro
Sep 12, 04:09 AM
At 10am in Cupertino it will be 6pm in London.
What will it be where you are Chundles? :D
What will it be where you are Chundles? :D
Patrick J
Apr 15, 04:17 PM
There is too much shadow on the side gradient.
more...
MarximusMG
Apr 21, 11:17 AM
Very nice! I've been waiting for this feature to be implemented on MR.
AidenShaw
Nov 16, 10:34 PM
Capacitator? That must be some fancy new kind of capacitor... sweet!
It's the Brit pronunciation - like that extra syllable that they throw into aluminum...
It's the Brit pronunciation - like that extra syllable that they throw into aluminum...
more...
Clive At Five
Oct 3, 03:42 PM
Merrom MBP ;p
Man... the Merom MBP has become the new PowerBook G5
-Clive
Man... the Merom MBP has become the new PowerBook G5
-Clive
Advil
Apr 15, 04:43 PM
the way it tapers in the back... no way ive would let that happen
arn
Apr 21, 09:19 PM
Ok, it's back.
arn
arn
likemyorbs
Apr 15, 03:16 PM
It bothers me a little when gay suffrage is pitted against something like slavery. Just not the same, IMO.
Gay suffrage? Wow i never knew gays were denied the right to vote! :eek:
Gay suffrage? Wow i never knew gays were denied the right to vote! :eek:
bense27
Aug 3, 06:40 PM
just the fact that its name is the "Argo" tells you that its not posing a threat to iPods.
takao
May 5, 09:30 AM
Are you truly anti-gun or have you just not been exposed to them so that you understand how fun it is:
1) Use a shotgun to shoot clay targets;
2) Shoot a rifle, pistol or revolver and realize how much fun it is to shoot a gun and hit your paper target, bowling pin or tin can;
funny how here in austria with it's conscription service one can easily see how the majority of 18 year olds turn from pro gun to anti gun within 6 months
after being grouped together with a whole age group across intelligence levels to handle guns, one simply can not take a pro gun stance
1) Use a shotgun to shoot clay targets;
2) Shoot a rifle, pistol or revolver and realize how much fun it is to shoot a gun and hit your paper target, bowling pin or tin can;
funny how here in austria with it's conscription service one can easily see how the majority of 18 year olds turn from pro gun to anti gun within 6 months
after being grouped together with a whole age group across intelligence levels to handle guns, one simply can not take a pro gun stance
AhmedFaisal
Apr 13, 07:40 AM
Yeah, because you have access to all of the intellegence reports. :rolleyes: You try again...
The official 9/11 commission report speaks for itself.
As for the TSA not making air travel any safer you literally have nothing to go on other than making a blind assumption. It is simply another security layer and that in itself will deter some from giving it a try. That being said, if someone wants to kill people bad enough they will and people like you will constantly blame it on others. :rolleyes:
Linky (http://www.usatoday.com/travel/columnist/mcgee/2008-02-27-state-of-airline-security_N.htm)
So much about that. Even when you read biased **** like the recent RAND Corp report the findings are astounding. What baffles me even more is their conclusion that international airtravel is the threat and domestic security should be reduced again. Nevermind that the 9/11 flights were all domestic flights and the 9/11 gang would have most likely been caught had they tried this stunt on an international flight with the pre 9/11 security measures of international travel. There is so much misinformation and ******** being propagated in this arena my trust in the competence of anyone involved in this business is absolute zero.
The official 9/11 commission report speaks for itself.
As for the TSA not making air travel any safer you literally have nothing to go on other than making a blind assumption. It is simply another security layer and that in itself will deter some from giving it a try. That being said, if someone wants to kill people bad enough they will and people like you will constantly blame it on others. :rolleyes:
Linky (http://www.usatoday.com/travel/columnist/mcgee/2008-02-27-state-of-airline-security_N.htm)
So much about that. Even when you read biased **** like the recent RAND Corp report the findings are astounding. What baffles me even more is their conclusion that international airtravel is the threat and domestic security should be reduced again. Nevermind that the 9/11 flights were all domestic flights and the 9/11 gang would have most likely been caught had they tried this stunt on an international flight with the pre 9/11 security measures of international travel. There is so much misinformation and ******** being propagated in this arena my trust in the competence of anyone involved in this business is absolute zero.
GSMiller
Jan 15, 09:22 PM
I don't know what is more lame...
The fact that Gizmodo actually pulled such a stunt or that Motorola used a presenter with a British accent.
The fact that Gizmodo actually pulled such a stunt or that Motorola used a presenter with a British accent.