starflyer
Nov 29, 11:03 AM
Oh yeah - for anyone who thinks most music these days sucks, you're just looking in the wrong place. Major labels ceased to produce anything of worth quite some time ago. Dig a little deeper and there's a wealth of wonderful music being made right now (and over the last 10 years specifically).
I'll help you dig...
www.sf59.com
www.toothandnailrecords.com
www.themilitiagroup.com
www.velvetbluemusic.com
www.jadetree.com
I'll help you dig...
www.sf59.com
www.toothandnailrecords.com
www.themilitiagroup.com
www.velvetbluemusic.com
www.jadetree.com
marksman
Mar 31, 04:37 PM
no, the question is: "Is this evil?" when google starts rejecting Facebook Android phones, or android versions using Bing and not Google...
thats the question.
I don't think it is evil. It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests. Removing Google as search is probably going to be a huge no-no. It is kind of dumb that anyone has even tried to do that... That is part of the problem. Some of the carriers/manufacturers are stupid.
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
thats the question.
I don't think it is evil. It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests. Removing Google as search is probably going to be a huge no-no. It is kind of dumb that anyone has even tried to do that... That is part of the problem. Some of the carriers/manufacturers are stupid.
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
igator210
Apr 27, 09:04 AM
The principle of any and every cell phone is that if can connect to a cellular network signal, it knows where you are. Based upon every unique cellular ID, the networks know how to route incoming calls and texts to you, If it didn't how that. how the h#!! do you think you'd get any calls? Right now, sitting at my desk, Verizon knows exactly where I am (based upon triangulation of the nearest cell towers. They have my unique cell ID and my account information. My dumb phone even has a gps 911 locator on it. I dial 911, they know where I am.
Side story: the credit card companies know exactly where I am better then the cell companies. Every time I swipe my credit or debit card, they know where I am. When I travel for vacation, I am very likely to get a call from my credit card company (on my cell) asking where, when and how long I will be traveling. They know every store and every purchase I've ever made on a credit card.
Side story: the credit card companies know exactly where I am better then the cell companies. Every time I swipe my credit or debit card, they know where I am. When I travel for vacation, I am very likely to get a call from my credit card company (on my cell) asking where, when and how long I will be traveling. They know every store and every purchase I've ever made on a credit card.
840quadra
Aug 16, 10:55 PM
I still love my PowerPC Mac. I'm gonna shed a tear some day when I retire it. This thing is rock solid and fast (enough) :cool:
I agree, Especially considering the fact that 4 months before I bought it, I was running on a Pentium 450 as a primary computer.
My goal is to buy a Quad G5 before the end of the year. I already have what is arguably the fastest 68k Mac (look at screen name for a clue) so I would like to also own the fastest PowerPC Mac Apple sold too.
I agree, Especially considering the fact that 4 months before I bought it, I was running on a Pentium 450 as a primary computer.
My goal is to buy a Quad G5 before the end of the year. I already have what is arguably the fastest 68k Mac (look at screen name for a clue) so I would like to also own the fastest PowerPC Mac Apple sold too.
milo
Jul 27, 04:11 PM
I'm sorry. I thought that it was adequately implied that I meant the fastest chip, to date. Anyway, that's what I meant if I've been misunderstood.
I wasn't disagreeing with the "to date" part, just with the notion that a higher clock speed is the same as a faster chip.
The 2.7 G5 will continue to be the highest clocked chip in a mac to date. But chips with lower clock speeds will likely prove to be faster in benchmarks, meaning it's not the fastest chip.
I wasn't disagreeing with the "to date" part, just with the notion that a higher clock speed is the same as a faster chip.
The 2.7 G5 will continue to be the highest clocked chip in a mac to date. But chips with lower clock speeds will likely prove to be faster in benchmarks, meaning it's not the fastest chip.
Daremo
Apr 19, 01:28 PM
The sales numbers are impressive, but not surprising.
whatever
Jul 20, 07:37 PM
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
Now you're not thinking like a competitive company that needs to continue to make money.
Sun is on the ropes and Apple now has a chance to soar in and take a lot of business from them.
Now you're not thinking like a competitive company that needs to continue to make money.
Sun is on the ropes and Apple now has a chance to soar in and take a lot of business from them.
opinioncircle
Mar 20, 07:56 AM
Until we have publicly funded campaigns, there will be no change. As long as it costs millions to get elected, business will continue to set policy, maintain the farce of two different parties and basically run the country, a situation I think the OP of this thread is in favour of.
Agreed. The 2012 race seems to be one for the books as far as campaign contributions are concerned.
This should all go public.
Agreed. The 2012 race seems to be one for the books as far as campaign contributions are concerned.
This should all go public.
daneoni
Aug 27, 03:38 PM
One reason Apple switched to Intel was because they couldn't get a G5 in a notebook, they kept saying they would do this for ages so a joke that powerbook G5's coming out Tuesday emerged. This *hilarious* joke has come back for an encore now we are all Intel chips which are quicker than the G5, especially as no-one knows exactly which Tuesday (28th August / 5th September / 12th September) the Merom MB/MBP will arrive.
It isn't the G5 part that's funny about it. The whole point of the joke is to make fun of the Rumor Article --> Wild Speculation --> Guessing the Specific Release Date cycle.
Finally people who grasp it
It isn't the G5 part that's funny about it. The whole point of the joke is to make fun of the Rumor Article --> Wild Speculation --> Guessing the Specific Release Date cycle.
Finally people who grasp it
SiliconAddict
Jul 27, 03:29 PM
this blog was also written by jason o'grady, aka the PowerPage rumor site. his writing means nothing to me.
++
99.998% of what is posted on POwerPage is garbage. I love the crap about how he's against a buttonless iPOd because touching the screen would scratch it. o.O No Jason....touching the screen would smuge it. Unless you hands are as hard as sandpaper....anyways. PP is pretty much crap.
Nice news from intel, good for WWDC ...
... Apple will probably announce right before, since SJ said long ago no hard announcements at WWDC.
Of course he reverses A LOT :eek:
ARE PREPARED for the NASTY NEWS THAT COULD COME AT ANY TIME :eek: :eek:
MS will announce that they are dropping Mac development :eek: :eek: :eek: :mad:
DON'T YOU GET IT ...
... this is the plan Bill G., the NICE GUY, leaves MS with his CLOD BULLDOG in charge AND YOU GET WHAT YOU GET, Balmer cuts the Mac devision and probably a TON of other jobs too and then they announce their MP3 player and all sorts of services !!!
This way their player looks more credible then Apple, for a while anyway !!
If Apple was smart after all they would have hired me to test their spreadsheet app a long time ago, I am after all, the SPREADSHEET GOD :cool:
Dude. One word.....Decaf. :rolleyes:
++
99.998% of what is posted on POwerPage is garbage. I love the crap about how he's against a buttonless iPOd because touching the screen would scratch it. o.O No Jason....touching the screen would smuge it. Unless you hands are as hard as sandpaper....anyways. PP is pretty much crap.
Nice news from intel, good for WWDC ...
... Apple will probably announce right before, since SJ said long ago no hard announcements at WWDC.
Of course he reverses A LOT :eek:
ARE PREPARED for the NASTY NEWS THAT COULD COME AT ANY TIME :eek: :eek:
MS will announce that they are dropping Mac development :eek: :eek: :eek: :mad:
DON'T YOU GET IT ...
... this is the plan Bill G., the NICE GUY, leaves MS with his CLOD BULLDOG in charge AND YOU GET WHAT YOU GET, Balmer cuts the Mac devision and probably a TON of other jobs too and then they announce their MP3 player and all sorts of services !!!
This way their player looks more credible then Apple, for a while anyway !!
If Apple was smart after all they would have hired me to test their spreadsheet app a long time ago, I am after all, the SPREADSHEET GOD :cool:
Dude. One word.....Decaf. :rolleyes:
tyroja00
Sep 19, 11:05 AM
My demanding you to give me a reason has about the same weight as all the people in this thread (and many others) demanding Apple provide them with the machine they think they needed yesterday.
Except we are going to pay Apple a lot of money. What are you paying me?
Except we are going to pay Apple a lot of money. What are you paying me?
obeygiant
Apr 27, 01:43 PM
Hey! The birth issue is closed! End of story! I am yelling this!
boo-hoo my all-caps was undid. :(
boo-hoo my all-caps was undid. :(
nagromme
Aug 7, 04:08 PM
I'm kinda bummed that even with Vista sneaking up that Aqua hasn't changed much.
Aqua is great and doesn't NEED to change much--it badly needs to be gone over for consistency, but it's already light years ahead of Vista in consistency, looks (MS loves clutter), and most importantly, functionality. Change for change's sake can be fun, but it can also get in the way.
That said, I think we haven't seen all the changes that next year will bring.
Anyway, Vista is not "sneaking up"... it still looks like a fiasco that nothing can save. It will sell well even so--that's a monopoly for you--but it doesn't threaten Tiger, much less Leopard (which we haven't even seen all of yet).
Aqua is great and doesn't NEED to change much--it badly needs to be gone over for consistency, but it's already light years ahead of Vista in consistency, looks (MS loves clutter), and most importantly, functionality. Change for change's sake can be fun, but it can also get in the way.
That said, I think we haven't seen all the changes that next year will bring.
Anyway, Vista is not "sneaking up"... it still looks like a fiasco that nothing can save. It will sell well even so--that's a monopoly for you--but it doesn't threaten Tiger, much less Leopard (which we haven't even seen all of yet).
Kirkmedia
Aug 11, 10:51 AM
iPhone = bad idea and difficult to implement beyond the USA.
I think it will be harder to implement in the USA and easier in Europe.
I think it will be harder to implement in the USA and easier in Europe.
dethmaShine
Apr 20, 07:50 AM
Don't let a few cherry picked pictures trick you, most Galaxy models don't look at all like an iPhone :
http://www.rogers.com/cms/images/en/Wireless/CellPhoneDetail/Banners/banner01_i896blkr.png
This one can go either way. Of course the Apple biased media are cherry picking their pictures. I'd doubt you'd have a hard time telling both devices apart in the real world with both in front of you.
Especially consdiring the Samsung doesn't use the icon grid on its homescreen at all, contrary to what the pictures are trying to show.
Why are you always anti-apple in every other thread?
Don't you yourself see any similarities b/w SG phones and the iPhone?
The only difference to me is the wallpaper and dull icons. They look almost the same.
http://www.rogers.com/cms/images/en/Wireless/CellPhoneDetail/Banners/banner01_i896blkr.png
This one can go either way. Of course the Apple biased media are cherry picking their pictures. I'd doubt you'd have a hard time telling both devices apart in the real world with both in front of you.
Especially consdiring the Samsung doesn't use the icon grid on its homescreen at all, contrary to what the pictures are trying to show.
Why are you always anti-apple in every other thread?
Don't you yourself see any similarities b/w SG phones and the iPhone?
The only difference to me is the wallpaper and dull icons. They look almost the same.
CaptMurdock
Mar 22, 07:02 AM
Fox News, huh?
That reminds me -- I gotta put some pine cleaner down my toilet.
That reminds me -- I gotta put some pine cleaner down my toilet.
backdraft
Aug 26, 04:30 PM
Yet iBooks and PowerBooks (PPC based systems) are part of this most recent battery recall (and a prior one)... it has nothing to do with switching to Intel. Apple has been using standard commodity parts in their systems for a VERY long time now.
...and while you are at the site why not look at some non-Intel based systems...
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Titanium_PowerBook_G4
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=PowerBook_12%22
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Ibook
From the looks of it PPC based Mac's have MUCH fewer issues.
...and while you are at the site why not look at some non-Intel based systems...
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Titanium_PowerBook_G4
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=PowerBook_12%22
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Ibook
From the looks of it PPC based Mac's have MUCH fewer issues.
rjohnstone
Apr 25, 03:19 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Actually it would not be admissible.
The police would not be able to verify where it actually came from unless they actually watched you retrieve it.
At that point a good attorney would argue that you were acting as an agent of the police and the subsequent discovery and retrieval of the coke would fall under the same rules for gathering evidence and require a warrant.
The coke evidence would get tossed and you would go to jail for breaking and entering.
The officers who you handed the coke too would either be reprimanded or fired.
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Actually it would not be admissible.
The police would not be able to verify where it actually came from unless they actually watched you retrieve it.
At that point a good attorney would argue that you were acting as an agent of the police and the subsequent discovery and retrieval of the coke would fall under the same rules for gathering evidence and require a warrant.
The coke evidence would get tossed and you would go to jail for breaking and entering.
The officers who you handed the coke too would either be reprimanded or fired.
Multimedia
Jul 20, 08:05 PM
I'm betting on Mac Pro OctaCore 2 :D
Should that "a" be an "o" ?
Should that "a" be an "o" ?
lasuther
Apr 6, 10:15 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Hopefully these hit in July for back to school shopping. I want to pick up a 13".
Hopefully these hit in July for back to school shopping. I want to pick up a 13".
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?
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?
NewbieNerd
Sep 13, 12:27 PM
Your IT guy can't even spell it correctly - so how do you expect him to have a clue?
Clovertown
I think we can all read at normal size. Besides, how do you know the IT dude typed that vs. the poster just typing what he said?
Clovertown
I think we can all read at normal size. Besides, how do you know the IT dude typed that vs. the poster just typing what he said?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 02:26 PM
That is totally reasonable and understandable, although I do disagree. I can't with good heart support sending my neighbors son/daughter overseas to fight for another people.
Well, we have allies, don't we? I simply consider the UN an attempt to permanently ally the world's nations to the extent that these sort of situations can be dealt with based on broader consensus. We are far from the ideal, but we must keep working towards it and an imperfect UN is better than no UN at all.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions." NOPE!
I'm not going to defend Biden, he puts his foot in his mouth quite a bit - though he is FAR from the only politician in Washingotn with that problem. Besides, unlike Cheney, he is very much playing second fiddle in the administration (actually he's so far down the pecking order only fiddles when someone lends him one, if I can stretch that saying to the breaking point).
It is worth remembering that the Bush Administration sent that clown Bolton as our representative to the UN - a man who opposes that organization's very existence. Incredibly counterproductive. No, I expect hypocrisy from both Democrats and Republicans.
I think it all boils down to whether you buy into the notion that the UN is a global representative body. If you do, then sending troops to enforce UN resolutions is not just fighting for "other people" but fighting for ouselves. If member nations took the concept of the UN more seriously, UN resolutions alone might be enough to stabilize situations like this without the need for major military intervention.
Well, we have allies, don't we? I simply consider the UN an attempt to permanently ally the world's nations to the extent that these sort of situations can be dealt with based on broader consensus. We are far from the ideal, but we must keep working towards it and an imperfect UN is better than no UN at all.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions." NOPE!
I'm not going to defend Biden, he puts his foot in his mouth quite a bit - though he is FAR from the only politician in Washingotn with that problem. Besides, unlike Cheney, he is very much playing second fiddle in the administration (actually he's so far down the pecking order only fiddles when someone lends him one, if I can stretch that saying to the breaking point).
It is worth remembering that the Bush Administration sent that clown Bolton as our representative to the UN - a man who opposes that organization's very existence. Incredibly counterproductive. No, I expect hypocrisy from both Democrats and Republicans.
I think it all boils down to whether you buy into the notion that the UN is a global representative body. If you do, then sending troops to enforce UN resolutions is not just fighting for "other people" but fighting for ouselves. If member nations took the concept of the UN more seriously, UN resolutions alone might be enough to stabilize situations like this without the need for major military intervention.
stefman
Nov 28, 09:46 PM
What kind of ridiculous Mafia tactics are those? This is so stupid, what if I don't buy a single Universal song? Why should they get any money?
:mad:
:mad:
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق