Super Dave
Aug 5, 09:16 PM
Thanks for the links, Dave! I found them both very informative, especially the one on Quartz 2 Extreme.
Do you have any feel for when we will see a roll-out of the pro apps? I recall quite a bit of rumor-mongering just before the Intel announcement. Since then it has been rather silent. I thought the sudden drop in Quake might be a precursor to something fairly soon??
I have no inside information. I just read rumour and news sites� a lot! Although I use the pro Apps for a course I take, I'm not familiar enough with them to know their typical release schedule. For instance, iLife is once a year, whereas Adobe CS products are about every 18 months - 2 years. With Apple's Pro Apps I just don't know. Anyone?
David :cool:
Do you have any feel for when we will see a roll-out of the pro apps? I recall quite a bit of rumor-mongering just before the Intel announcement. Since then it has been rather silent. I thought the sudden drop in Quake might be a precursor to something fairly soon??
I have no inside information. I just read rumour and news sites� a lot! Although I use the pro Apps for a course I take, I'm not familiar enough with them to know their typical release schedule. For instance, iLife is once a year, whereas Adobe CS products are about every 18 months - 2 years. With Apple's Pro Apps I just don't know. Anyone?
David :cool:
theonekcrow
Jun 18, 07:50 PM
Basically if a store takes 20 reservations, they will get 20 phones plus a few extra based on how many reservations they took.!
Are you certain on this statement, if so I will be camping out in front of Radio Shack on the 24th...
Are you certain on this statement, if so I will be camping out in front of Radio Shack on the 24th...
twoodcc
Jul 20, 08:30 AM
this can be only good news, as long as Apple keeps up with the pc world and put these processors in their computers when they are released. i sure hope that they do
gauriemma
Jul 27, 01:25 PM
I never thought there'd come a day when I needed to know anything about what kind of chips Intel was coming out with.
citizenzen
Mar 22, 02:59 PM
A dictator is slaughtering his own people.
A government in power is responding against a rebellion.
If a rebellion sprang up in the United States, our government would respond with force as well.
"Slaughtering his own people" sounds a little propogandish to me. Are you saying that Qaddafi is taking people who have no connection to the rebellion at all and slaughtering them?
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
A government in power is responding against a rebellion.
If a rebellion sprang up in the United States, our government would respond with force as well.
"Slaughtering his own people" sounds a little propogandish to me. Are you saying that Qaddafi is taking people who have no connection to the rebellion at all and slaughtering them?
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 03:21 AM
But you ARE trying to control others Bill. It's quite obvious. There are no negative consequences inherent to being gay. I'm a 43 year old man, and quite happy. The only negative consequences I've suffered have been at the hands of people like you, who think you know how everyone should live and try to force your beliefs on us with laws. You absolutely want to control others, or at the very least, impose your punishments on us.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy
Hmm...but did they make any laws against you doing any of those things?
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
There are risks inherent in any sexual activity Bill, heterosexual or homosexual. I'm well aware of the risks of both. Apparently, you seem to feel that all gay men engage in sodomy, which is far from the truth. Also, many of these statistics are based on the results of promiscuous behavior. Gay people marrying would discourage promiscuity, which would most likely reduce those statistics. One would think you should be pro gay marriage rights in that case. But hey, we all know that's not what your real concern is. Your concern is to get everyone to conform to your rules.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
My handicap puts me in a minority full of people who think like Marxists. They'll tell you that they're the innocent, persecuted ones and that everyone else is the evil oppressor. Newsflash: Good and evil are on both sides. The "victims" aren't all good and the "persecutors" aren't all bad.
As I told you guys, I think that moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good. Moral liberty is not license. License causes chaos.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy
Hmm...but did they make any laws against you doing any of those things?
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
There are risks inherent in any sexual activity Bill, heterosexual or homosexual. I'm well aware of the risks of both. Apparently, you seem to feel that all gay men engage in sodomy, which is far from the truth. Also, many of these statistics are based on the results of promiscuous behavior. Gay people marrying would discourage promiscuity, which would most likely reduce those statistics. One would think you should be pro gay marriage rights in that case. But hey, we all know that's not what your real concern is. Your concern is to get everyone to conform to your rules.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
My handicap puts me in a minority full of people who think like Marxists. They'll tell you that they're the innocent, persecuted ones and that everyone else is the evil oppressor. Newsflash: Good and evil are on both sides. The "victims" aren't all good and the "persecutors" aren't all bad.
As I told you guys, I think that moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good. Moral liberty is not license. License causes chaos.
hayesk
Nov 29, 10:45 AM
If Universal gets a royalty from every iPod, then I will help myself to Universal's music library. After all, isn't that what the fee is for?
Piggie
Mar 23, 02:40 AM
When will RIM realize that nothing they can create, have created, or ever will create can be as good as something created by Apple? Some companies: Google, Microsoft, and RIM will just never learn.
Steve Jobs = Genius
It depends how you define "Good" does it not?
For some people an iMac or an iPad would be a useless device, and a PC with a Honeycomb tablet could be the ideal combination for them.
It's all down to what you want something to do.
Steve Jobs = Genius
It depends how you define "Good" does it not?
For some people an iMac or an iPad would be a useless device, and a PC with a Honeycomb tablet could be the ideal combination for them.
It's all down to what you want something to do.
Timepass
Jul 14, 04:49 PM
For dual opitical drives I say abotu time. Almost all cheap Pc have 2 opical drives. I like having them because I like to leave disk that I use a lot in the system. A lot easier that have to swap them time when running different programs.
As for the PSU at the top I like that design. The PSU is going to generated the most heat over all and that heat has to go somewhere.
Put it at the bottom it going to suck cooling air way from the graphic card and the CPU to cool it self and add more heat inside the case to make cooling the CPU and graphic card even worse. Or put it at the top where it will help pull cooling air over the CPU and graphic card and pulling heat off of them. Then pushing it al out the back. I like the 2nd one more. The design I would like would be a BTX mount and PSU at the top. That would put the CPU at the bottom, then graphic card and then PSU at the top. That way things that have the worse problem over heating get the coldest air and moves up from there. The hottest object is at the top of the case so the over all temp in the case is lower.
That just my logic of it. Balance wise it not go effect it to much. it not like you are going to move you Tower that offen and it going to be out of the way so the center of gravity being a little higher is not going to be big deal.
As for the PSU at the top I like that design. The PSU is going to generated the most heat over all and that heat has to go somewhere.
Put it at the bottom it going to suck cooling air way from the graphic card and the CPU to cool it self and add more heat inside the case to make cooling the CPU and graphic card even worse. Or put it at the top where it will help pull cooling air over the CPU and graphic card and pulling heat off of them. Then pushing it al out the back. I like the 2nd one more. The design I would like would be a BTX mount and PSU at the top. That would put the CPU at the bottom, then graphic card and then PSU at the top. That way things that have the worse problem over heating get the coldest air and moves up from there. The hottest object is at the top of the case so the over all temp in the case is lower.
That just my logic of it. Balance wise it not go effect it to much. it not like you are going to move you Tower that offen and it going to be out of the way so the center of gravity being a little higher is not going to be big deal.
theBB
Aug 11, 07:28 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
amin
Sep 13, 03:13 PM
The MP is so overkill for my needs right now, I wonder if I'd even notice the difference. I think I'll wait for 32 cores before I update!
Consultant
Apr 19, 02:06 PM
What annoys me even more is that Apple always seems to make these claims that they made such and such first, and that Windows is copying Mac OS.. What annoys me is if you know a bit of the history you'll find that Apple copied Xerox interface, with permission of course, but it's not like they came up with it first..
Now they are making another claim that Samsung is copying..
WRONG. A lot of modern GUI elements are INVENTED by Apple:
http://obamapacman.com/2010/03/myth-copyright-theft-apple-stole-gui-from-xerox-parc-alto/
Now they are making another claim that Samsung is copying..
WRONG. A lot of modern GUI elements are INVENTED by Apple:
http://obamapacman.com/2010/03/myth-copyright-theft-apple-stole-gui-from-xerox-parc-alto/
AngryCorgi
Apr 6, 04:16 PM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
ahuman7341
Aug 5, 05:57 PM
BitTorrent seems very NO!
The main reson I don't like the idea of it is the security issues. I Also think Apple will be aware of the security issues so I doubt that software update will use BitTorrent. Although Apple may have a client that comes with leopard or in iTunes.
The main reson I don't like the idea of it is the security issues. I Also think Apple will be aware of the security issues so I doubt that software update will use BitTorrent. Although Apple may have a client that comes with leopard or in iTunes.
Zimmy68
Apr 7, 11:36 PM
If there is one indisputable fact of this world...
Those on message boards that say they hate Best Buy, are the first to grab the Sunday ad and visit the store at least weekly.
Bank on it.
Those on message boards that say they hate Best Buy, are the first to grab the Sunday ad and visit the store at least weekly.
Bank on it.
Veinticinco
Apr 6, 10:42 AM
At least I now have a short finite timeline to work with to buy my 13"/2.13GHz C2D/256GB MBA before they "upgrade" it to a vastly inferior Intel GPU.
majorp
Sep 19, 05:08 AM
Im still on for today, 4 hours and counting.
Amazing Iceman
Apr 25, 01:36 PM
I would bet anything that these two "customers" happen to also be lawyers.
They just can't earn clean money, always have to rip some one to earn it.
They just can't earn clean money, always have to rip some one to earn it.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 01:11 PM
Fair enough. Now let's move along. ;)
You guys move on without me, please. I regret that I posted to this thread, because I said I wanted to post about technical topics only. It's best for me to post where I can do plenty of good. So I'll go back to the Mac Programming forum where I won't react emotionally.
You guys move on without me, please. I regret that I posted to this thread, because I said I wanted to post about technical topics only. It's best for me to post where I can do plenty of good. So I'll go back to the Mac Programming forum where I won't react emotionally.
rdowns
Mar 22, 01:50 PM
Where are our strict constitutionalist Tea Party Republicans? They haven't had anything to say about this. ****ing hypocrites.
mcrain
Apr 27, 10:47 AM
Stay classy Faux News:
Oh, it gets better. Apparently, the release of the birth certificate proving them wrong somehow demonstrates that the "birthers" were NOT kooks. :rolleyes:
President Obama reversed course today and answered critics, led by reality show host Donald Trump, who have called for him to release his original birth certificate.
Until now, the White House has stood by the president�s certificate of live birth, a health department document that attests to the existence of an actual birth certificate. The document has less information, but is valid proof of citizenship.
...
The president will address the press on the issue this morning just one day after his press secretary upbraided a reporter for even asking about such a thing.
...
Case in point: In a snappish press conference on Tuesday, Press Secretary Jay Carney gave a belittling answer to CNN�s Ed Henry for asking why the president doesn�t put the doubts over his nativity to rest by releasing his long-form birth certificate.
Carney told Henry that Americans would be �appalled� by the question and that he should be talking about serious issues involving the economy and foreign affairs.
...
Carney painted Obama into a corner by suggesting that he can�t deal with the distraction of answering the question about his birth certificate because he is working constantly to revive the economy and oversee three wars. How can he help Winfrey, raise money or even play golf by that standard?
Democrats long championed the idea of branding Republicans as kooks for believing that the president might not have been born in Hawaii. It explains why liberal outlets have given such lavish attention to Trump, who has embraced the issue.
But when a Gallup poll shows that only 38 percent of Americans are convinced of the president�s place of birth, the strategy of branding Republicans as �birthers� looks dubious. The fact that Obama has drawn a hard line against releasing his birth certificate amid such doubts was an unsustainable position amid legitimate inquiries from legitimate journalists like Henry. FauxNews (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/27/birther-strategy-backfires/)
Oh, it gets better. Apparently, the release of the birth certificate proving them wrong somehow demonstrates that the "birthers" were NOT kooks. :rolleyes:
President Obama reversed course today and answered critics, led by reality show host Donald Trump, who have called for him to release his original birth certificate.
Until now, the White House has stood by the president�s certificate of live birth, a health department document that attests to the existence of an actual birth certificate. The document has less information, but is valid proof of citizenship.
...
The president will address the press on the issue this morning just one day after his press secretary upbraided a reporter for even asking about such a thing.
...
Case in point: In a snappish press conference on Tuesday, Press Secretary Jay Carney gave a belittling answer to CNN�s Ed Henry for asking why the president doesn�t put the doubts over his nativity to rest by releasing his long-form birth certificate.
Carney told Henry that Americans would be �appalled� by the question and that he should be talking about serious issues involving the economy and foreign affairs.
...
Carney painted Obama into a corner by suggesting that he can�t deal with the distraction of answering the question about his birth certificate because he is working constantly to revive the economy and oversee three wars. How can he help Winfrey, raise money or even play golf by that standard?
Democrats long championed the idea of branding Republicans as kooks for believing that the president might not have been born in Hawaii. It explains why liberal outlets have given such lavish attention to Trump, who has embraced the issue.
But when a Gallup poll shows that only 38 percent of Americans are convinced of the president�s place of birth, the strategy of branding Republicans as �birthers� looks dubious. The fact that Obama has drawn a hard line against releasing his birth certificate amid such doubts was an unsustainable position amid legitimate inquiries from legitimate journalists like Henry. FauxNews (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/27/birther-strategy-backfires/)
MyDesktopBroke
Mar 18, 07:16 AM
How many times did Barack Obama attempt to draw a difference between himself and Hillary by saying "I was against the war from the beginning."? Lots.
How many times did he attempt to portray himself as the polar opposite of George Bush, especially his foreign policy? Lots.
How many times did he say that he was going to repair the view of America in the eyes of the Muslim world? Lots.
How many times did he say he would talk to leaders of 'terrorist nations' without preconditions? Lots.
The point is... he talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. On foreign policy, he's more of the same. On everything else, especially domestic spending, he's much much worse.
He did say all those things - but none of those make him a military dove, since in his debates with McCain he did extensively paint Afghanistan as the "right war," or the place were America "should have been." How many times did he promise to "find and kill" Bin Laden? Even before the debates he was openly pushing Afghan and Pakistan escalation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0WOFrEgRu4
According to the Tea Party, he's doing everything he can to appease Muslims, too. While they obviously are using that as an attack, his speeches in the middle east and Egypt after his election showed a marked difference in communication and downplayed American exceptionalism. Plus, so far he hasn't had a request from a terrorist leader to talk, if I'm not mistaken, so that's not really a fair comparison.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_889oBKkNU
(I can't good youtube links for his Turkey speech - the one with the "not a Christian nation remark)
Obviously he's failed on a lot of campaign promises - especially on the front of reversing Bush domestic policies like the PATRIOT act - but I'd argue that people who saw Obama as the anti-war candidate were the ones who didn't pay attention. The last part about spending doesn't really connect to this issue.
How many times did he attempt to portray himself as the polar opposite of George Bush, especially his foreign policy? Lots.
How many times did he say that he was going to repair the view of America in the eyes of the Muslim world? Lots.
How many times did he say he would talk to leaders of 'terrorist nations' without preconditions? Lots.
The point is... he talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. On foreign policy, he's more of the same. On everything else, especially domestic spending, he's much much worse.
He did say all those things - but none of those make him a military dove, since in his debates with McCain he did extensively paint Afghanistan as the "right war," or the place were America "should have been." How many times did he promise to "find and kill" Bin Laden? Even before the debates he was openly pushing Afghan and Pakistan escalation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0WOFrEgRu4
According to the Tea Party, he's doing everything he can to appease Muslims, too. While they obviously are using that as an attack, his speeches in the middle east and Egypt after his election showed a marked difference in communication and downplayed American exceptionalism. Plus, so far he hasn't had a request from a terrorist leader to talk, if I'm not mistaken, so that's not really a fair comparison.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_889oBKkNU
(I can't good youtube links for his Turkey speech - the one with the "not a Christian nation remark)
Obviously he's failed on a lot of campaign promises - especially on the front of reversing Bush domestic policies like the PATRIOT act - but I'd argue that people who saw Obama as the anti-war candidate were the ones who didn't pay attention. The last part about spending doesn't really connect to this issue.
magbarn
Apr 10, 03:23 AM
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.
Sorry not all of us are blessed with 'night vision' I dunno about your advanced genetics, but using my MBA on minimum setting will give me a headache in about 3 minutes.
Sorry not all of us are blessed with 'night vision' I dunno about your advanced genetics, but using my MBA on minimum setting will give me a headache in about 3 minutes.
seenew
Aug 27, 02:49 AM
What do you guys think the new iMac specs will be like?
Let's say on the 17" iMac maybe a 250 gig hard disk, 1 gb ram, upgraded video card, and conroe at some speed who cares what for $1299? Sounds sweet but not outrageously impossible.
I already have those stats, I want to see them drop in a high-end Conroe (~3GHz) so I would know that I could feasibly upgrade my 2GHz Core Duo in the future. It's possible, isn't it? I mean, the G5's were really hot, and the iMac enclosure could handle that, wouldn't the new Intel ones be able to handle the Conroe Extremes?
Let's say on the 17" iMac maybe a 250 gig hard disk, 1 gb ram, upgraded video card, and conroe at some speed who cares what for $1299? Sounds sweet but not outrageously impossible.
I already have those stats, I want to see them drop in a high-end Conroe (~3GHz) so I would know that I could feasibly upgrade my 2GHz Core Duo in the future. It's possible, isn't it? I mean, the G5's were really hot, and the iMac enclosure could handle that, wouldn't the new Intel ones be able to handle the Conroe Extremes?
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق