cynerjist
Jan 8, 10:40 PM
Probably. :D BTW, you have a link to that? Edit: nvm I found it on MS's site. (http://www.microsoft.com/events/executives/billgates.mspx)
i couldn't get anything that's a windows media file to play. here is a link for people with that problem. it has all keynotes as .flv
http://media.digitaltrends.com/digitaltrends/ces_2007_-_keynote_part_1.html
i couldn't get anything that's a windows media file to play. here is a link for people with that problem. it has all keynotes as .flv
http://media.digitaltrends.com/digitaltrends/ces_2007_-_keynote_part_1.html
JohnBossu
Mar 19, 06:22 AM
Even though I own two iPhone 4's I never experienced being a meat sandwich so that survey is mostly bullshiznit.
Honestly, I don't buy the iPhone to show off but because it is a photography tool for my art studio.
I believe there are plenty of good cameras in the market at the same price with a iPhone, you picked iPhone instead?
yeah iPhone is so overrated then.
Honestly, I don't buy the iPhone to show off but because it is a photography tool for my art studio.
I believe there are plenty of good cameras in the market at the same price with a iPhone, you picked iPhone instead?
yeah iPhone is so overrated then.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 29, 05:55 PM
No, smitty was correct. MS uses version numbers that identify it's code. It's how software devs can write code that decides whether the app should be allowed to install.
In a command prompt, use winver. Note the version listed
EG, Windows 95, NT 4, 98, and ME are all considered Windows 4.x. 2000 and XP are both 5.x, Vista and Windows 7 are 6.x. So it's clear 7 is nothing more than marketing.
From the horses mouth: http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/archive/b/windowsvista/archive/2008/10/14/why-7.aspx
Umm just going to point this out to but Windows 95, 98 and ME were all the windows 9.x kernel code.
Knight pointed out that what you are reading is just the gui version number. GUI is just a shell around the OS(aka eye candy). The kernel is what really matters and what is really accessed and controlled.
NT and beyond were on different version of NT.
Knight is the one is correct and he has proving he knows his stuff in that deparment.
Windows had 2 lines for the longest time the NT line (business for the most part) and the other one which has been known as the 9.x line.
Windows XP killed off the 9.x line and they went NT only.
In a command prompt, use winver. Note the version listed
EG, Windows 95, NT 4, 98, and ME are all considered Windows 4.x. 2000 and XP are both 5.x, Vista and Windows 7 are 6.x. So it's clear 7 is nothing more than marketing.
From the horses mouth: http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/archive/b/windowsvista/archive/2008/10/14/why-7.aspx
Umm just going to point this out to but Windows 95, 98 and ME were all the windows 9.x kernel code.
Knight pointed out that what you are reading is just the gui version number. GUI is just a shell around the OS(aka eye candy). The kernel is what really matters and what is really accessed and controlled.
NT and beyond were on different version of NT.
Knight is the one is correct and he has proving he knows his stuff in that deparment.
Windows had 2 lines for the longest time the NT line (business for the most part) and the other one which has been known as the 9.x line.
Windows XP killed off the 9.x line and they went NT only.
rdowns
Apr 21, 11:46 AM
arn,
What are we to do with people who will abuse of this new feature?
How will you know who is abusing it. I mean, I'll probably always give you -1 but how will you know? :p
What are we to do with people who will abuse of this new feature?
How will you know who is abusing it. I mean, I'll probably always give you -1 but how will you know? :p
more...
MattSepeta
Apr 27, 12:55 PM
So now you're going with chromosomes, fab, you should let the intersex community know they're not entitled to be women or men anymore as they don't conform to your grade school understanding of sex and gender.
:rolleyes:
When did I say anything about what people are "entitled" to be???
You and leekohler have just created a strawman before our very eyes. Very impressive.
:rolleyes:
When did I say anything about what people are "entitled" to be???
You and leekohler have just created a strawman before our very eyes. Very impressive.
ericschmerick
Sep 25, 06:12 PM
Prob a dumb question but is my mac fast enough to run aperture?
20 inch imac
2 gb ram
intel 2.0
It will run great. My MBP is almost the same spec, runs wonderfully.
Eric
http://www.essersinchina.com/
20 inch imac
2 gb ram
intel 2.0
It will run great. My MBP is almost the same spec, runs wonderfully.
Eric
http://www.essersinchina.com/
more...
quagmire
Nov 14, 08:52 PM
I finally tried playing some of the campaign tonight. I've only made it about 4 missions in, but so far I can safely say, it is the worst thing I've ever played. It is nothing but endless sequences of "monster closet" events, with little to no indication as to what you are supposed to be doing, with your crappy "Partners" doing nothing but yelling incomprehensible things at you. Quite a mess.
Yeah. I liked MW2's campaign better. It may be because I am from the DC area so it was quite weird seeing it war torn.
Yeah. I liked MW2's campaign better. It may be because I am from the DC area so it was quite weird seeing it war torn.
MacRumors
Aug 7, 02:18 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Although not mentioned during the keynote, Apple has reduced the prices on its Cinema Displays. The 20" Cinema Display now sells for $699 (down from $799), the 23" Cinema Display now sells for $999 (down from $1299), and the 30" Cinema Display now sells for $1999 (down from $2499), representing cuts of $100, $300, and $500 respectively.
Update: MacForum member BlizzardBomb notes that the specifications for the 20 and 23" displays have been bumped. The 20" display now has a brightness of 300 cd/m2 (up from 250 cd/m2), and the 23" display has a brightness of 400 cd/m2 (up from 270 cd/m2). Both models also now feature 700:1 contrast ratios (both up from 400:1). The 30" display remains at 400 cd/m2 and a 700:1 contrast ratio.
Although not mentioned during the keynote, Apple has reduced the prices on its Cinema Displays. The 20" Cinema Display now sells for $699 (down from $799), the 23" Cinema Display now sells for $999 (down from $1299), and the 30" Cinema Display now sells for $1999 (down from $2499), representing cuts of $100, $300, and $500 respectively.
Update: MacForum member BlizzardBomb notes that the specifications for the 20 and 23" displays have been bumped. The 20" display now has a brightness of 300 cd/m2 (up from 250 cd/m2), and the 23" display has a brightness of 400 cd/m2 (up from 270 cd/m2). Both models also now feature 700:1 contrast ratios (both up from 400:1). The 30" display remains at 400 cd/m2 and a 700:1 contrast ratio.
more...
gorgeousninja
Apr 17, 04:15 PM
Under sharia law a woman who was raped would need like 9 witnesses to prove the man guilty. And her testimony in other cases would be half that of a man's.
Sharia law isn't a very good thing to bring up ;)
Indeed I would hate to live under such a system...
but, I do think that it is worth reminding kids who smugly proclaim that they are involved in illegal activities because of skewed morals and misguided self-entitlement that there are penalties and consequences for such actions... don't you?
Sharia law isn't a very good thing to bring up ;)
Indeed I would hate to live under such a system...
but, I do think that it is worth reminding kids who smugly proclaim that they are involved in illegal activities because of skewed morals and misguided self-entitlement that there are penalties and consequences for such actions... don't you?
BrettJDeriso
Apr 5, 04:44 PM
I have to say, this is the dumbest idea I've ever seen come out of Cupertino. Even worse than the Newton.
I feel sorry for the tools who download this.
I feel sorry for the tools who download this.
more...
displaced
Sep 25, 11:20 AM
I suppose there could be a bit of news here for non-photographers.
As I understand it, Aperture uses OS X's built-in RAW image processing. If I remember rightly, the last Aperture update accompanied an OS X update. So it's possible 10.4.8 could be just around the corner (i.e. sometime this week?)
As I understand it, Aperture uses OS X's built-in RAW image processing. If I remember rightly, the last Aperture update accompanied an OS X update. So it's possible 10.4.8 could be just around the corner (i.e. sometime this week?)
Chundles
Sep 12, 08:21 AM
yeah, the iTunes videos are definitely referencing movies I'd say. I mean we all know it was happening. The surprise is the non-disney titles, since we'd all assumed that that would be all Jobs was able to pull. But then again I don't see why studios would sign up with Amazon video, relatively unproven in digital content delivery, without signing up with iTMS, a very much proven system. I'm sure that's a huge part of Jobs negotiations, not ever once asking for anything exclusive. (That would be what his disney connections might be able to get him). If they're worried about being locked in to the iTMS, then they're free to allow whoever they want to to sell their stuff. The pricing scheme right now as rumored is at least two tiered, one for new releases and one for old, so yes, Mr. Movie Studio, you can make more money off your hot newest thing.
The links from that iTunes Videos thing DO NOT point to any movies. They point to iPod versions of movie trailers. It's just a consolidation of the current content.
But saying that doesn't matter because people aren't reading the thread.
The links from that iTunes Videos thing DO NOT point to any movies. They point to iPod versions of movie trailers. It's just a consolidation of the current content.
But saying that doesn't matter because people aren't reading the thread.
more...
japanime
Mar 25, 03:46 AM
the release in retrospect was a milestone in Apple's transformation from a struggling computer company into the major technology behemoth it is today.
Odd choice of words. "Behemoth" is most often used to describe something that that it is so large that it is unpleasant. And "major behemoth" is redundant.
Odd choice of words. "Behemoth" is most often used to describe something that that it is so large that it is unpleasant. And "major behemoth" is redundant.
Thex1138
Sep 30, 08:14 PM
There's a single Home Button in the middle...
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
more...
KnightWRX
Mar 13, 11:25 AM
I think there will be a change in computing
So you mean computing won't be "Input, Process, Output, Storage" but something else ?
No, there will be no change in computing. It's already general and basic enough to cover all the bases.
and tablets are the future of it. I do think servers/ power machines will remain, but I can see them becoming specialised (such as in power stations etc). I can see Linux filling that whole perfectly. I do feel that tablets/ touch based computers are the future, but I think they need voice recognition software to truly come into play for text input. If the iPad had a killer voice recognition software, then MS Word for iPad might truly become a game changer. As good as any touchscreen is, typing 2,000 words on a touchscreen would be a bit of a push.
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
So you mean computing won't be "Input, Process, Output, Storage" but something else ?
No, there will be no change in computing. It's already general and basic enough to cover all the bases.
and tablets are the future of it. I do think servers/ power machines will remain, but I can see them becoming specialised (such as in power stations etc). I can see Linux filling that whole perfectly. I do feel that tablets/ touch based computers are the future, but I think they need voice recognition software to truly come into play for text input. If the iPad had a killer voice recognition software, then MS Word for iPad might truly become a game changer. As good as any touchscreen is, typing 2,000 words on a touchscreen would be a bit of a push.
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
Thex1138
Sep 30, 08:14 PM
There's a single Home Button in the middle...
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
more...
DHUK
Jan 9, 05:10 AM
Cheaper tracks on iTunes, at least in the UK.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7178651.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7178651.stm
goobot
Dec 13, 10:58 AM
ha!, no.
shartypants
May 3, 01:55 PM
Why is it that Google always touts how open is so good, then they realize that, oh, guess we should tighten things up a bit, maybe being too open is not such a good thing.
longofest
Oct 19, 10:26 AM
1.5% woo hoo!! Thats quite a climb!
Indeed. If you look at it a different way, it is a 33% increase year over year for Apple's market share numbers.
How I got to 33%:
% increase_________1.5
---------------- = ---- = 32.6%
old market share____4.6
Indeed. If you look at it a different way, it is a 33% increase year over year for Apple's market share numbers.
How I got to 33%:
% increase_________1.5
---------------- = ---- = 32.6%
old market share____4.6
buckwheat987
Mar 24, 03:00 PM
Cool..happy birthday...
great OS
great OS
roadbloc
Apr 9, 07:39 AM
From what I've heard of Windows 8 so far, I am impressed that Microsoft are back on the ball in terms of features that users want. A lot of the features coming in Windows 8 should either have been added ages ago, or are polished/expanded versions of something that existed in Windows for a long time, but was either poorly integrated or went stale due to no updates for it over the years. It will also be good to see a return of the Marketplace.
The idea of Live integration and the 'Ribbon' in explorer are the only things that put me off.
What disappoints me in Lion is the system requirements. It is massively bloated. Core2Duo and 2GB of RAM minimum is terrible. Even though my Mac is capable of running it, I'm still not impressed. Hopefully the Resume feature will kick ass so much that it will be worth it. Other than Resume and Versions, the rest of Lion's features are a big 'meh'.
The idea of Live integration and the 'Ribbon' in explorer are the only things that put me off.
What disappoints me in Lion is the system requirements. It is massively bloated. Core2Duo and 2GB of RAM minimum is terrible. Even though my Mac is capable of running it, I'm still not impressed. Hopefully the Resume feature will kick ass so much that it will be worth it. Other than Resume and Versions, the rest of Lion's features are a big 'meh'.
samiwas
Mar 4, 03:57 PM
Minimum wages = unemployment, lower growth
child labor laws = limits free will and opportunities for youngsters
max hours per week = limits free will, opportunity for higher personal revenue
workplace safety = bureaucracy, red tape, lower growth
Holy effin' Shizzle batman! You don't believe this. Come on. Fo' reals? I mean really...come on. I know it, and you know it...you're trolling. There is no way you actually believe that stuff.
Minimum wages = employer must pay at the very least a human wage...not a slave wage. If the employer cannot afford to pay people fairly, their business should fail. Isn't that what the free market is all about? You produce or you fail?
Child Labor Laws = really??? Limits free will?? Opportunities for youngsters? Do you really think that if child labor laws were done away with in this country that some warehouse wouldn't have the 6-year-old kid of some nearly-homeless family out running a meat slicer for $4 a day? Do you REALLY think that kind of thing wouldn't happen? And that something like that is an opportunity for that 6-year-old? You are truly a piece of work. Oh right, I keep forgetting...you're a troll.
Max hours per week does not limit free will. An employer is certainly allowed to let an employee work 100 hours a week if they so want to. I know because I've done it on many occasions. I had a 140-hour week a while back. It's perfectly legal. But you have to PAY OVERTIME. If you want to exploit your workers, you pay them for it. You have the free will to work them overtime, they have the free will to accept that overtime, and then you pay them for it. Don't like it, don't do it...free will, baby.
Workplace safety should not be required? Bwaahahaha. Now, I most certainly do not follow most safety rules in my line of work, because a lot of them are pretty silly. But to do away with required safety procedures for many occupations is just an amazing concept. That you actually believe that employers will willingly pay more if they are not required to in order to keep their employees safe is one of the more laughable things ever.
Don't be naive. The goals are the same, more wealth, health, prosperity, and safety for all. Conservatives simply disagree with your methods. They realize that a hand-out is NEVER the same as a hand-up, and that wealth earned is not generally earned at the expense of others, but rather to their benefit.
So being paid overtime for working crazy hours is a HAND OUT? Really?
Cutting wages and pay requirements and removing safety requirements means more wealth and safety for ALL? OK. Hold on, let me comprehend that. Wait, I can't because it's the stupidest thing ever uttered.
Yes. it has been decided. He's a <censored>swell guy</censored>. There is no one who actually thinks like this.
*edit - while I meant what I said, it's not worth getting banned over.
child labor laws = limits free will and opportunities for youngsters
max hours per week = limits free will, opportunity for higher personal revenue
workplace safety = bureaucracy, red tape, lower growth
Holy effin' Shizzle batman! You don't believe this. Come on. Fo' reals? I mean really...come on. I know it, and you know it...you're trolling. There is no way you actually believe that stuff.
Minimum wages = employer must pay at the very least a human wage...not a slave wage. If the employer cannot afford to pay people fairly, their business should fail. Isn't that what the free market is all about? You produce or you fail?
Child Labor Laws = really??? Limits free will?? Opportunities for youngsters? Do you really think that if child labor laws were done away with in this country that some warehouse wouldn't have the 6-year-old kid of some nearly-homeless family out running a meat slicer for $4 a day? Do you REALLY think that kind of thing wouldn't happen? And that something like that is an opportunity for that 6-year-old? You are truly a piece of work. Oh right, I keep forgetting...you're a troll.
Max hours per week does not limit free will. An employer is certainly allowed to let an employee work 100 hours a week if they so want to. I know because I've done it on many occasions. I had a 140-hour week a while back. It's perfectly legal. But you have to PAY OVERTIME. If you want to exploit your workers, you pay them for it. You have the free will to work them overtime, they have the free will to accept that overtime, and then you pay them for it. Don't like it, don't do it...free will, baby.
Workplace safety should not be required? Bwaahahaha. Now, I most certainly do not follow most safety rules in my line of work, because a lot of them are pretty silly. But to do away with required safety procedures for many occupations is just an amazing concept. That you actually believe that employers will willingly pay more if they are not required to in order to keep their employees safe is one of the more laughable things ever.
Don't be naive. The goals are the same, more wealth, health, prosperity, and safety for all. Conservatives simply disagree with your methods. They realize that a hand-out is NEVER the same as a hand-up, and that wealth earned is not generally earned at the expense of others, but rather to their benefit.
So being paid overtime for working crazy hours is a HAND OUT? Really?
Cutting wages and pay requirements and removing safety requirements means more wealth and safety for ALL? OK. Hold on, let me comprehend that. Wait, I can't because it's the stupidest thing ever uttered.
Yes. it has been decided. He's a <censored>swell guy</censored>. There is no one who actually thinks like this.
*edit - while I meant what I said, it's not worth getting banned over.
G4DP
Jan 15, 03:40 PM
�200 for a 500GB External drive - haha, good one Steve!
No comments:
Post a Comment