Arcus
May 2, 09:35 AM
no thanks.
y u no like bugfixes?
y u no like bugfixes?
mdntcallr
Oct 29, 01:40 AM
hey, im all for apple not releasing this software to the public.
Why? it may mean less viruses or hacks.
Why? it may mean less viruses or hacks.
Corndog5595
Nov 14, 09:23 PM
Maybe you're really bad, or playing on a bad TV (too small or low res?). I played on hardened, and the most I had to replay a section was WMD, a part near the end of the game where you have a crossbow. You get an achievement for taking out all guards silently, so I had to restart to keep trying.
random47
Apr 13, 07:32 AM
Just got my new Dell u2311:D
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Ab7AxhOTL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Ab7AxhOTL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
VideoFreek
May 4, 03:37 PM
Why does a question about a potentially dangerous object and your provisions for its safe keeping threaten you? The doctor is not playing politics, hes practicing good preventative medicine.Sorry, during which year of medical school do doctors receive gun safety training? How many hours of coursework on home safety do they complete? The typical MD is no more qualified to discuss these matters than any bozo on the street with more than an ounce of common sense. If they really want to help their patients child-proof their homes effectively, providing a helpful checklist would far more effective than interrogating parents.
0010101
Oct 29, 01:34 AM
The problem with Apple making a 'PC' version of OSX is that they'd have to write it to work with a million different combinations of hardware.. one of the reasons XP is such a crappy OS.
Since Apple builds the hardware, they build the OS to work with that hardware. That's what makes it so stable and reliable.
Now, Apple could, in theory, start a 'OSX Compliant' program, telling third party hardware vendors like Dell or HP that if they use a specific logic board chipset, video chipset, etc that OSX would run as well on such a PC as a Mac, but all that would do is kill Apples hardware sales, because most folks would opt for the ballsed out clone instead of the neutered Apple.
That's why licencing nearly killed Apple.. because the clone companies were building a better, faster box for much less money, and cutting too deep into their hardware sales (which they're making alot more than 20% on).
Another good reason for Apple to keep OSX on their hardware is Microsoft, who would probably quit releasing OSX versions of their popular Word and Excel software if Apple were to try and go head to head with them in the OS market.
Even animals know better than to $#it where they eat.
Despite Apples superior OS, I doubt they'll ever gain much more than 20% of the market, because when it comes down to it, people in general are going to buy what is inexpensive and familure, and has the best range of software available.
Software companies are going to write software for the largest audience possible.. and that's going to continue to be the Winblows platform.
Why hasn't there been a 'universal' version of Photoshop yet? Because the hard core digital imaging people are hanging on to their G5's. The 'casual' and 'consumer' users can use their software just fine under Rosetta on their Intel Macs.
There isn't any incentive for Adobe to port their flagship product yet.. because customers don't have any real incentive to buy it yet.
Since Apple builds the hardware, they build the OS to work with that hardware. That's what makes it so stable and reliable.
Now, Apple could, in theory, start a 'OSX Compliant' program, telling third party hardware vendors like Dell or HP that if they use a specific logic board chipset, video chipset, etc that OSX would run as well on such a PC as a Mac, but all that would do is kill Apples hardware sales, because most folks would opt for the ballsed out clone instead of the neutered Apple.
That's why licencing nearly killed Apple.. because the clone companies were building a better, faster box for much less money, and cutting too deep into their hardware sales (which they're making alot more than 20% on).
Another good reason for Apple to keep OSX on their hardware is Microsoft, who would probably quit releasing OSX versions of their popular Word and Excel software if Apple were to try and go head to head with them in the OS market.
Even animals know better than to $#it where they eat.
Despite Apples superior OS, I doubt they'll ever gain much more than 20% of the market, because when it comes down to it, people in general are going to buy what is inexpensive and familure, and has the best range of software available.
Software companies are going to write software for the largest audience possible.. and that's going to continue to be the Winblows platform.
Why hasn't there been a 'universal' version of Photoshop yet? Because the hard core digital imaging people are hanging on to their G5's. The 'casual' and 'consumer' users can use their software just fine under Rosetta on their Intel Macs.
There isn't any incentive for Adobe to port their flagship product yet.. because customers don't have any real incentive to buy it yet.
DTphonehome
Oct 19, 04:00 PM
Original Investment - $94,070.00 for 11,500 shares
11,500 x 2 after the split last summer = 23,000 shares
23,000 x 78.71 at todays rate = $1,810,330.00
$1,810,330 - $94,070.00 = $1,716,260.00 stock worth.
I have not sold one share. Now who is laughing. Thank you iPod.
Damn, man, I'd hate to see your tax bill when you finally sell!
Anyway, share-dropping is not very gentlemanly, so I'll keep my figures to myself...but at this point I too have to hold back from selling simply to avoid the huge tax hit. Would be nice if Apple issued dividends though, especially now that they're flush. Make some cash without divesting of the principal.
11,500 x 2 after the split last summer = 23,000 shares
23,000 x 78.71 at todays rate = $1,810,330.00
$1,810,330 - $94,070.00 = $1,716,260.00 stock worth.
I have not sold one share. Now who is laughing. Thank you iPod.
Damn, man, I'd hate to see your tax bill when you finally sell!
Anyway, share-dropping is not very gentlemanly, so I'll keep my figures to myself...but at this point I too have to hold back from selling simply to avoid the huge tax hit. Would be nice if Apple issued dividends though, especially now that they're flush. Make some cash without divesting of the principal.
Digitalclips
Dec 14, 07:45 AM
On your first point: It is also the company that came out with the iphone 4 and its antenna problems.
Oh you mean the problem they have actually done nothing about (other than a perceptual one to show weak signal strength more accurately) and yet the iPhone 4 doesn't seem to have any such issue now?
Oh you mean the problem they have actually done nothing about (other than a perceptual one to show weak signal strength more accurately) and yet the iPhone 4 doesn't seem to have any such issue now?
SeaFox
Oct 29, 01:00 AM
Why hasn't there been a 'universal' version of Photoshop yet? Because the hard core digital imaging people are hanging on to their G5's.
No, you have it backwards. Software companies don't release products because the hardware is out there. They release because they've added new features and want user to upgrade and new consumers to come. Consumers buy the hardware because the software is available for it. A computer without software is just a really expensive paper weight. It's Adobe's lack of a native Creative Suite than keeps professionals from picking up MacPros - and Apple said just that during their last financial results call.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
No, you have it backwards. Software companies don't release products because the hardware is out there. They release because they've added new features and want user to upgrade and new consumers to come. Consumers buy the hardware because the software is available for it. A computer without software is just a really expensive paper weight. It's Adobe's lack of a native Creative Suite than keeps professionals from picking up MacPros - and Apple said just that during their last financial results call.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
Rocksaurus
Oct 28, 05:37 PM
Isn't a healthy chunk of OS X based on FreeBSD? A free, open source Unix distro? In a sense, if they use FreeBSD and do not contribute back to the very open source community they're borrowing from, doesn't that make Apple a thief? Maybe I'm missing something :o
firestarter
Apr 21, 12:50 PM
It works in Slashdot, but only because you have Kudos rating and meta-moderation.
Without meta-moderation the trolls get equal voting powers to everyone else - and all hell will break loose as people vote up friends and down 'enemies'.
I think it's a good idea in general though. It would be great to cut through a 30 page thread and see only the top 10 posts.
Without meta-moderation the trolls get equal voting powers to everyone else - and all hell will break loose as people vote up friends and down 'enemies'.
I think it's a good idea in general though. It would be great to cut through a 30 page thread and see only the top 10 posts.
Mattie Num Nums
May 2, 09:29 AM
Actually I have seen a number of explanations on this thread from people who use Windows more than myself. The answer to why it is "7" does not seem to be well known even to Windows users.
Really its not brain surgery.
Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, XP (5.0), Vista (6.0), Windows 7 (7.0).
Really its not brain surgery.
Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, XP (5.0), Vista (6.0), Windows 7 (7.0).
lacoste-rocker
Apr 10, 11:29 PM
Just ordered these from Abercrombie, they will be here on Tuesday.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5188/5608293111_096eaf1257_z.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4109/5608876668_767c272def_z.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5229/5608876854_c792f5dd54_z.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5188/5608293111_096eaf1257_z.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4109/5608876668_767c272def_z.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5229/5608876854_c792f5dd54_z.jpg
kevinliu4
Oct 11, 05:25 AM
initially i was skeptical of the design as i was wondering how anyone is supposed to hold this thing (while watching video) without blocking the screen. then i realised when i use the ipod to watch video, it's usually resting on a table (at work) or in my palm (on the train). i don't actually watch video while i'm walking down the street for example.
however, i think with a virtual touch screen click wheel, the screen of the ipod is gonna be a mess in no time...fingerprint city. i also have visions of me forgetting to click hold as i wipe the screen to remove the finger prints, then inadvertently blasting my ears off as the volume on the virtual wheel goes up. i dunno. having said that, can't wait to see it!
however, i think with a virtual touch screen click wheel, the screen of the ipod is gonna be a mess in no time...fingerprint city. i also have visions of me forgetting to click hold as i wipe the screen to remove the finger prints, then inadvertently blasting my ears off as the volume on the virtual wheel goes up. i dunno. having said that, can't wait to see it!
g7by08believeit
Oct 3, 05:02 PM
apple phone - no
Motorola already has iTunes on the SLVR (only 100 songs, but with a removeable mini sandisk chip you can switch anytime you like!)
I'm betting that motorola was smart enough to hold the market for iTunes on phones for at least a year.
MBP - updated either before holidays or nothing until santa rosa
iWork/iLife, of course.
OS X 10.5- hopefully, but i would'nt be surprised/dissapointed if not
iRetire - no
iTV - yep
i believe this will be the big announcement - but i believe as far as hardware releases go, not a lot... this will be mainly for software updates/releases.
ipod touchscreen - doubtful
Motorola already has iTunes on the SLVR (only 100 songs, but with a removeable mini sandisk chip you can switch anytime you like!)
I'm betting that motorola was smart enough to hold the market for iTunes on phones for at least a year.
MBP - updated either before holidays or nothing until santa rosa
iWork/iLife, of course.
OS X 10.5- hopefully, but i would'nt be surprised/dissapointed if not
iRetire - no
iTV - yep
i believe this will be the big announcement - but i believe as far as hardware releases go, not a lot... this will be mainly for software updates/releases.
ipod touchscreen - doubtful
Labaguette
Apr 15, 01:40 PM
hmm hmm hmm - this is clearly Maxwell Render (http://www.maxwellrender.com/gallery/gallery.php) image. Exactly the same style. sry guys, no a(luminium)Phone.
lbro
Apr 22, 06:28 PM
I think everybody should be able to see how many positives and negatives specific posters have given. e.g. I gave a few +1s today and no -1s so somewhere on my profile or under my username it should say 3 +1s given, 0 -1s given or something like that.
ejbenjamin
Jan 5, 02:46 PM
You guys are the coolest. Thanks for all your hard work.
Poggy777
Apr 25, 02:58 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Lol. Let's just wait and see.
Lol. Let's just wait and see.
superfula
Apr 29, 06:54 PM
NT 4 and Windows 95/98 don't use the same kernel at all. They might share the GUI sub-system (actually, it's called the Win32 sub-system, which is probably what Windows Team blog is referring when referring to API versions, since Win32 is the Windows API) (and yes, I know the 64 bit version is called Win64, just like the 16 bit version was called Win16), but they do not share the same architecture/kernel at all, which Smitty inferred. So no, Smitty wasn't right at all, is use of the word kernel was wrong and confusing.
Read my post. I didn't say he was right about them being the same kernal. I simply said he was right about the naming conventions.
The version in question isn't simply the gui version number, but the code base version as a whole.
Anyway, the only way it makes sense again is Windows NT releases. I doubt the Windows Team Blog are in on marketing meetings. ;)
The only way it makes sense is by using the actual version numbers that MS gave us, which are quite easily found. ;) Not only in Windows but in several sources through the net. I'll believe the info MS gives us vs someone from macrumors.
Read my post. I didn't say he was right about them being the same kernal. I simply said he was right about the naming conventions.
The version in question isn't simply the gui version number, but the code base version as a whole.
Anyway, the only way it makes sense again is Windows NT releases. I doubt the Windows Team Blog are in on marketing meetings. ;)
The only way it makes sense is by using the actual version numbers that MS gave us, which are quite easily found. ;) Not only in Windows but in several sources through the net. I'll believe the info MS gives us vs someone from macrumors.
Anuba
Jan 12, 07:52 PM
i don't know i still who they plan to sell it ... sure there are mac enthusiasts (i would take it too when given as a present) but 10 million within a year without any real range of products ...
Did he really say 10 million within a year? Surely he jests. It's not even coming out in Europe until and if he's thinking 10 million in the US alone, um... that's like 15% of Cingular's customer base.
Did he really say 10 million within a year? Surely he jests. It's not even coming out in Europe until and if he's thinking 10 million in the US alone, um... that's like 15% of Cingular's customer base.
iShater
Jul 28, 01:02 PM
True on the economies of scale bit - although the batteries are always going to be pricey.
I keep hammering the same point here, but the Volt would see a quite significant fuel economy boost by switching to a diesel engine to charge the batteries and run the motors. Sort it out, US car companies...it's not like we don't sell diesel here.
That is true. I'm surprised nobody has brought even diesel based hybrids here yet. I recall hearing VW was planning on it, but I don't remember where I read that.
I keep hammering the same point here, but the Volt would see a quite significant fuel economy boost by switching to a diesel engine to charge the batteries and run the motors. Sort it out, US car companies...it's not like we don't sell diesel here.
That is true. I'm surprised nobody has brought even diesel based hybrids here yet. I recall hearing VW was planning on it, but I don't remember where I read that.
robbieduncan
Sep 26, 02:46 AM
Why would Apple logically develop a piece of software that uses the graphics card when I have four processors - many others have two - begging to be worked. I guess I never understood the logic of using Core Image to power this thing.
I think that's because you don't understand how CoreImage is meant to work (I'm not saying how it does work for you). When you write an ImageUnit to run in CoreImage you are not targeting a particular processor at all (be that CPU, GPU or some future co-processor). You write your code in a special language and it gets compiled into a kind of 50% compiled code. CoreImage will then run this on the GPU or any of the available CPUs using whichever it thinks will be fastest at that time.
You can read about it here (http://developer.apple.com/macosx/coreimage.html), see Parallel Execution around half way down.
I think that's because you don't understand how CoreImage is meant to work (I'm not saying how it does work for you). When you write an ImageUnit to run in CoreImage you are not targeting a particular processor at all (be that CPU, GPU or some future co-processor). You write your code in a special language and it gets compiled into a kind of 50% compiled code. CoreImage will then run this on the GPU or any of the available CPUs using whichever it thinks will be fastest at that time.
You can read about it here (http://developer.apple.com/macosx/coreimage.html), see Parallel Execution around half way down.
creator2456
Apr 10, 12:36 AM
Can you report your speeds with that whenever you get it running?
I shall try to remember, but won't have it until Wed., won't have connection until the Monday after.
I shall try to remember, but won't have it until Wed., won't have connection until the Monday after.
No comments:
Post a Comment