NT1440
May 1, 11:47 PM
I don't think anyone believes that this will be the end of terrorism. Just like America wouldn't collapse if our President was assassinated. But it would still be a pretty big deal right?
Comparing him to the President shows just how twisted our population's understanding of Al-Qaeda's current make up has become. He was a leader a decade ago.
The current iteration of "Al-Qaeda" has only the idea driving it in common with the hierarchical Al-Qaeda of a decade ago.
Comparing him to the President shows just how twisted our population's understanding of Al-Qaeda's current make up has become. He was a leader a decade ago.
The current iteration of "Al-Qaeda" has only the idea driving it in common with the hierarchical Al-Qaeda of a decade ago.
shazzam
May 3, 07:35 AM
Yay!
fcortese
Apr 9, 02:17 PM
So it finally stopped snowing this morning, skies overcast. I couldn't stand it anymore, so I got out and headed just a little north of town to a closed ended valley - elevation 6300 feet. There are a bunch of old abandoned farm houses scattered about. Here's one of them.
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/9691/elkpark2142011040911114.jpg
5DII w/70-300 f4-5.6L IS USM
EXIF: 100 ISO, f/9, 1/400s, 0 ev, 300mm
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/9691/elkpark2142011040911114.jpg
5DII w/70-300 f4-5.6L IS USM
EXIF: 100 ISO, f/9, 1/400s, 0 ev, 300mm
HMFIC03
Apr 13, 04:56 PM
top ten apple branded tv features.
10. Requires itunes $500 remote.
9. Costs twice as much and has half as many channels as other tvs.
8. Can't watch bd movies on it.
7. No pron.
6. Requires 7 apple adapters to access all features.
5. Tv bezel constantly runs iads.
4. Not able to display politically incorrect programming.
3. Al gore circuit turns off tv after 200 watts are consumed.
2. Comes in only one size.
1. Wooooo!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juh6ldz177k
+1 - #3 lmfao
10. Requires itunes $500 remote.
9. Costs twice as much and has half as many channels as other tvs.
8. Can't watch bd movies on it.
7. No pron.
6. Requires 7 apple adapters to access all features.
5. Tv bezel constantly runs iads.
4. Not able to display politically incorrect programming.
3. Al gore circuit turns off tv after 200 watts are consumed.
2. Comes in only one size.
1. Wooooo!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juh6ldz177k
+1 - #3 lmfao
more...
Vizin
Apr 25, 11:33 PM
Same thing apple always does function not features.
LTE is a pretty fantastic function. Using 4G on my friend's Thunderbolt feels the same as using WiFi. The battery life is unacceptable though.
If Apple can't get LTE working in time for the iPhone 5 (not really in their hands), I seriously hope to see HSPA+ as a stop-gap.
LTE is a pretty fantastic function. Using 4G on my friend's Thunderbolt feels the same as using WiFi. The battery life is unacceptable though.
If Apple can't get LTE working in time for the iPhone 5 (not really in their hands), I seriously hope to see HSPA+ as a stop-gap.
garethlewis2
Jan 28, 06:48 AM
This is a good time for Apple.
They can choose todo two things.
One. Attempt to satiate the readers of the Wall Street Journal. Sorry to brake it to you, but Walt Mosberg has more say in the running of the company, than every customer of Apple. The investers read WSJ, not MacRumors. This means milking the iPod line and iPhone lines until they have sold every variation they can. Then still make an absolute crap profit as nobody wants to buy their sellout products.
Two. When you are ********* over by the stock market as Apple have been with massively inflated expectations, you have breathing space. Nobody in the stock market is expecting you to well. The investors have been told by the market analysts that the stocks are junk so sell. Apple can now quitely invest money into new products as nobody who has any money thinks Apple is going to come back. Announce new products that people want to buy. iPhones in Europe are about as useful as canines on bovine. The result. The stock price shoots up.
I actually expect Apple to go with option One. Option Two is far too sensible.
They can choose todo two things.
One. Attempt to satiate the readers of the Wall Street Journal. Sorry to brake it to you, but Walt Mosberg has more say in the running of the company, than every customer of Apple. The investers read WSJ, not MacRumors. This means milking the iPod line and iPhone lines until they have sold every variation they can. Then still make an absolute crap profit as nobody wants to buy their sellout products.
Two. When you are ********* over by the stock market as Apple have been with massively inflated expectations, you have breathing space. Nobody in the stock market is expecting you to well. The investors have been told by the market analysts that the stocks are junk so sell. Apple can now quitely invest money into new products as nobody who has any money thinks Apple is going to come back. Announce new products that people want to buy. iPhones in Europe are about as useful as canines on bovine. The result. The stock price shoots up.
I actually expect Apple to go with option One. Option Two is far too sensible.
more...
damixt
Mar 15, 09:40 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
Cerritos has none today
Cerritos has none today
coachingguy
Mar 31, 02:47 PM
When I got my iPad, the first app I fell in love with was the Cal. I remember saying to multiple people that I hope this makes its way in the Apple Os... This is a huge improvement!
Coachingguy
Coachingguy
more...
pondosinatra
Mar 31, 03:02 PM
...
I guess now that Macs are only 20% of Apple revenue, we're getting the "B-team" developers and designers. I give Mac OS X 3 more years, tops, before it's Apple ]['d in favor of iOS entirely.
Team? OS X is actually developed by one guy in the boiler room who was actually fired years ago but still shows up to work... :rolleyes:
I guess now that Macs are only 20% of Apple revenue, we're getting the "B-team" developers and designers. I give Mac OS X 3 more years, tops, before it's Apple ]['d in favor of iOS entirely.
Team? OS X is actually developed by one guy in the boiler room who was actually fired years ago but still shows up to work... :rolleyes:
SchneiderMan
Sep 17, 02:59 PM
I love these! I have them in gray as well.
http://content.backcountry.com/images/items/medium/TNF/TNF4903/BK.jpg
http://content.backcountry.com/images/items/medium/TNF/TNF4903/BK.jpg
more...
neko girl
Jan 30, 11:24 PM
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_96OHt6xpsbg/TUZHdpPwaYI/AAAAAAAAAW4/y57-C-m7Kac/ninjas.jpg
Kardashian
Jul 25, 08:26 AM
Now I can't sell it anymore for a good price:(
eBay people are dumb.. sell NOW! People come on here, a Mac forum, still asking when the transition to Intel is gonna start.
You'll be fine, believe me LOL.
eBay people are dumb.. sell NOW! People come on here, a Mac forum, still asking when the transition to Intel is gonna start.
You'll be fine, believe me LOL.
more...
CFreymarc
Apr 22, 04:29 PM
I would expect better of this place than to take bait. I bet this is a false flag out there specifically to find security holes inside Apple. Does it let you rip and play BluRay disks too?
bman1209
Mar 31, 11:01 AM
I hope like Address Book, you can change it back.
I haven't heard Address Book will be able to switch back, could you provide a link where you heard that?
Thanks.
I haven't heard Address Book will be able to switch back, could you provide a link where you heard that?
Thanks.
more...
dethmaShine
Apr 22, 07:17 AM
Image (http://phandroid.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Samsungvs.Apple_-550x391.jpg)
yes it's obvious who stole.....
Fuddy Fud.
F700 was shown in Feb 2007 1 month after the showcase of the iPhone and was not ready for sale until later.
:rolleyes:
yes it's obvious who stole.....
Fuddy Fud.
F700 was shown in Feb 2007 1 month after the showcase of the iPhone and was not ready for sale until later.
:rolleyes:
twoodcc
Nov 4, 05:14 PM
Welcome!
Please run the bigadv units, you will get much better PPD. It looks like you are running the regular SMP client for now.
Use -smp 8 if the are 2008 or earlier, -smp 16 if they are 2009 otco...
will -smp 8 be fast enough?
Please run the bigadv units, you will get much better PPD. It looks like you are running the regular SMP client for now.
Use -smp 8 if the are 2008 or earlier, -smp 16 if they are 2009 otco...
will -smp 8 be fast enough?
more...
DewGuy1999
Sep 14, 07:53 AM
Disagree about the LP album being even close to good, but I stated that before:rolleyes:
CD's? That's still just about all I purchase, beside my vinyl collection:D I want a physical copy for everything, and I like to have the artwork, AND get it signed by the artist when I see them live. I also get the ticket and place it behind the CD holder in the case. With my Genelec 1030A's I can tell if it's an MP3 or not:p Now where did the sweet spot between my speakers go again:rolleyes:
And on top of all that, it's your property to do with as you please...forever.:)
CD's? That's still just about all I purchase, beside my vinyl collection:D I want a physical copy for everything, and I like to have the artwork, AND get it signed by the artist when I see them live. I also get the ticket and place it behind the CD holder in the case. With my Genelec 1030A's I can tell if it's an MP3 or not:p Now where did the sweet spot between my speakers go again:rolleyes:
And on top of all that, it's your property to do with as you please...forever.:)
Parkin Pig
Apr 10, 08:02 AM
In one of the cooling towers at the abandoned power station is this foreboding text.
Hope I won't get too much flak for the heavy use of photoshop.
Vignetted, poster-edged, and graduated-blurred, but I was pleased with the comic book result
Hope I won't get too much flak for the heavy use of photoshop.
Vignetted, poster-edged, and graduated-blurred, but I was pleased with the comic book result
bluebomberman
Jul 10, 05:00 PM
As for being harsh, it seems like every time a thread on subject gets started, someone says Pages is only really suitable for newsletters, and not for "serious" writing. I find that most of the people who say this haven't gotten much past the template selection window. They see all those newsletter and flier templates and assume that this all Pages is good for. They've probably never created a template of their own and so are missing one of Pages' most powerful features.
Part of the problem is the way they market it. There was such an emphasis on templates and graphic-intensive stuff when it was first demoed in MacWorld 2005 that it's hard to think it can be a good word processor. My first thought was how it looked 100x better than Microsoft Publisher.
Again, I think this latest rumor shows that Apple will address some of the perceptions (or misperceptions, depending on who you ask) by allowing people to dive into word processing mode and adding better search and research functions. It just might make me a convert.
Part of the problem is the way they market it. There was such an emphasis on templates and graphic-intensive stuff when it was first demoed in MacWorld 2005 that it's hard to think it can be a good word processor. My first thought was how it looked 100x better than Microsoft Publisher.
Again, I think this latest rumor shows that Apple will address some of the perceptions (or misperceptions, depending on who you ask) by allowing people to dive into word processing mode and adding better search and research functions. It just might make me a convert.
Cheerwino
Apr 28, 05:04 PM
This is THE most retarded thread EVER hahaha
Each new thread on the white iPhone becomes increasingly more retarded than the last. It's a retarded iPhone thread arms race that will eventually consume the world in war.
Each new thread on the white iPhone becomes increasingly more retarded than the last. It's a retarded iPhone thread arms race that will eventually consume the world in war.
jtara
Apr 14, 11:14 AM
Interesting possibility. It would be extremely difficult to emulate a complete iOS device (custom ASICs and all). But Apple could emulate just enough ARM instructions to emulate an app that was compiled by Xcode & LLVM (which would limit the way ARM instructions were generated), and used only legal public iOS APIs (instead of emulating hardware and all the registers), which could be translated in Cocoa APIs to display on a Mac OS X machine.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
NativeOSXboy
Apr 22, 10:06 AM
Who's blasting Apple ? This shouldn't be an emotional discussion about the history of both corporations, this is about a specific case/cases. As such it should be rooted in facts and objective commentary, not in some subjective tangeant ranting like you went on.
The copying isn't so blatant, and it's highly model dependant. Some biased Apple media is making it look worse than it is with cherry picked images. Here's a post where I clear up the muddied waters a bit :
And here's one about the famous Icon grid :
To claim "Blatant copying" at this point is only to get eat whatever the media is feeding you. The courts will decide how much Samsung does or doesn't infringe on Apple's various trademarks and the trade dress claims.
Your right. I didn't see it before, I did mix up emotions in a logical argument. My bad, you make a great case.
The copying isn't so blatant, and it's highly model dependant. Some biased Apple media is making it look worse than it is with cherry picked images. Here's a post where I clear up the muddied waters a bit :
And here's one about the famous Icon grid :
To claim "Blatant copying" at this point is only to get eat whatever the media is feeding you. The courts will decide how much Samsung does or doesn't infringe on Apple's various trademarks and the trade dress claims.
Your right. I didn't see it before, I did mix up emotions in a logical argument. My bad, you make a great case.
Marx55
Nov 4, 03:24 AM
VMWare is going to smoke Parallels when it comes out. I can�t wait. I'm still a little bit miffed though that no one has gotten native partition support so we can use the same partition while virtualizing or dual booting.
That native partion support to use virtualization or dual booting would be awesome, having the best of both worlds (Boot Camp & Virtualization). I look forward to it!
That native partion support to use virtualization or dual booting would be awesome, having the best of both worlds (Boot Camp & Virtualization). I look forward to it!
MacRumoron
Aug 15, 01:44 PM
i like the new Preview look :)