ArchaicRevival
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
Epic. Fail.
fivepoint
Apr 27, 02:27 PM
I am fairly confident that rather than pointing to a conspiracy, this simply shows that when scanned, the operator had enabled some sort of "auto-text" option that attempted to read and convert then embed the raw text info in the PDF, as to make the text "selectable" in preview programs.
It only worked on certain text, as is par for the course.
Hopefully you're not insinuating that I am pointing to a conspiracy, I'm pretty sure I was quite clear on that account.
As for the 'auto-text' thing... interesting, why though would the several dates, etc. be on separate layers? And why would the signatures be separate from the typed text? Just slightly different colorations? My only thought was that the thing was retouched in order to improve the appearance of a poor quality scan... but why would they be so sloppy in reassembling? Why not make it a single layer image before releasing? I don't buy that it was simply overlooked... It's the White House for crying out loud. It's as if they WANT they want the controversy to continue???
It only worked on certain text, as is par for the course.
Hopefully you're not insinuating that I am pointing to a conspiracy, I'm pretty sure I was quite clear on that account.
As for the 'auto-text' thing... interesting, why though would the several dates, etc. be on separate layers? And why would the signatures be separate from the typed text? Just slightly different colorations? My only thought was that the thing was retouched in order to improve the appearance of a poor quality scan... but why would they be so sloppy in reassembling? Why not make it a single layer image before releasing? I don't buy that it was simply overlooked... It's the White House for crying out loud. It's as if they WANT they want the controversy to continue???
toddybody
Apr 19, 02:37 PM
Similarities aside...Samsung cannot be hurting Apple sales as a result of this line. Move on Apple
severe
Jun 22, 01:00 AM
Yeah I thought about that... But I'd rather not go through the hassle of craigs list and eBay...
Just a suggestion. Don't blame ya. eBay is a disaster. And Craigs wasn't far off, with all the inquiries and little follow through. I let it go for less than I would have liked, just to be done with it.
Still glad I did.
Just a suggestion. Don't blame ya. eBay is a disaster. And Craigs wasn't far off, with all the inquiries and little follow through. I let it go for less than I would have liked, just to be done with it.
Still glad I did.
fivepoint
Mar 17, 10:33 AM
Back in Ron Paul warned us about Barack Obama and the fact that his foreign policy would almost certainly essentially mirror that of the Democrats and Neo-Cons for the past 60 years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ez5robAWmu4
�Change� means nothing. It�s just a word, and it�s a clich�. If you just repeat it it has no meaning. You have to say, what are you going to change, and I would argue, you offer no change. You have the same foreign policy, you want more troops in Afghanistan, you�re not talking about only going to war with a declaration, you don�t want to deal with the monetary/financial crisis in this country, you want to keep the system together for the benefit of the banks and the big corporations and the politicians. What kind of change you have on social policy? Do you care about sick people using using Marijuana, have you come out for that? [...]
[Obama] doesn�t want change, he wants the status quo. [...] If you want change, what you need is someone who�s going to make sure you�re never going to have a draft, and we�re going to bring our troops home, we�re going to balance the budget, we�re going have sound money� [Obama] never talks about any of that.
Since that day, Obama has failed to close Guantanamo, failed to end the war in Iraq, escalated the war in Afghanistan, promoted and maintained the Patriot Act, and today stands as the worlds' most powerful advocate for American military involvement in Libya!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/17/seeks-resolution-authorizing-wide-range-strikes-libya/
The Obama administration is seeking a UN Security Council resolution authorizing a wide range of possible strikes against the regime of Libyan leader Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.
The move comes as Qaddafi forces have made "significant strides" in Libya, the State Department said.
The Obama administration and other supporters of action against Qaddafi were pushing for a Thursday vote on a draft resolution. Russia and China have expressed doubts about the U.N. and other outside powers getting involved.
The U.S. wants the Security Council to approve planes, troops or ships to stop attacks by Qaddafi on the rebels, according to a diplomat familiar with closed-door negotiations Wednesday.
The Obama administration said it would not act without Security Council authorization, did not want to put U.S. ground troops into Libya, and insists on broad international participation, especially by Arab states, the diplomat said.
Yet another war, yet another military action which will inevitably cause 'blow-back', started by a man who sold himself to you as a military dove. When will the people realize that there's essentially no difference between the two parties? One advocates bigger government, but they both vote for it. One advocates for bigger military, but they both vote for it, there's no difference between them... and the end result is a trillion + of dollars in annual deficit, a failing economy, and a debt hole so large we may never be able to dig ourselves out.
When you voted for 'change' in you really voted for more of the same. Expansion of the government, expansion of the Military Industrial Complex, and the direct and indirect reduction in personal liberty. There was only one candidate in 2008 and will likely be only one candidate in 2012 who ACTUALLY stood for REAL change... and that is Ron Paul.
The difference between Ron Paul and Barack Obama (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVKSfwfy0h8)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ez5robAWmu4
�Change� means nothing. It�s just a word, and it�s a clich�. If you just repeat it it has no meaning. You have to say, what are you going to change, and I would argue, you offer no change. You have the same foreign policy, you want more troops in Afghanistan, you�re not talking about only going to war with a declaration, you don�t want to deal with the monetary/financial crisis in this country, you want to keep the system together for the benefit of the banks and the big corporations and the politicians. What kind of change you have on social policy? Do you care about sick people using using Marijuana, have you come out for that? [...]
[Obama] doesn�t want change, he wants the status quo. [...] If you want change, what you need is someone who�s going to make sure you�re never going to have a draft, and we�re going to bring our troops home, we�re going to balance the budget, we�re going have sound money� [Obama] never talks about any of that.
Since that day, Obama has failed to close Guantanamo, failed to end the war in Iraq, escalated the war in Afghanistan, promoted and maintained the Patriot Act, and today stands as the worlds' most powerful advocate for American military involvement in Libya!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/17/seeks-resolution-authorizing-wide-range-strikes-libya/
The Obama administration is seeking a UN Security Council resolution authorizing a wide range of possible strikes against the regime of Libyan leader Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.
The move comes as Qaddafi forces have made "significant strides" in Libya, the State Department said.
The Obama administration and other supporters of action against Qaddafi were pushing for a Thursday vote on a draft resolution. Russia and China have expressed doubts about the U.N. and other outside powers getting involved.
The U.S. wants the Security Council to approve planes, troops or ships to stop attacks by Qaddafi on the rebels, according to a diplomat familiar with closed-door negotiations Wednesday.
The Obama administration said it would not act without Security Council authorization, did not want to put U.S. ground troops into Libya, and insists on broad international participation, especially by Arab states, the diplomat said.
Yet another war, yet another military action which will inevitably cause 'blow-back', started by a man who sold himself to you as a military dove. When will the people realize that there's essentially no difference between the two parties? One advocates bigger government, but they both vote for it. One advocates for bigger military, but they both vote for it, there's no difference between them... and the end result is a trillion + of dollars in annual deficit, a failing economy, and a debt hole so large we may never be able to dig ourselves out.
When you voted for 'change' in you really voted for more of the same. Expansion of the government, expansion of the Military Industrial Complex, and the direct and indirect reduction in personal liberty. There was only one candidate in 2008 and will likely be only one candidate in 2012 who ACTUALLY stood for REAL change... and that is Ron Paul.
The difference between Ron Paul and Barack Obama (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVKSfwfy0h8)
babyj
Sep 19, 07:07 AM
It amazes me that people can get so worked up about a processor that was only officially released three weeks ago.
It never ends either. As soon as Merom chips are in the MacBook range everyone will just move on to the next thing. When are Apple going to put quad cores in their high end products? When are the Macbooks going to be updated with Santa Rosa? When are we going to get nand cache?
I'm even more amazed that some people seem ready to move computer platforms just to get a speed increase a few weeks earlier. By the time you've finished moving everything over to a Windows laptops the new Macbooks will of been available for a few weeks.
It never ends either. As soon as Merom chips are in the MacBook range everyone will just move on to the next thing. When are Apple going to put quad cores in their high end products? When are the Macbooks going to be updated with Santa Rosa? When are we going to get nand cache?
I'm even more amazed that some people seem ready to move computer platforms just to get a speed increase a few weeks earlier. By the time you've finished moving everything over to a Windows laptops the new Macbooks will of been available for a few weeks.
wmmk
Jul 14, 06:07 PM
the question still remains--will the powermacs be able to use standard, off the shelf, pc video cards?
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.
i'v actually heard that with a normal PC, you can make almost any NVIDIA card compatible with mac, but it takes a bit of geekery and hackery.
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.
i'v actually heard that with a normal PC, you can make almost any NVIDIA card compatible with mac, but it takes a bit of geekery and hackery.
kiwi_the_iwik
Apr 6, 02:28 AM
My wishlist?
I'd love the option for fast HD compression and ftp transfer straight from the program.
Also, greater MXF support for P2, as well as metadata compatibility would be very welcome additions.
AVC-Intra would be brilliant (without having to constantly rewrap...), to go along with existing DVCPRO HD support.
Currently, we have to resort to 3rd party strategies for all of the above, which can be a major pain (and expense).
I'd love the option for fast HD compression and ftp transfer straight from the program.
Also, greater MXF support for P2, as well as metadata compatibility would be very welcome additions.
AVC-Intra would be brilliant (without having to constantly rewrap...), to go along with existing DVCPRO HD support.
Currently, we have to resort to 3rd party strategies for all of the above, which can be a major pain (and expense).
jonharris200
Nov 28, 06:33 PM
They'd be lucky.
CJM
Jul 20, 12:35 PM
You realize there are probably only four people on this board who are old enough to get that joke, right?
My "vote" goes for "Hex" - "The Mac Hex. Buy one and see." Then again, maybe not.
16 here, but I still get it :p
Come on, some Mac fans do a little research now and again :P
My "vote" goes for "Hex" - "The Mac Hex. Buy one and see." Then again, maybe not.
16 here, but I still get it :p
Come on, some Mac fans do a little research now and again :P
ciTiger
Mar 25, 10:35 PM
What? this seems hard to believe... Already done on development? :confused:
geerlingguy
Aug 16, 11:24 PM
When rendering in FCP, it's all about the CPU.
Fast hard drives contribute to real-time effects, but do NOT contribute to rendering.
Ram helps a little bit.
However, depending on what kind of rendering you're doing, the hard drive can be a limiting factor.
Say you're just rendering ten minutes worth of a blur effect on video�the CPU says 'gimme all you got' and goes to town on the frames, blurring each one quickly. But the hard drive may have a hard time keeping up with the CPU, because 10 minutes of footage needs to be read, then re-written to the drive. For HD-resolution video, that can be a couple gigs of data. And that data also has to pass through the RAM (which acts like a high-speed buffer).
However, in the case of these benchmarks, one would think the testers would choose some more CPU-intense rendering, which would allow the hard drive to take it's time while the CPU is overloaded with work.
But, to anyone configuring a graphics or video workstation: Everything�CPU, Hard Drives, RAM, and even the GPU for some tasks�should be as fast and ample as possible. "A chain is only as good as it's weakest link." If you pair up a Quad 3.0 GHz Xeon with a 5400 rpm USB 2.0 drive, you will be disappointed.
Fast hard drives contribute to real-time effects, but do NOT contribute to rendering.
Ram helps a little bit.
However, depending on what kind of rendering you're doing, the hard drive can be a limiting factor.
Say you're just rendering ten minutes worth of a blur effect on video�the CPU says 'gimme all you got' and goes to town on the frames, blurring each one quickly. But the hard drive may have a hard time keeping up with the CPU, because 10 minutes of footage needs to be read, then re-written to the drive. For HD-resolution video, that can be a couple gigs of data. And that data also has to pass through the RAM (which acts like a high-speed buffer).
However, in the case of these benchmarks, one would think the testers would choose some more CPU-intense rendering, which would allow the hard drive to take it's time while the CPU is overloaded with work.
But, to anyone configuring a graphics or video workstation: Everything�CPU, Hard Drives, RAM, and even the GPU for some tasks�should be as fast and ample as possible. "A chain is only as good as it's weakest link." If you pair up a Quad 3.0 GHz Xeon with a 5400 rpm USB 2.0 drive, you will be disappointed.
AppleInLVX
Apr 11, 01:00 PM
And you'll be complaining about battery life and the Android experience in a few days.
Be fair. I'm still using an HTC Hero in spite of the fact that I have Apple everything else. This little underpowered crappy screened, poorly designed device can do things my brother's iPhone 4 cannot. Really cool things. The fact the hardware sucks I will readily give you--however, the experience of the OS is doing to Apple what Apple is doing to RIM. iOS better damned well rock.
Be fair. I'm still using an HTC Hero in spite of the fact that I have Apple everything else. This little underpowered crappy screened, poorly designed device can do things my brother's iPhone 4 cannot. Really cool things. The fact the hardware sucks I will readily give you--however, the experience of the OS is doing to Apple what Apple is doing to RIM. iOS better damned well rock.
Popeye206
Apr 11, 02:17 PM
LOL at all of the people saying it's a big mistake and bad move on Apple's part. They know what they are doing. Why would they do something that would hurt their iPhone sales?!
They just put out the iPhone 4 verizon. If they refresh in June they will have to do both AT&T and Verizon. Otherwise, Verizon will always play second fiddle with updates. Dumb move. They are waiting for enough time to pass where it won't be just 6 months between verizon updates.
I don't think Apple is waiting because of the Verizon phone. I think they just are making more changes than just simple upgrades and it's going to take longer. I think they also see that iPhone4 sales are still heathy so why rush it?
Release iOS 5.0 this summer, then follow-up with the new iPhone5 in the fall. Keep up the momentum and slaughter the competition in the fall during the busiest season for gadgets.
I see nothing wrong with the iPhone5 in the fall. "Na sayers" can say what they want, but in the long run it does not matter as long as the iPhone5 is a healthy upgrade.
The only downside is, Apple may be so darn busy in the fall with new products, that you won't even be able to get in their stores!
They just put out the iPhone 4 verizon. If they refresh in June they will have to do both AT&T and Verizon. Otherwise, Verizon will always play second fiddle with updates. Dumb move. They are waiting for enough time to pass where it won't be just 6 months between verizon updates.
I don't think Apple is waiting because of the Verizon phone. I think they just are making more changes than just simple upgrades and it's going to take longer. I think they also see that iPhone4 sales are still heathy so why rush it?
Release iOS 5.0 this summer, then follow-up with the new iPhone5 in the fall. Keep up the momentum and slaughter the competition in the fall during the busiest season for gadgets.
I see nothing wrong with the iPhone5 in the fall. "Na sayers" can say what they want, but in the long run it does not matter as long as the iPhone5 is a healthy upgrade.
The only downside is, Apple may be so darn busy in the fall with new products, that you won't even be able to get in their stores!
iAlan
Nov 28, 08:16 PM
I haven't read all the post as yet, got to around post #50 but my sentiments pretty much reflect those of most posters.
However, if there is evidence that a bulk of the royalty (and I mean more than 50%) will go to artists then I can see justification in the process (but it should not be a flat $1 per device as the cost/profit of devices varies). But at the same time, Apple should get a higher share of the 99c per track as I believe the money they get per song pretty much only covers there management of the stored data and hosting on iTunes with very little profit per song - and this is understandable as Apple can leverage the iTunes store to drive iPod sales.
If the record companies want a profitable piece of Apple�s pie (no pun intended) then Apple should be entitled to a profitable piece of the 99c download.
Same logic me thinks�
However, if there is evidence that a bulk of the royalty (and I mean more than 50%) will go to artists then I can see justification in the process (but it should not be a flat $1 per device as the cost/profit of devices varies). But at the same time, Apple should get a higher share of the 99c per track as I believe the money they get per song pretty much only covers there management of the stored data and hosting on iTunes with very little profit per song - and this is understandable as Apple can leverage the iTunes store to drive iPod sales.
If the record companies want a profitable piece of Apple�s pie (no pun intended) then Apple should be entitled to a profitable piece of the 99c download.
Same logic me thinks�
SevenInchScrew
Dec 9, 01:09 AM
DoFoT:
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
arkitect
Mar 22, 12:55 PM
Competition is good.
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Burnsey
Apr 27, 09:23 PM
Technically he is eligible to be president even if he wasn't born in the US:
http://blogs.forbes.com/danielfreedman/2011/04/12/romney-to-trump-obama-doesnt-need-a-birth-certificate/
Not sure why this is such a big issue, the country is facing huge problems and you people need to work together and solve them. Set these distractions aside or you'll miss what's really going on.
http://blogs.forbes.com/danielfreedman/2011/04/12/romney-to-trump-obama-doesnt-need-a-birth-certificate/
Not sure why this is such a big issue, the country is facing huge problems and you people need to work together and solve them. Set these distractions aside or you'll miss what's really going on.
psionic001
Nov 28, 07:50 PM
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
That's it!.... I'm not buying any more tapes...
Actually I think two things should happen:
1) Universal should pay an anual feel to be on ITS.
2) Universal should pay a further industry fee to Apple (or DAP manufacturers) to go towards DRM R&D.
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
That's it!.... I'm not buying any more tapes...
Actually I think two things should happen:
1) Universal should pay an anual feel to be on ITS.
2) Universal should pay a further industry fee to Apple (or DAP manufacturers) to go towards DRM R&D.
THX1139
Aug 17, 03:57 PM
Some people do things called graphic design and video editing for a living. Sometimes, when you want to make money and put food on the table, you want top of the line equipment.:rolleyes:
Calm down. The OP was directing his question towards gamers. I agree with him, why salivate over a Macpro and whine for games when it's clear that the Macpro isn't intended for that kind of user. If I were a games enthusiast, I'd build my own custom PC that would be optimized for gaming performance. Apple is ignoring this segment of the market. For those of us who need to get real work done, the Macpro is a great machine. It will play games, but don't try hauling to a Lan party. You'll probably get laughed at.
Do you see now?
Calm down. The OP was directing his question towards gamers. I agree with him, why salivate over a Macpro and whine for games when it's clear that the Macpro isn't intended for that kind of user. If I were a games enthusiast, I'd build my own custom PC that would be optimized for gaming performance. Apple is ignoring this segment of the market. For those of us who need to get real work done, the Macpro is a great machine. It will play games, but don't try hauling to a Lan party. You'll probably get laughed at.
Do you see now?
princealfie
Nov 29, 09:28 AM
Same here, paying a levy on iPod's is like paying one on Hard drives as many of them contain copyrighted material, except they could never do that as the business world would go insane if they had to pay a levy to the music industry.
Anyone interested in creating an Universal blacklist of albums then?
Anyone interested in creating an Universal blacklist of albums then?
mobilehavoc
Apr 6, 02:14 PM
It's funny because appletards tend to speak about numbers in different ways.
When it's related to Macs, they say they sell less than PCs but they're still much better.
When it's related to tablets, they say the iPad sells more because it's better.
So, I'm under the impression that the iPad is just like a "PC-like" market, which everyone buys because someone told it's cheaper and better.
That's what appletards say about PCs, isn't that? Something like an underground market which avoids people from knowing the "real quality" of Macs.
Ps: lol.
I'm not joking when I say this - I held off buying a Macbook for years purely because I didn't want to be associated with these hardcore Apple fanboys who live under Steve Job's bed. It's quite sickening.
I love Apple products, but doesn't mean you have to be blind to the alternatives. It's absolutely amazing how easily people can be brainwashed.
When it's related to Macs, they say they sell less than PCs but they're still much better.
When it's related to tablets, they say the iPad sells more because it's better.
So, I'm under the impression that the iPad is just like a "PC-like" market, which everyone buys because someone told it's cheaper and better.
That's what appletards say about PCs, isn't that? Something like an underground market which avoids people from knowing the "real quality" of Macs.
Ps: lol.
I'm not joking when I say this - I held off buying a Macbook for years purely because I didn't want to be associated with these hardcore Apple fanboys who live under Steve Job's bed. It's quite sickening.
I love Apple products, but doesn't mean you have to be blind to the alternatives. It's absolutely amazing how easily people can be brainwashed.
ssk2
Mar 22, 03:28 PM
I know I haven't been on this forum for as long as some, but this topic again proves why I'm often dissuaded from posting more regularly.
The constant foot-stomping, ridiculing without even trying, 'my Dad-is-better-than-your-Dad' attitude towards other manufacturers, the list is ongoing. How can any of us write off the Playbook or the Samsung tablet without even trying them? Yes, they are second and third to the market, but then so was Apple with the first iteration of its smartphone. Now look where we are.
The iPad two does have some shortcomings, few of which are worth going to to here. However, the OS of these devices IS crucial and we are beginning to see iOS creaking slightly. In terms of looks and notifications, for me, Apple is lagging. I like how the Playbook looks and potentially, should operate. Will I make a snap judgement? No. I'll try the damn thing first before making a judgement.
Do I see these tablets wiping out the iPad? Not a chance. Not in a million years. Do I see future versions of the Playbook and Samsung tabs wiping out the iPad? Perhaps, who can say. Mobile computing and tablets are here to stay now - saying and believing that the iPad will remain as dominant is pure wishful thinking from the more fanboy-minded of us.
The constant foot-stomping, ridiculing without even trying, 'my Dad-is-better-than-your-Dad' attitude towards other manufacturers, the list is ongoing. How can any of us write off the Playbook or the Samsung tablet without even trying them? Yes, they are second and third to the market, but then so was Apple with the first iteration of its smartphone. Now look where we are.
The iPad two does have some shortcomings, few of which are worth going to to here. However, the OS of these devices IS crucial and we are beginning to see iOS creaking slightly. In terms of looks and notifications, for me, Apple is lagging. I like how the Playbook looks and potentially, should operate. Will I make a snap judgement? No. I'll try the damn thing first before making a judgement.
Do I see these tablets wiping out the iPad? Not a chance. Not in a million years. Do I see future versions of the Playbook and Samsung tabs wiping out the iPad? Perhaps, who can say. Mobile computing and tablets are here to stay now - saying and believing that the iPad will remain as dominant is pure wishful thinking from the more fanboy-minded of us.
63dot
Apr 25, 02:16 PM
Law is not justice, and one of the few absolutes in this shaky profession is that if a company is big and doing well, then they are a target, both to plaintiffs and to the lawyers who cash in over these attacks on Apple.
Apple will probably have to pay out some sort of millions over this, and for Apple, it's the price of doing business. Hey Apple, welcome to the territory that once belonged to the Microsofts and Dells of this industry. When suits this big and frivolous come out, it shows Apple has reached a prime level of success. My old contracts professor called this the deep pocket theory and the frivolous lawsuit we tackled that night was one just as ridiculous but against Dell, who was on the rise for #1 at the time and it went all the way to the Supreme Court and took years and many tens of millions of dollars to iron out. Expect this suit to be ugly.
Apple will probably have to pay out some sort of millions over this, and for Apple, it's the price of doing business. Hey Apple, welcome to the territory that once belonged to the Microsofts and Dells of this industry. When suits this big and frivolous come out, it shows Apple has reached a prime level of success. My old contracts professor called this the deep pocket theory and the frivolous lawsuit we tackled that night was one just as ridiculous but against Dell, who was on the rise for #1 at the time and it went all the way to the Supreme Court and took years and many tens of millions of dollars to iron out. Expect this suit to be ugly.
