lordonuthin
May 2, 11:58 PM
really? oh man, you've got to fill us in on how it does. some screen shots please! and maybe some pics of the thing also?
i was tempted to get one, but decided to save some money for now. i might get one late this year or next year
I've finally got it folding, took a while cuz I didn't have the bios set to boot from USB-cdrom, that USB part is important :o also I tried Ubuntu 10.4 but there is a problem with folding and libc on 10.4 so I tried a copy of 8.04 that I had and it didn't want to install. I finally had to download 9.10 and after getting it installed, folding on it and configured; it works:D woo hoo! It's always something when I install Linux but I usually figure it out after a while...
I trid to go to 4Ghz but I must not have set something right and it didn't work so I went back to stock 3.33, it folded the first frame in 27 minutes which is exactly what my mac pro does: for less than half the cost. I then set it to 3.6 Ghz and it seems to be stable without upping the voltage. I hope it can do a frame in 25 minutes :p I'm waiting to see...
i was tempted to get one, but decided to save some money for now. i might get one late this year or next year
I've finally got it folding, took a while cuz I didn't have the bios set to boot from USB-cdrom, that USB part is important :o also I tried Ubuntu 10.4 but there is a problem with folding and libc on 10.4 so I tried a copy of 8.04 that I had and it didn't want to install. I finally had to download 9.10 and after getting it installed, folding on it and configured; it works:D woo hoo! It's always something when I install Linux but I usually figure it out after a while...
I trid to go to 4Ghz but I must not have set something right and it didn't work so I went back to stock 3.33, it folded the first frame in 27 minutes which is exactly what my mac pro does: for less than half the cost. I then set it to 3.6 Ghz and it seems to be stable without upping the voltage. I hope it can do a frame in 25 minutes :p I'm waiting to see...
jbg232
Mar 17, 08:56 AM
This is a very entertaining thread that is showing many different sides of the macrumors members.
That being said, we are ALL unethical at some point in time and we ALL have varying interpretations for "ethical" behavior. Philosophers have debated for thousands of years to answer the question "what is the right way to act?" Thinking that there IS an answer is superfluous, even more so on an internet forum.
That being said, obviously you got a break and you're happy. You're the only one who ultimately has to determine if you did the right thing because honestly, we on the macrumors forums are NOT realistically being affected by this random act (if this were a systematic thing or we were making laws that would be different) and it is your conscience that matters.
However, PERSONALLY, given that I had already budgeted out the money for the iPad before buying it I would make a small donation (maybe $5-$25) to Japan (you'll still be making a deal). That's just me however, feel free to do what you want with the extra money.
That being said, we are ALL unethical at some point in time and we ALL have varying interpretations for "ethical" behavior. Philosophers have debated for thousands of years to answer the question "what is the right way to act?" Thinking that there IS an answer is superfluous, even more so on an internet forum.
That being said, obviously you got a break and you're happy. You're the only one who ultimately has to determine if you did the right thing because honestly, we on the macrumors forums are NOT realistically being affected by this random act (if this were a systematic thing or we were making laws that would be different) and it is your conscience that matters.
However, PERSONALLY, given that I had already budgeted out the money for the iPad before buying it I would make a small donation (maybe $5-$25) to Japan (you'll still be making a deal). That's just me however, feel free to do what you want with the extra money.
soulreaver99
Mar 17, 01:27 AM
You are so going to jail...
whatever
Oct 11, 12:00 PM
Disagree strongly. There are PLENTY of times when people are doing things that go perfectly with the video iPod (airplane travel, roadtrips, commuting via bus or carpool, just to name a few). Just because it doesn't fit into your lifestyle doesn't mean it won't be the greatest thing since sliced bread to a whole lot of others. When you miss a show you want to see (I still do occassionally, even with a DVR) it is AWESOME to be able to get it quick and easy on iTunes, at a pretty dang good quality.
Also, have you TRIED watching TV on an iPod. Even the current screen at 320x480 looks great with as bright and high resolution (per inch) as they've made the current iPod. If Apple really does go wide screen as so many are hoping, the picture may look nicer than a big screen TV (since any screen gets smaller the further you get from it).
Hey don't you watch Heroes? The Japaneese guy watches his porn on a iPod.
Also, have you TRIED watching TV on an iPod. Even the current screen at 320x480 looks great with as bright and high resolution (per inch) as they've made the current iPod. If Apple really does go wide screen as so many are hoping, the picture may look nicer than a big screen TV (since any screen gets smaller the further you get from it).
Hey don't you watch Heroes? The Japaneese guy watches his porn on a iPod.
guzhogi
Dec 13, 12:31 PM
I'm getting really tired of reading "iPhone on Verizon 4G after Christmas!" rumors on here. WHy is it that every time someone says "Oh, I've heard the iPhone's coming to Verizon in January," MacRumors puts it on the front page or Page 2? Are enough people so totally obsessed with the iPhone, they pee their pants if they don't hear a Verizon iPhone rumor every day/every other day?
Much Ado
Jan 9, 01:49 PM
I'm not chancing it. I've made my own HTML to do it for me :P
Very nice, my friend. But if you will allow me to improve your idea:
<html>
<head>
Who I#39;d like to meet:
Tennessee Titans Cheerleaders
Photo Sharing and Video
Along with Chapters and their
Movies, Grape Vine middot; Y.G
Very nice, my friend. But if you will allow me to improve your idea:
<html>
<head>
BRLawyer
Oct 4, 01:59 PM
Windows and Linux are running on the same platform, and both have proven SMP capabilities far beyond what Apple is selling.
Most of the quad and octo systems at IDF were running XP, W2K3, or Vista. None were running OSX.
Squarely wrong. Even "The Inquirer" has talked about the vastly superior multitasking AND SMP features of OS X Leopard, as compared to what Vista seems to offer. Damn, even today any version of Windows crawls far behind OS X in that (XP Home didn't even have SMP support in the first place).
Second: the fact that IDF didn't have any "octo" machines derives from the simple and obvious assessment that Apple does NOT have any "octo" machines. Anything else would be just illegal.
And the lack of any OS X-running "quad" machines is not surprising either, given the usual (and) historical focus of the IDF; besides, it's an easy fallacy to assert that the non-existence of machines "running OS X" in quad configurations at a certain event means a lack of capacity by OS X to do so. This statement has no basis whatsoever.
Most of the quad and octo systems at IDF were running XP, W2K3, or Vista. None were running OSX.
Squarely wrong. Even "The Inquirer" has talked about the vastly superior multitasking AND SMP features of OS X Leopard, as compared to what Vista seems to offer. Damn, even today any version of Windows crawls far behind OS X in that (XP Home didn't even have SMP support in the first place).
Second: the fact that IDF didn't have any "octo" machines derives from the simple and obvious assessment that Apple does NOT have any "octo" machines. Anything else would be just illegal.
And the lack of any OS X-running "quad" machines is not surprising either, given the usual (and) historical focus of the IDF; besides, it's an easy fallacy to assert that the non-existence of machines "running OS X" in quad configurations at a certain event means a lack of capacity by OS X to do so. This statement has no basis whatsoever.
Highland
Aug 2, 11:45 AM
In terms of Apple's DRM however, I think you'll find that each type of DRM is a platform. Much like CDs, cassettes, and so on. I can't play vinyl in my CD player, however I can make a recording of the output, much as I can burn a CD from iTunes of iTMS purchased music.
There's two important things here though... what you can do, and what you can do legally. Plus, any "red book" CD can be played on any CD player. And anyone who wants can make a CD. That's not the case with Fairplay (the iTunes DRM), or pretty much any DRM on the market right now.
And Lyra... OMG. You don't seem to have any grasp of the situation and are pretty keen on making some very insulting remarks. To suggest Apple (or any other online store) drop a region just because they can't be bullied into changing their local laws to suit a large multinational company is completely insane. You're loco.
And just so everyone knows, I'm not from the US or the EU. I'm not taking sides, and I'm not getting involved in the "my country is worth more to iTMS than yours". ;)
As others have mentioned, these things have a tendency to act as test cases. Once one country sorts this out, others will follow.
There's two important things here though... what you can do, and what you can do legally. Plus, any "red book" CD can be played on any CD player. And anyone who wants can make a CD. That's not the case with Fairplay (the iTunes DRM), or pretty much any DRM on the market right now.
And Lyra... OMG. You don't seem to have any grasp of the situation and are pretty keen on making some very insulting remarks. To suggest Apple (or any other online store) drop a region just because they can't be bullied into changing their local laws to suit a large multinational company is completely insane. You're loco.
And just so everyone knows, I'm not from the US or the EU. I'm not taking sides, and I'm not getting involved in the "my country is worth more to iTMS than yours". ;)
As others have mentioned, these things have a tendency to act as test cases. Once one country sorts this out, others will follow.
Lord Blackadder
Aug 10, 01:10 PM
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
SPEEDwithJJ
Apr 12, 03:13 PM
Wait......do you guys have a little obsession with cupcakes, or an obsession with little cupcakes?
I just want to be clear, that's all. ;)
Haha. :D That's a good one. I LOL at that! :p
I just want to be clear, that's all. ;)
Haha. :D That's a good one. I LOL at that! :p
Hugh
Apr 5, 10:14 PM
I'm going to start a TV channel that only shows commercials.
They already have it and it's actually quite popular. :D
In 2000 there was a web site that was nothing but ads. Ads from all around the globe. Why is it gone? It got to popular and they were having a hard time paying for the bandwidth. Not to mention that some of the companies wanted money or their ad pulled. It was a great site to see all the Super Bowl ads. :/
Jackie Houghton
7 on 7
~BuRcHeLl~
Jun 11 2009 3:30 PM
Apr 29 2009 6:36 AM
Water Pipe Cult. 2 years ago
Greene_metro_weather1.jpg (Bill Greene/Globe Staff)
When it comes to action films, especially from producer Jerry Bruckheimer, there are things that you come to expect, heavy action and a film that utilizes
They already have it and it's actually quite popular. :D
In 2000 there was a web site that was nothing but ads. Ads from all around the globe. Why is it gone? It got to popular and they were having a hard time paying for the bandwidth. Not to mention that some of the companies wanted money or their ad pulled. It was a great site to see all the Super Bowl ads. :/
tveric
Jul 25, 01:22 AM
I'd be worried about that exept one incontrovertible fact. Steve Jobs has more creative spark in his left pinky than M$ does in it whole genetic tree.
And so, my friends, we see why funny comic strips don't get published widely; instead, we have to live with pablum like "Family Circus" because if it gets any funnier than that, 90% of the population doesn't even come close to getting it.
And so, my friends, we see why funny comic strips don't get published widely; instead, we have to live with pablum like "Family Circus" because if it gets any funnier than that, 90% of the population doesn't even come close to getting it.
aristobrat
Oct 6, 12:45 PM
There's a reason for that, less work is required to upgrade a tower from CDMA to EvDO than to upgrade a tower from GSM to UMTS. That's why Verizon and Sprint are ahead in the 3G rollout. But that doesn't change the fact that overall, UMTS is a better technology than EvDO. SIM cards, simultaneous voice and data, global compatibility, etc.
Wonder what Sprint/Verizon's upgrade from EvDO to LTE will be like, compared to AT&T/T-Mo's UMTS to LTE upgrade? :confused:
The ad is very misleading because it leaves out any EDGE coverage..
The ad is just comparing 3G to 3G, so 1x/EDGE doesn't count.
Wonder what Sprint/Verizon's upgrade from EvDO to LTE will be like, compared to AT&T/T-Mo's UMTS to LTE upgrade? :confused:
The ad is very misleading because it leaves out any EDGE coverage..
The ad is just comparing 3G to 3G, so 1x/EDGE doesn't count.
balamw
Oct 5, 01:37 AM
good lord, if anyone actually got through reading all this, can there be any doubt left that all consumers want is DRM-free content???
Actually what many consumers want is DRM transparent downloads. They don't want to constantly be reminded of their restrictions and they don't want the restrictions to get in the way or have to know any of the technical details.
Fairplay does a fairly good job at that, which is why it has been successful.
OTOH Amazon unbox seems overly restrictive with its two machine and 48 hour limitations. Zune's 3x3 DRM also seems to miss the boat as it'll probably annoy more users than get them to buy tracks...
B
Actually what many consumers want is DRM transparent downloads. They don't want to constantly be reminded of their restrictions and they don't want the restrictions to get in the way or have to know any of the technical details.
Fairplay does a fairly good job at that, which is why it has been successful.
OTOH Amazon unbox seems overly restrictive with its two machine and 48 hour limitations. Zune's 3x3 DRM also seems to miss the boat as it'll probably annoy more users than get them to buy tracks...
B
arn
Apr 21, 10:44 PM
Perhaps a "Relevant" button then.
I guess leaving it as a +1 button is pretty much the same thing without using a word.
*shrug*
I just think it may be more troublesome than helpful to have a -1 button. If someone disagrees with a post, they usually respond with an argument. If they agree, unless they have something to add, hitting the +1 button would work, and it would clear up the "Agreed" and "+1" posts.
Well, some places limit the ability to downvote for higher level accounts. Like those who have been around or gained a certain amount of reputation. While others have no downvote ability at all.
arn
I guess leaving it as a +1 button is pretty much the same thing without using a word.
*shrug*
I just think it may be more troublesome than helpful to have a -1 button. If someone disagrees with a post, they usually respond with an argument. If they agree, unless they have something to add, hitting the +1 button would work, and it would clear up the "Agreed" and "+1" posts.
Well, some places limit the ability to downvote for higher level accounts. Like those who have been around or gained a certain amount of reputation. While others have no downvote ability at all.
arn
iTeen
Jan 12, 11:48 PM
yes, i would hate for steve to be in the middle of the keynote and Gizmodo screws something up, then i would hunt them down.
that was a very childish joke, but funny
that was a very childish joke, but funny
iphone3gs16gb
Apr 21, 10:55 AM
arn,
What are we to do with people who will abuse of this new feature?
What are we to do with people who will abuse of this new feature?
puuukeey
Jan 9, 02:02 PM
Oh the irony. I sit and refresh this idiotic mac fanatic fan site 4 times a day so I can see what apple is going to release. Then I insist on being the last guy on the planet to know when they actually do something.
SHOOT ME
SHOOT ME
ngenerator
May 2, 09:36 AM
Agree with above. Plus, how else would yesterday have turned out without location tracking ;)
Hephaestus
Mar 18, 08:18 PM
I agree with you on this- the comments were definitely rude.
But I still don't think you get my point (and this includes the guy who posted below my previous post). That it doesn't mean that the other person is jealous of you. Its this attitude that irks me. And its this very attitude that so many "fanboys" share. Why in the world would someone be JEALOUS of you because you have a $200-$300 phone or even a $1500 computer?!? And because you think others envy you for it, you end up placing extraordinary value on everyday material things. I mean, seriously, is this what you use to define your status in society, what kind of phone you carry? Are you really that shallow and materialistic? I honestly feel pity for you.
To the other poster. You were jealous of (or "hated") those who had iphones until you got one for yourself. Now you believe that everyone around you is jealous of you.
I understand, you buy something trendy, and it makes you feel good. Thats great, I'm not arguing with that, because you should enjoy everything you have. But its this faux sense of superiority that comes with it, that makes you believe that others are envious of you because you bought this gadget. Its not like you've won the Nobel prize or even drive a Bugatti Veyron, that would make someone want what you have. No, you bought a phone. A phone that lots of people already have. A phone that my housekeeper's 11 year old son has. And any Joe Schmoe can walk into any Apple store/Walmart/Best Buy and pick one up. And when the new model comes out, you'll buy that as well, because you're chronically unsatisfied with what you have, and somehow, you feel that owning this will raise you up above the rest of society. It is people with attitudes like this (the attitude of the fanboy) that Apple capitalizes on.
Take this as a life lesson -- set your goals higher. Don't be envious of the guy with the cooler phone.
Oh my, you really missed the point with this one. Maybe you are right and I'm exaggerating, but if someone flat out starts being rude to someone because they see them with something, then I'm struggling to think of a reason. By no means am I placing extraordinary value on it, what have I been repeating through every page of this thread? Its just a damn phone. Keep your life lessons to yourself and try not to be so condescending.
Also, reality is that there are a lot of people out there that get jealous of material things. Some people get jealous when they see others drive a nicer car, some get jealous when they see someone with nicer shoes then them. I perfectly understand the shallowness of the human condition. I'm simply pointing out an observation based on my own personal experience within the last few days.
But I still don't think you get my point (and this includes the guy who posted below my previous post). That it doesn't mean that the other person is jealous of you. Its this attitude that irks me. And its this very attitude that so many "fanboys" share. Why in the world would someone be JEALOUS of you because you have a $200-$300 phone or even a $1500 computer?!? And because you think others envy you for it, you end up placing extraordinary value on everyday material things. I mean, seriously, is this what you use to define your status in society, what kind of phone you carry? Are you really that shallow and materialistic? I honestly feel pity for you.
To the other poster. You were jealous of (or "hated") those who had iphones until you got one for yourself. Now you believe that everyone around you is jealous of you.
I understand, you buy something trendy, and it makes you feel good. Thats great, I'm not arguing with that, because you should enjoy everything you have. But its this faux sense of superiority that comes with it, that makes you believe that others are envious of you because you bought this gadget. Its not like you've won the Nobel prize or even drive a Bugatti Veyron, that would make someone want what you have. No, you bought a phone. A phone that lots of people already have. A phone that my housekeeper's 11 year old son has. And any Joe Schmoe can walk into any Apple store/Walmart/Best Buy and pick one up. And when the new model comes out, you'll buy that as well, because you're chronically unsatisfied with what you have, and somehow, you feel that owning this will raise you up above the rest of society. It is people with attitudes like this (the attitude of the fanboy) that Apple capitalizes on.
Take this as a life lesson -- set your goals higher. Don't be envious of the guy with the cooler phone.
Oh my, you really missed the point with this one. Maybe you are right and I'm exaggerating, but if someone flat out starts being rude to someone because they see them with something, then I'm struggling to think of a reason. By no means am I placing extraordinary value on it, what have I been repeating through every page of this thread? Its just a damn phone. Keep your life lessons to yourself and try not to be so condescending.
Also, reality is that there are a lot of people out there that get jealous of material things. Some people get jealous when they see others drive a nicer car, some get jealous when they see someone with nicer shoes then them. I perfectly understand the shallowness of the human condition. I'm simply pointing out an observation based on my own personal experience within the last few days.
ritmomundo
Mar 18, 04:15 PM
Did you even read my original post?
yes. what's your point?
yes. what's your point?
notjustjay
Apr 21, 02:04 PM
well sometimes there is an article about different kind of processor, chips or whatever. some stuff that I don't know anything about. So then I like to look at the votes and see if this is something that is good or bad for Apple. I like to think that majority of the people voting have the same love of apple products and have more insight on this issue than I do.
But it's still highly opinion-based. I think the rating should be based on something other than whether or not I like the poster or what he/she has to say. Something more like, how helpful or constructive was this post?
I still think the "thanks" system like at RedFlagDeals.com is a better representation of what a good "point" system looks like. Certain people are very helpful in answering other people's questions or providing useful information. When someone answers your question or provides a technical explanation (or even a snappy comeback or an informed opinion) that people find insightful, they can "thank" the user for the post. Everyone who sees the post then can quickly see that this post has been helpful to others ("6 people thanked Mad Mac Maniac for this post"). And the cumulative total stays with the user, so you can also see at a quick glance that this user has a reputation for being helpful ("Mad Mac Maniac has been thanked 4,134 times.")
But it's still highly opinion-based. I think the rating should be based on something other than whether or not I like the poster or what he/she has to say. Something more like, how helpful or constructive was this post?
I still think the "thanks" system like at RedFlagDeals.com is a better representation of what a good "point" system looks like. Certain people are very helpful in answering other people's questions or providing useful information. When someone answers your question or provides a technical explanation (or even a snappy comeback or an informed opinion) that people find insightful, they can "thank" the user for the post. Everyone who sees the post then can quickly see that this post has been helpful to others ("6 people thanked Mad Mac Maniac for this post"). And the cumulative total stays with the user, so you can also see at a quick glance that this user has a reputation for being helpful ("Mad Mac Maniac has been thanked 4,134 times.")
Stellarola
Apr 25, 11:53 AM
Looks good, I've been holding out since my first-gen iPhone.
...hopefully we'll see a Summer or Fall release? :)
...hopefully we'll see a Summer or Fall release? :)
technicolor
Nov 24, 05:58 AM
so guys,
does anyone think that the discounts will be able to be used in conjunction with educational discounts? if so that'd be great...if not...then i guess you still save an additional 50 bucks? that'd be ok!
tell me what you think about hte question?
In store you should be able to get both discounts.
does anyone think that the discounts will be able to be used in conjunction with educational discounts? if so that'd be great...if not...then i guess you still save an additional 50 bucks? that'd be ok!
tell me what you think about hte question?
In store you should be able to get both discounts.
