Stridder44
Mar 23, 07:04 PM
Censorship! Don't do it, Apple!
Gotta say, usually I'd be right there with you on this, but in this case I'm on the senators side. Drunk driving is f--ked up, and the people who do it deserve to rot in a cell. I'm a-okay with them finding those kinds of people. Again though, under most other circumstances I would be completely against caving into the senators' requests.
Gotta say, usually I'd be right there with you on this, but in this case I'm on the senators side. Drunk driving is f--ked up, and the people who do it deserve to rot in a cell. I'm a-okay with them finding those kinds of people. Again though, under most other circumstances I would be completely against caving into the senators' requests.
Machead III
Sep 20, 03:19 AM
And a hearty Amen and hell yeah for that!
Maybe someone shoudl get to work on adding subtitles to Itunes 7 and FrontRow then. Missing that feature was so ****ing dense of Apple.
Maybe someone shoudl get to work on adding subtitles to Itunes 7 and FrontRow then. Missing that feature was so ****ing dense of Apple.
tpg
Apr 25, 01:27 PM
What about the screen? Are they finally moving to 16:9 screens?
I hope not - retaining the 16:10 aspect ratio is one thing I really admire about Apple's notebooks. (11inch Air aside)
16:9 displays are cheaper to manufacture, but from a usability/aesthetic point of view 16:10 is superior IMO. Vertical space is at a premium, particularly on a laptop screen. Also, 16:10 is pretty darn close to the golden ratio...
I hope not - retaining the 16:10 aspect ratio is one thing I really admire about Apple's notebooks. (11inch Air aside)
16:9 displays are cheaper to manufacture, but from a usability/aesthetic point of view 16:10 is superior IMO. Vertical space is at a premium, particularly on a laptop screen. Also, 16:10 is pretty darn close to the golden ratio...
HecubusPro
Aug 28, 04:18 PM
I believe such behavior is sign of impending mental collapse...
I wouldn't do it, but it might make some one happy. You never know.
I wouldn't do it, but it might make some one happy. You never know.
VPrime
Apr 30, 05:11 PM
He was talking about the fact that "Cloud storage" uses physical media. ;) The cloud is not some kind of magic thing, it's just a bunch of physical disks and servers. And those disks and servers aren't anything special either, they are your typical server computer and the disks are also your standard server based disk, grouped up in a volume manager over massive raid arrays.
Oh right, didn't think that part through.... Its the future everthing is magic! :D
Oh right, didn't think that part through.... Its the future everthing is magic! :D
Hattig
Mar 29, 12:37 PM
Wow, I didnt even realize they took CUT away
They didn't, you're being trolled when someone says you can't cut text.
Files, in Finder, that's another thing, and quite annoying. This is the only place that the comments about Mac OS X lacking cut functionality have any relevance.
They didn't, you're being trolled when someone says you can't cut text.
Files, in Finder, that's another thing, and quite annoying. This is the only place that the comments about Mac OS X lacking cut functionality have any relevance.
LagunaSol
Apr 4, 12:50 PM
I'm not a gun control advocate. I own a gun. But I laugh at the absurd notion of being a hero when threatened.
So, um...what are you going to do with your gun when threatened? :confused:
These glorified stories of what would have happened in situation X if someone had had a gun are laughable. It doesn't work like that.
How do you know?
So, um...what are you going to do with your gun when threatened? :confused:
These glorified stories of what would have happened in situation X if someone had had a gun are laughable. It doesn't work like that.
How do you know?
ValSalva
Apr 25, 02:33 PM
Would you disagree that, just perhaps, in these industries where the DVD drive is so crucial that they might just have external drives? Apple is trying to sell these MacBooks to everyone, not just pros. It's the internet and App store are capable of doing the exact same thing as DVDs (for most computer purposes). For everything else, buy the external superdrive. 15% of MBP customers might need a DVD drive, but we know Apple isn't going to ignore the 85% who don't.
I'd agree with you. Apple is also trying to get everyone to purchase software from the Mac App Store. They are even trying to distribute Final Cut Pro via download so you have to believe Apple is going to do everything possible to diminish the use of CD/DVDs.
You also have to believe that if you still intend to watch movies/TV on your MacBook Pro that Apple would rather you download it from iTunes than buy a DVD from which Apple receives no cut.
At this point I'd be more surprised if the next MacBook Pro had a Superdrive. I think they didn't remove it this year because that would have required a redesign.
I'd agree with you. Apple is also trying to get everyone to purchase software from the Mac App Store. They are even trying to distribute Final Cut Pro via download so you have to believe Apple is going to do everything possible to diminish the use of CD/DVDs.
You also have to believe that if you still intend to watch movies/TV on your MacBook Pro that Apple would rather you download it from iTunes than buy a DVD from which Apple receives no cut.
At this point I'd be more surprised if the next MacBook Pro had a Superdrive. I think they didn't remove it this year because that would have required a redesign.
Macnoviz
Sep 19, 02:54 PM
Yeah it already lets you watch while downloading and frankly I think that this is a very important feature that is not often discussed. People bash it saying that it takes 1.5 hours to download a movie. Well if the movie is 1.5 hours long than wait 5 minutes and start watching. It is close to instant. I know that on my computer it only took 70 minutes to download which means I can start watching it right away. With Verizon rolling out their Fios internet with speeds of up to 30mbs even 1080p will soon be no problem. I am not sure just how big a 1080p movie is but I am hoping that within a year it will be do able for more people.
Don't forget that Apple servers will be the weakest link here. Amazon servers were overcrowded the first days, leading to downloads of 8+ hours (and you can only rent them for 24 hours (or buy them, of course))
They will have to build/purchase a data center or two
Don't forget that Apple servers will be the weakest link here. Amazon servers were overcrowded the first days, leading to downloads of 8+ hours (and you can only rent them for 24 hours (or buy them, of course))
They will have to build/purchase a data center or two
Eidorian
May 3, 12:46 PM
Sigh... It's a shame really, I don't need nearly the kind of power that even the lowest Mac Pro has, but it's the only desktop mac that I could buy at this point.It is not the first time where the iMac has more CPU power than the entry Mac Pro. Seriously, it does. If you get the 6970M (HD 6850) you can beat the video card as well.
Eidorian
Sep 9, 01:26 PM
Preemble clarification: I use Toast in a highly unorthodox way - nothing to do with writing DVDs or CDs. I use it most of the time to write DVD IMAGES that Handbrake understands how to make priistine mp4 files from. I am able to reduce a 4.3GB original EyeTV HD broadcast recording down to 351MB using this method. The result is an excellent, albeit soft, version of the original that can go on an iPod or two on a CD and when played on an analog TV looks like a DVD. On a HD monitor it still looks great. Just a little soft.
I haven't explored what else we can run simultaneously beyond Toast and Handbrake. I can run as many instances of those as I like. But I run out of cores even just running both of them because they will each use more than two cores given the chance to run alone. Running them simultaneously even with a second Handbrake running third, still gets all the jobs done faster than waiting for two to run and then running the third. Handbrake will process up to about 150-160 fps when two copies are running while it will process only about 93-100 fps alone.
Handbrake FPS readings vary a lot between the analysis pass and the writing pass - much slower writing on the second pass than studying-planning the writing scheme on the first pass on both the Quad and the Mac Pro. On the Mac Pro, Toast will use almost all 4 cores given no competition. But so far I'm not convinced it is encoding EyeTV recordings for DVD images much faster than it does on teh Quad - yes 7.1 UB. I need to go back and exact time some encodes on the Mac Pro then compare that here on the Quad to tell.
Just tried to launch a second copy of EyeTV and it's a no go. Maybe if I have another liscense with another tuner like the new hybrid it will work with a second copy - don't know yet. Probably getting a hybrid tuner yet so I can record two shows at once.
A Multi-Instance and Multi-Core Usage Guide would be a great help. Does someone with authorization want to start a thread on this subject? I am not authorized to create new threads. But I would be happy to contribute to it. If someone with new thread creation permission does it, please post a link to it here. Thank you.Well anyone here can start a Guide on the wiki. Ask around if anyone else knows more on the subject. Otherwise I picked you from our previous ramblings on Core 2 Duo and quad-core machines.
Edit: Interesting usage of Toast/Handbrake there.
64bit addressing arrives with the new cpu. so the point is that napa64 isn't really new, it just uses merom instead of yonah.I guess that resolves the Napa32/64 argument. If there ever was one...
Yeah that will be the Mac Pro Jr. while the rest of the Mac Pros will be running pairs of Clovertowns.Cube? 24" iMac?
I haven't explored what else we can run simultaneously beyond Toast and Handbrake. I can run as many instances of those as I like. But I run out of cores even just running both of them because they will each use more than two cores given the chance to run alone. Running them simultaneously even with a second Handbrake running third, still gets all the jobs done faster than waiting for two to run and then running the third. Handbrake will process up to about 150-160 fps when two copies are running while it will process only about 93-100 fps alone.
Handbrake FPS readings vary a lot between the analysis pass and the writing pass - much slower writing on the second pass than studying-planning the writing scheme on the first pass on both the Quad and the Mac Pro. On the Mac Pro, Toast will use almost all 4 cores given no competition. But so far I'm not convinced it is encoding EyeTV recordings for DVD images much faster than it does on teh Quad - yes 7.1 UB. I need to go back and exact time some encodes on the Mac Pro then compare that here on the Quad to tell.
Just tried to launch a second copy of EyeTV and it's a no go. Maybe if I have another liscense with another tuner like the new hybrid it will work with a second copy - don't know yet. Probably getting a hybrid tuner yet so I can record two shows at once.
A Multi-Instance and Multi-Core Usage Guide would be a great help. Does someone with authorization want to start a thread on this subject? I am not authorized to create new threads. But I would be happy to contribute to it. If someone with new thread creation permission does it, please post a link to it here. Thank you.Well anyone here can start a Guide on the wiki. Ask around if anyone else knows more on the subject. Otherwise I picked you from our previous ramblings on Core 2 Duo and quad-core machines.
Edit: Interesting usage of Toast/Handbrake there.
64bit addressing arrives with the new cpu. so the point is that napa64 isn't really new, it just uses merom instead of yonah.I guess that resolves the Napa32/64 argument. If there ever was one...
Yeah that will be the Mac Pro Jr. while the rest of the Mac Pros will be running pairs of Clovertowns.Cube? 24" iMac?
kdarling
Apr 19, 09:20 AM
This doesn't look like an iPhone 3GS? :confused:
You must be a barrel of laughs on a shopping trip:
Salesperson: May I help you?
LagunaSol: Yes, I'd like to buy that big white iPhone 3GS over there.
Salesperson: (confused) Uh, you mean the Galaxy Tab?
LagunaSol: No, no, the 3GS. It's right there.
Salesperson: Sir, they're only vaguely the same shape.
LagunaSol: I don't care, it's a big 3GS, I can tell !
Salesperson: Yeah... okay.
You must be a barrel of laughs on a shopping trip:
Salesperson: May I help you?
LagunaSol: Yes, I'd like to buy that big white iPhone 3GS over there.
Salesperson: (confused) Uh, you mean the Galaxy Tab?
LagunaSol: No, no, the 3GS. It's right there.
Salesperson: Sir, they're only vaguely the same shape.
LagunaSol: I don't care, it's a big 3GS, I can tell !
Salesperson: Yeah... okay.
JAT
Apr 29, 03:56 PM
that was in 2005 when it first came out. by now they are on a revision that costs a lot less to make and they have sold a lot of games and XBL subs to make up for it. back when the 360 first came out it had an attach rate of 8 games, higher than Sony. figure at $10 licensing per game that's $80 per console on average plus XBL. so i don't know if the isuppli numbers are accurate.
a lot of companies in the console market have been doing it like this for years. take a loss the first year or two, sell break even or small profit later in the cycle and make it up on the games. except for nintendo which is doing the opposite. make money early in the cycle and start losing money at the end of the cycle.
2011 the division will probably turn a profit of $3 to $4 billion or so due to kinect. 2010 was also profitable. if the Nokia partnership works out 2012 will be even better.
You do understand that 2008 minus 2001 plus development time is more than 1 or 2, right? That's 7, maybe 9 years of losses.
My original comment was that this is a poor way to do it, from a finance perspective. There was no guarantee, and if Sony and M$ didn't have profit elsewhere, these wouldn't even exist. Nintendo made money on the Wii almost immediately, as you've claimed M$ did. It sounds like you are talking about Nintendo.
a lot of companies in the console market have been doing it like this for years. take a loss the first year or two, sell break even or small profit later in the cycle and make it up on the games. except for nintendo which is doing the opposite. make money early in the cycle and start losing money at the end of the cycle.
2011 the division will probably turn a profit of $3 to $4 billion or so due to kinect. 2010 was also profitable. if the Nokia partnership works out 2012 will be even better.
You do understand that 2008 minus 2001 plus development time is more than 1 or 2, right? That's 7, maybe 9 years of losses.
My original comment was that this is a poor way to do it, from a finance perspective. There was no guarantee, and if Sony and M$ didn't have profit elsewhere, these wouldn't even exist. Nintendo made money on the Wii almost immediately, as you've claimed M$ did. It sounds like you are talking about Nintendo.
tbobmccoy
Apr 14, 07:03 PM
They wouldn't have to add more hardware. USB3.0 is backwards compatible with 2.0. They would only have to disable 3.0 protocols somehow or artificially speed limit it to 2.0 speeds. I wouldn't put it past them. I KNOW if they got Blu-Ray drives somehow included with their hardware (i.e. only thing available), they would STILL not support it except in DVD/CD mode. Apple will do what they think is best for them NO MATTER WHAT. They don't give a flying rat's hind end about what the consumer wants. Steve thinks he knows better than anyone and he has a whole army of groupies telling him he's right so how on earth could he ever imagine otherwise?
I think this is a bit paranoid. Blu-ray just isn't that great of a tech for Apple to justify the increased cost of adding it to the MacBook Pro. Yes, there is some bias due to their DLC, but I doubt that's the ONLY reason blu-ray isn't available. Plus, I'd rather go without a drive period on my next MacBook. Give me the space savings, extra battery life, etc and let me have a thunderbolt drive, since I never use the drive outside of... installing software, and even that's rare these days.
I think this is a bit paranoid. Blu-ray just isn't that great of a tech for Apple to justify the increased cost of adding it to the MacBook Pro. Yes, there is some bias due to their DLC, but I doubt that's the ONLY reason blu-ray isn't available. Plus, I'd rather go without a drive period on my next MacBook. Give me the space savings, extra battery life, etc and let me have a thunderbolt drive, since I never use the drive outside of... installing software, and even that's rare these days.
Peace
Sep 5, 05:58 PM
Wow, you really don't get it.
Watching on the tv is exactly what this is about. The whole point is that you don't need to have a *computer* or even a *hard drive* next to the TV since you can just stream the video from a computer ANYWHERE in your house.
Seriously, did you even look at the picture you responded to?
Yes I did milo.And it's a fine rendition :)
Only thing is one still has to connect some kind of A/V cables to the TV..
Think about that concept.
Watching on the tv is exactly what this is about. The whole point is that you don't need to have a *computer* or even a *hard drive* next to the TV since you can just stream the video from a computer ANYWHERE in your house.
Seriously, did you even look at the picture you responded to?
Yes I did milo.And it's a fine rendition :)
Only thing is one still has to connect some kind of A/V cables to the TV..
Think about that concept.
emon878
Mar 23, 06:51 PM
Do a poll macrumors.... Us 6 want them pulled Now!!... the others not quoted want them to stay on the App Store for no real good or beneficial reason
I'll give you a reason many people that use this are drivers who aren't drunk and just want to avoid the hassle. Like others have said if you are drunk enough this would be hard to use.
I'll give you a reason many people that use this are drivers who aren't drunk and just want to avoid the hassle. Like others have said if you are drunk enough this would be hard to use.
yg17
Sep 26, 10:34 AM
I'm surprised at all the Cingular hate here. At least in the D.C. area, the word is that they have the best coverage available - better than Verizon, who was the previous benchmark before the merger.
When I was in DC, my Cingular service was horrible. Just like it was in New York City, St. Louis and New Orleans (pre Katrina, when cell towers were still standing) and every other large city I've been in.
Yet, it works fine in the middle of nowhere. On my way down to New Orleans, I was on the phone in some tiny little town that couldn't have had more than 500 people. The only thing this place had was a gas station. I'm on my phone and call quality is excellent. An hour later in NO, dropped calls and low signal as usual. Or when I'm on the backroads in Missouri talking, again, perfect signal. Enter the STL city limits? Goodbye service.
Cingular has their priorities wrong. They go for the rural markets, where people don't want to have anything to do with cell phones, and they ignore the big cities. And if you try to call customer service to complain about the piss poor service, or to try to fix a billing error (which are common with Cingular) then you'll be on hold for half an hour, and get nowhere with their customer service rep who's over in India. They are the worst company we have ever dealt with, and will be leaving them the day our contract is up in December. IMO, Apple is making a huge mistake by being exclusive with Cingular.
When I was in DC, my Cingular service was horrible. Just like it was in New York City, St. Louis and New Orleans (pre Katrina, when cell towers were still standing) and every other large city I've been in.
Yet, it works fine in the middle of nowhere. On my way down to New Orleans, I was on the phone in some tiny little town that couldn't have had more than 500 people. The only thing this place had was a gas station. I'm on my phone and call quality is excellent. An hour later in NO, dropped calls and low signal as usual. Or when I'm on the backroads in Missouri talking, again, perfect signal. Enter the STL city limits? Goodbye service.
Cingular has their priorities wrong. They go for the rural markets, where people don't want to have anything to do with cell phones, and they ignore the big cities. And if you try to call customer service to complain about the piss poor service, or to try to fix a billing error (which are common with Cingular) then you'll be on hold for half an hour, and get nowhere with their customer service rep who's over in India. They are the worst company we have ever dealt with, and will be leaving them the day our contract is up in December. IMO, Apple is making a huge mistake by being exclusive with Cingular.
Scottsdale
Apr 22, 12:43 PM
You don't think ? Seriously people, we had 1440x900 displays 10 years ago, on GPUs that had about 1% the graphics processing power of today and about a tenth of the RAM.
Heck, the 9400M could power external 30" monitors at their native resolution of 2560x1600 at the same time it powered in the laptop's internal display of 1280x800 without breaking a sweet.
What's so hard to grasp that the MBP's resolution staying at 1280x800 has nothing to do with the GPU in SB ? :confused:
Have you guys never used computers 10 years ago ? CRT monitors at 1600x1200 ring a bell to anyone but me here ?
Because part of releasing a new, backwards approaching, IGP in the 13" MBP required saving face for both its MacBook "PRO" name and Intel's IGP capabilities itself.
If the resolution is upgraded to 1440x900, the IGP is going to perform worse in comparison to the prior 13" MBP...
I also fear Apple's ridiculous 10.6.7 downgrade was somehow to show the MBA's IGP isn't as bad as it is going to be with SB IGP. Look at OpenGL performance on it, as it dropped 30% from 10.6.6. Now, we have seen Apple screw these things up before, but they also market their new products based upon prior products and list an OS X version tested on the prior gen. If they reverse course with 10.6.8 or 10.7, in the new MBA, then they might show only a 20% loss in IGP performance vs. the prior Nvidia 320m... when in reality, it might be more like a 50% plus loss in performance.
The big thing here, that NOBODY likes to think about is the 13" MBP uses a standard voltage CPU, while the MBA will use either ULV and LV or just ULV depending on who we believe. The ULV SB IGP operates at a greater than 50% loss than the Nvidia 320m. We can see this from competing products, that yes are running Windows but still have better OpenGL capabilities in the first place.
I think the big advantage to this downgrade will be buying clearance and refurbished Nvidia-based MBAs for 25% discounts... Unless Apple somehow fits a standard voltage SB CPU in the 13" MBA, I think most will be better off with C2D and Nvidia 320m at discounts.
Apple has been down the path of using a low voltage Intel CPU and IGP in the MBA before, and it was the worst Mac created since the Intel transition. It wasn't until Nvidia 9400m that the MBA became even usable. Yes, the SB IGP is better than prior Intel IGPs, but it's still utterly disappointing in LV/ULV variants. I guess the smart buyers will be buying clearance MBAs with Nvidia 320m and skip Sandy Bridge for a more reliable Ivy Bridge model. It depends on how each person uses the MBA, but I believe the vast majority are much better off with Nvidia and C2D. I just hope Apple doesn't destroy the MBA brand to try to make Intel's inferior IGP work... especially in LV and ULV variants.
Heck, the 9400M could power external 30" monitors at their native resolution of 2560x1600 at the same time it powered in the laptop's internal display of 1280x800 without breaking a sweet.
What's so hard to grasp that the MBP's resolution staying at 1280x800 has nothing to do with the GPU in SB ? :confused:
Have you guys never used computers 10 years ago ? CRT monitors at 1600x1200 ring a bell to anyone but me here ?
Because part of releasing a new, backwards approaching, IGP in the 13" MBP required saving face for both its MacBook "PRO" name and Intel's IGP capabilities itself.
If the resolution is upgraded to 1440x900, the IGP is going to perform worse in comparison to the prior 13" MBP...
I also fear Apple's ridiculous 10.6.7 downgrade was somehow to show the MBA's IGP isn't as bad as it is going to be with SB IGP. Look at OpenGL performance on it, as it dropped 30% from 10.6.6. Now, we have seen Apple screw these things up before, but they also market their new products based upon prior products and list an OS X version tested on the prior gen. If they reverse course with 10.6.8 or 10.7, in the new MBA, then they might show only a 20% loss in IGP performance vs. the prior Nvidia 320m... when in reality, it might be more like a 50% plus loss in performance.
The big thing here, that NOBODY likes to think about is the 13" MBP uses a standard voltage CPU, while the MBA will use either ULV and LV or just ULV depending on who we believe. The ULV SB IGP operates at a greater than 50% loss than the Nvidia 320m. We can see this from competing products, that yes are running Windows but still have better OpenGL capabilities in the first place.
I think the big advantage to this downgrade will be buying clearance and refurbished Nvidia-based MBAs for 25% discounts... Unless Apple somehow fits a standard voltage SB CPU in the 13" MBA, I think most will be better off with C2D and Nvidia 320m at discounts.
Apple has been down the path of using a low voltage Intel CPU and IGP in the MBA before, and it was the worst Mac created since the Intel transition. It wasn't until Nvidia 9400m that the MBA became even usable. Yes, the SB IGP is better than prior Intel IGPs, but it's still utterly disappointing in LV/ULV variants. I guess the smart buyers will be buying clearance MBAs with Nvidia 320m and skip Sandy Bridge for a more reliable Ivy Bridge model. It depends on how each person uses the MBA, but I believe the vast majority are much better off with Nvidia and C2D. I just hope Apple doesn't destroy the MBA brand to try to make Intel's inferior IGP work... especially in LV and ULV variants.
GGJstudios
Apr 4, 04:52 PM
ClamXav only detects Windows viruses.
http://www.clamxav.com
ClamXav is a free virus scanner for Mac OS X. It uses the very popular ClamAV open source antivirus engine as a back end and has the ability to detect both Windows and Mac threats.
http://www.clamxav.com
ClamXav is a free virus scanner for Mac OS X. It uses the very popular ClamAV open source antivirus engine as a back end and has the ability to detect both Windows and Mac threats.
patsfan83
Mar 30, 12:06 PM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/app
278891
I think this is enough to show that Microsoft is unequivocally correct. The term has been in use for much longer than Apple's launching of the store and it has been ubiquitous in the computer industry for a long time.
The way to distinguish (if it needs to be done) between app stores is by saying the name of the app store before hand, ie the Apple App Store, the Amazon App Store, or the Microsoft App Store.
How long has Apple been using .app as an extension for applications?
278891
I think this is enough to show that Microsoft is unequivocally correct. The term has been in use for much longer than Apple's launching of the store and it has been ubiquitous in the computer industry for a long time.
The way to distinguish (if it needs to be done) between app stores is by saying the name of the app store before hand, ie the Apple App Store, the Amazon App Store, or the Microsoft App Store.
How long has Apple been using .app as an extension for applications?
jwdsail
Sep 16, 09:49 AM
Hmmm that is an intresting thought. I saw a demo, over a year ago, of a wireles VoIP phone at Dartmouth University that did just that. They wear them around their neck or use a clip, but it was voice activated, and they actually called them their "Star Trek badges".
http://www.vocera.com/
So a quad-band gsm iPhone based on the new clip shuffle? Perfect! Speaker phone mode or BT headset .. voice activated.. Sync the phone number and voice dialing through an updated AddressBook. Perfect!
;-)
jwd
http://www.vocera.com/
So a quad-band gsm iPhone based on the new clip shuffle? Perfect! Speaker phone mode or BT headset .. voice activated.. Sync the phone number and voice dialing through an updated AddressBook. Perfect!
;-)
jwd
Rodimus Prime
Apr 25, 12:45 AM
I personally love how I get the bad rap, when the woman was the one going under the speed limit and attempted to breakcheck me first. She got what was coming to her. Had she just had some common courtesy and moved over, nothing would of happened. Instead she decided that she had to play traffic cop.
You people are all laughable.
-Don
and you doing 20 mph over the limit was a good idea?
A rarely if ever a good idea.
2 you lack the experience to even know how to drive that much over the limit.
3 fact that she had to go out of your way quickly tells me you really screwed up. I know if I saw someone flying up on me I might flash my brake lights (not slow down but flash them) to get them to slow down and back off. Force them to see me and people see brake lights they tend to slow down. I have gotten people like you to smoke their tires before. Mind you I was in the left lane. Had a semi truck to my right and I was going threw a pass. They come flying up on me and get on my bumper. I press my brakes just hard enough to cause the lights to come on but my speed stays the same. They smoke their tires and give me some breathing room. Works every time to get people to back off.
You people are all laughable.
-Don
and you doing 20 mph over the limit was a good idea?
A rarely if ever a good idea.
2 you lack the experience to even know how to drive that much over the limit.
3 fact that she had to go out of your way quickly tells me you really screwed up. I know if I saw someone flying up on me I might flash my brake lights (not slow down but flash them) to get them to slow down and back off. Force them to see me and people see brake lights they tend to slow down. I have gotten people like you to smoke their tires before. Mind you I was in the left lane. Had a semi truck to my right and I was going threw a pass. They come flying up on me and get on my bumper. I press my brakes just hard enough to cause the lights to come on but my speed stays the same. They smoke their tires and give me some breathing room. Works every time to get people to back off.
scottsjack
Apr 30, 03:12 PM
Wonder if the top of the line Core i7 Sandy Bridge iMac will be faster than many of the SP Mac Pro configurations.
Well of course it will. Processing speed is only one of the reasons people buy Mac Pros. I'll predict that a SB iMac quad will easily go faster than any one of the current Mac Pros and maybe even faster than the corrent hexacore.
Well of course it will. Processing speed is only one of the reasons people buy Mac Pros. I'll predict that a SB iMac quad will easily go faster than any one of the current Mac Pros and maybe even faster than the corrent hexacore.
cozmot
Mar 17, 07:31 AM
It this utter ignorance and false sense of security in the Mac user base that I would use to my advantage if I were a cyber-criminal. While I completely appreciate the lack of malware OSX has enjoyed thus far, I've seen more than enough evidence over the past few years to tell me that it's far from safe. The latest Safari/Webkit hacking contest result alone should be enough to cause any reasonable person to take notice. I think a few people will be changing their tunes the day the crap finally hits the fan.
For some reason, a certain famous quote from The Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy about the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation comes to mind regarding certain people who will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.... ;)
So you're not a cyber-criminal, but there are many out there, yet they haven't used this "sense of security in the Mac user base" to their advantage, have they? The latest hacking contest (I assume you're referring to Pwn2Own 2011) resulted in Safari and IE 8 being hacked. A browser is not an OS. Note that Goggle Chrome came out with flying colors, yet one of its platforms - Windows - has been hacked many times.
Simply put, there are underlying vulnerabilities to Windows that do not exist with OS X. That said, the real dangers to your computer are how you use it. Don't have a password on your wireless router? Use easy-to-guess passwords on your online accounts? Never change your passwords? Use the same password on all your accounts? Visit porn sites a lot and download that stuff? Download movies illegally? Click on links in emails from people you don't know? Or, from those you do, don't look at the source to see if it's a valid link? Respond to emails telling you that your [fill in the blank] account has been temporarily disabled, and that you need to "verify" your information to reactivate it? If so to any of the above, you're asking for trouble, even if you do have AV software "protecting" you.
There are many security experts who do not use AV software. Steve Gibson http://www.grc.com is one of them. Why? They practice safe computing and use common sense. No amount of AV or Internet security software is going to protect people who practice unsafe computing.
We've been hearing about the crap hitting the fan for years, and will for years to come. Yawn.
For some reason, a certain famous quote from The Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy about the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation comes to mind regarding certain people who will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.... ;)
So you're not a cyber-criminal, but there are many out there, yet they haven't used this "sense of security in the Mac user base" to their advantage, have they? The latest hacking contest (I assume you're referring to Pwn2Own 2011) resulted in Safari and IE 8 being hacked. A browser is not an OS. Note that Goggle Chrome came out with flying colors, yet one of its platforms - Windows - has been hacked many times.
Simply put, there are underlying vulnerabilities to Windows that do not exist with OS X. That said, the real dangers to your computer are how you use it. Don't have a password on your wireless router? Use easy-to-guess passwords on your online accounts? Never change your passwords? Use the same password on all your accounts? Visit porn sites a lot and download that stuff? Download movies illegally? Click on links in emails from people you don't know? Or, from those you do, don't look at the source to see if it's a valid link? Respond to emails telling you that your [fill in the blank] account has been temporarily disabled, and that you need to "verify" your information to reactivate it? If so to any of the above, you're asking for trouble, even if you do have AV software "protecting" you.
There are many security experts who do not use AV software. Steve Gibson http://www.grc.com is one of them. Why? They practice safe computing and use common sense. No amount of AV or Internet security software is going to protect people who practice unsafe computing.
We've been hearing about the crap hitting the fan for years, and will for years to come. Yawn.
