puuukeey
Jan 9, 03:45 PM
I agree you guys blow. what the hell?
nosen
Sep 25, 04:24 PM
It still is pretty poor with compatibility when it comes to RAW. For example, it still can't read white balance from the meta data on RAW files off Canon cameras. Great!
Um, really? I use a Canon camera and Aperture seems to preserve the camera WB setting fine...
Aperture's development also is going slow. Apple pulling out the software?
They've updated it twice, and I'm pretty sure its only been out a year. Not too shabby....
Perhaps all the developers are spending too much time on Leopard and Logic 8 at the moment.
Perhaps you don't have all the facts?
Um, really? I use a Canon camera and Aperture seems to preserve the camera WB setting fine...
Aperture's development also is going slow. Apple pulling out the software?
They've updated it twice, and I'm pretty sure its only been out a year. Not too shabby....
Perhaps all the developers are spending too much time on Leopard and Logic 8 at the moment.
Perhaps you don't have all the facts?
apfhex
Jan 5, 03:17 PM
Right in the beginning, there was a live video feed to all the Apple stores... I went to two of them, both at the Mall of America store (and both times sat next to some very quirky Mac users... y'know... the regular type). Then one year, I went and it wasn't on. I was pissed. Then I learned Apple wasn't doing that because it was too expensive or something.
I wish they at least did that still. I mean, they offer a streaming video after the event, is it really so much more expensive to to offer it live? That would be something worth getting up early and going to the Apple Store for.
Although I find enough excitement in both reading the live text updates and then getting to go to Apple's site and see the product pages,and watch them in action in the keynote video.
I wish they at least did that still. I mean, they offer a streaming video after the event, is it really so much more expensive to to offer it live? That would be something worth getting up early and going to the Apple Store for.
Although I find enough excitement in both reading the live text updates and then getting to go to Apple's site and see the product pages,and watch them in action in the keynote video.
PeterQVenkman
Apr 29, 04:00 PM
1. Dang, I liked the sliders. Wish Apple would set an option in the system preferences to enable/disable them.
My bet is that you'll get sliders if you use it on a touch screen based mac which we all know are coming.
My bet is that you'll get sliders if you use it on a touch screen based mac which we all know are coming.
Mord
Apr 26, 09:57 AM
I know it wasn't a skeevy guy. What I also know is that transgendered people have to deal with all sorts of problems, including what restroom to use. A transgendered woman going into a women's room should not be treated like a skeevy guy going into a restroom, but it happens. I've seen it happen. I pointed out the comparison to spark a conversation, not to say it's right, but to say the comparison is often made. Either there is a failure of education and tolerance, or some accomodation needst to be made, or maybe security should be better, or something...
Oh, and there are too many people who make unfounded assumptions. This story is proof of that.
Out of curiosity, do you actually know what gender she was? Was she post-op? Pre-op? Does it matter? I think a woman sitting in a stall might freak out by someone peeing upright next to them.
Yes, I do. She's female. No it doesn't matter, even if she was pre-op she wouldn't nor would any transsexual pee standing up in a female public restroom. I certainly never did before I had surgery. For what it's worth I used female loos for four years before I went under the knife, not one single incident, not one single person expressed any kind of discomfort, not one single eyelid batted.
This obsession with the loos is ridiculous. They're just toilets. We have to piss just like anyone else, is it too much to ask to do it with dignity without undue hassle?
I did have something to add, my opinion, which I am more than entitled to state just as much as you do.
This guy had arms and legs. He could've at least tried to defend himself, but he chose not too, which I dont understand why...
If I were attacked, my first instinct would be to fight back or run.
You're not a skinny girl. Being attacked like that typically puts one into a state of shock especially if one doesn't have the fight/flight response of a typical male.
Oh, and there are too many people who make unfounded assumptions. This story is proof of that.
Out of curiosity, do you actually know what gender she was? Was she post-op? Pre-op? Does it matter? I think a woman sitting in a stall might freak out by someone peeing upright next to them.
Yes, I do. She's female. No it doesn't matter, even if she was pre-op she wouldn't nor would any transsexual pee standing up in a female public restroom. I certainly never did before I had surgery. For what it's worth I used female loos for four years before I went under the knife, not one single incident, not one single person expressed any kind of discomfort, not one single eyelid batted.
This obsession with the loos is ridiculous. They're just toilets. We have to piss just like anyone else, is it too much to ask to do it with dignity without undue hassle?
I did have something to add, my opinion, which I am more than entitled to state just as much as you do.
This guy had arms and legs. He could've at least tried to defend himself, but he chose not too, which I dont understand why...
If I were attacked, my first instinct would be to fight back or run.
You're not a skinny girl. Being attacked like that typically puts one into a state of shock especially if one doesn't have the fight/flight response of a typical male.
GoKyu
Apr 12, 07:24 AM
Do you really think MS will ever do that?
As stupid as they are, probably not. They're happy with having the most market share, why should they bother changing anything?
But, when it's as easy to get a virus as downloading a banner ad from a website that you visit ( sometimes even legitimate ones) using IE with ActiveX enabled, then *maybe* a stronger security model is called for.
These days, if you're running Windows and don't have at least a good antivirus, antispyware and (can't hurt) firewall, you're almost assured of getting infected somehow. I see it all the time at work - we have people coming in paying hundreds to have us remove viruses and to install a new antivirus program, because they didn't know the old one expired.
If Microsoft was smart, they'd even *consider* doing this - I hate to say it, but look at Mac users - even though we're not immune to potential viruses in the future, how long has OS X been around, and how much malware is out there to infect it? Maybe 5-10 programs? UNIX just has that stronger security model...
As stupid as they are, probably not. They're happy with having the most market share, why should they bother changing anything?
But, when it's as easy to get a virus as downloading a banner ad from a website that you visit ( sometimes even legitimate ones) using IE with ActiveX enabled, then *maybe* a stronger security model is called for.
These days, if you're running Windows and don't have at least a good antivirus, antispyware and (can't hurt) firewall, you're almost assured of getting infected somehow. I see it all the time at work - we have people coming in paying hundreds to have us remove viruses and to install a new antivirus program, because they didn't know the old one expired.
If Microsoft was smart, they'd even *consider* doing this - I hate to say it, but look at Mac users - even though we're not immune to potential viruses in the future, how long has OS X been around, and how much malware is out there to infect it? Maybe 5-10 programs? UNIX just has that stronger security model...
LastLine
Sep 12, 07:32 AM
why would they take the uk store down if there were not going to add movies for us here!! woohoo..
I'm still waiting for my TV Shows in the UK :(
I'm still waiting for my TV Shows in the UK :(
Synthion
Mar 7, 05:38 AM
Apple isn't the origin of all their ideas, some, but not all. Look at it this way.
prom hairstyles 2011 curly to
prom hairstyles 2011 curly to
prom hairstyles 2011 curly to
prom hairstyles 2011 curly to
prom hairstyles 2011 curly to
Curly hairstyles have always
prom hairstyles 2011 curly to
Prom Hairstyles 2011
prom hairstyles 2011 curly to
prom hairstyles 2011 curly to
prom hairstyles 2011 curly to
Mr. MacBook
Mar 26, 05:00 PM
Your thinking too much about the worst side of things. Aren't you grateful they didnt steal umm... $10000?
!� V �!
Apr 29, 05:40 PM
iCal has taken a turn for the worse. I makes me uneasy. :(
crap freakboy
Jan 5, 05:43 PM
Excellent work MR.
Stops me sneaking a look before the stream is available.
Now I can watch after the kids and 'er indoors are asleep.
Fantastic.
Stops me sneaking a look before the stream is available.
Now I can watch after the kids and 'er indoors are asleep.
Fantastic.
drayon
Apr 30, 12:03 AM
Hey knock it off with all the off topic Windows drivel. Winrumors forums would be a better place to dispute these matters.
GFLPraxis
Apr 15, 02:02 PM
The OP was ambiguous ... I read it that the weapons used on 9/11 were still not banned. As opposed to not banned at the time.
Hasn't anyone noticed that not a single US plane has been hijacked in the past 10 years? A quick look at Wikipedia shows 7 US planes hijacked in the 1970s, several in the 80s and 90s. Four planes were hijacked in 2001 (all on the same day....) - and then not a single US, European, Japanese plane has been hijacked.
Something is working.....
1980s - Aer Ligus Dublin - London; Air France Frankfurt - Paris; Rio Airways Killen, Texas - Dallas, Texas; TWA Athens - Beirut; Egypt Air Athens - Cairo; Malev Hungarian Airlines Prague - ?? ;
1990s - Lufthansa Frankfort - Cairo; FedEx flight Memphis - ??; Air Malta Malta - Turkey; All Nippon (domestic flight);
I've only listed those flights that departed from a European (and one Japanese) airport.... not European airlines that departed from non-European airports. After 9/11 there were still a number of hijackings, but the closest they come to European departure points are Nicosia, and Tirana. Though there was one from a Mexican Airport and one from a Caribbean airport. The Mexican hijacking was by a man threatening a bomb, but I don't think they actually found one.
I'll grant you the eighties. Now we get in to the ninties and there's...one in the United States, and it's an employee hijacking a company plane (FedEx).
So what's the correlation you're going for here? I'm not seeing it.
I see a decline from the 70's to the 80's, but the 90's seems in line with 2K.
We go ten years without a single commercial U.S. flight getting hijacked. Then 9/11. Then ten more years without. I'm not seeing some amazing statistical shift as a result of TSA. Further, I'm not seeing anything that justifies the new full body scanners. These were added without any supporting reasons.
If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.
And if your argument is that last year's full body scanners are justified, I would request much more evidence.
And how may people have the TSA found?
You tell me.
And how many people have not even bothered to try, because they were afraid of getting caught?
Same number as in the 90's.
Hasn't anyone noticed that not a single US plane has been hijacked in the past 10 years? A quick look at Wikipedia shows 7 US planes hijacked in the 1970s, several in the 80s and 90s. Four planes were hijacked in 2001 (all on the same day....) - and then not a single US, European, Japanese plane has been hijacked.
Something is working.....
1980s - Aer Ligus Dublin - London; Air France Frankfurt - Paris; Rio Airways Killen, Texas - Dallas, Texas; TWA Athens - Beirut; Egypt Air Athens - Cairo; Malev Hungarian Airlines Prague - ?? ;
1990s - Lufthansa Frankfort - Cairo; FedEx flight Memphis - ??; Air Malta Malta - Turkey; All Nippon (domestic flight);
I've only listed those flights that departed from a European (and one Japanese) airport.... not European airlines that departed from non-European airports. After 9/11 there were still a number of hijackings, but the closest they come to European departure points are Nicosia, and Tirana. Though there was one from a Mexican Airport and one from a Caribbean airport. The Mexican hijacking was by a man threatening a bomb, but I don't think they actually found one.
I'll grant you the eighties. Now we get in to the ninties and there's...one in the United States, and it's an employee hijacking a company plane (FedEx).
So what's the correlation you're going for here? I'm not seeing it.
I see a decline from the 70's to the 80's, but the 90's seems in line with 2K.
We go ten years without a single commercial U.S. flight getting hijacked. Then 9/11. Then ten more years without. I'm not seeing some amazing statistical shift as a result of TSA. Further, I'm not seeing anything that justifies the new full body scanners. These were added without any supporting reasons.
If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.
And if your argument is that last year's full body scanners are justified, I would request much more evidence.
And how may people have the TSA found?
You tell me.
And how many people have not even bothered to try, because they were afraid of getting caught?
Same number as in the 90's.
Erwin-Br
May 3, 05:58 PM
Too many people think they are entitled to get everything for free. No matter if it is a new service for $20 a year or if it is tethering they didn't pay for ... Don't know where people get it from that they should get everything for free (or cheap).
I didn't hear anyone saying they have the right to use free tethering, or that they are entitled to get it cheap.
Since when can't people complain about the price being too high anyways? And who on Earth would prefer to pay extra for tethering instead of getting it for "free". And note that I put free in quotes, because you're still paying for your data and bandwidth, so it's really never been free anyways. You're just paying twice for the same thing now, which is consuming bandwidth.
I didn't hear anyone saying they have the right to use free tethering, or that they are entitled to get it cheap.
Since when can't people complain about the price being too high anyways? And who on Earth would prefer to pay extra for tethering instead of getting it for "free". And note that I put free in quotes, because you're still paying for your data and bandwidth, so it's really never been free anyways. You're just paying twice for the same thing now, which is consuming bandwidth.
netdog
Sep 12, 07:31 AM
Can't wait :D
The Australian store is claiming that the store is busy or to check my connection :confused:
Same in the UK.
The Australian store is claiming that the store is busy or to check my connection :confused:
Same in the UK.
cocky jeremy
Apr 25, 02:47 PM
That looks fine actually.
I'm fine with Apple not changing the overall design from the iPhone 4. It's already pretty sexy. This will just be like iPhone 3G ->iPhone 3Gs. They just make it better.
Now where can I pay?! :D
Same here. They can keep the iPhone 4 design for years and years. I love it. As far as a bigger screen, i don't really care either way. Give me dual-core A5, doubled RAM, and 64 GB, a better camera sensor, and i'm happy. I don't want 8 MP camera, just a 5 MP camera with a bigger/better sensor. :)
I'm fine with Apple not changing the overall design from the iPhone 4. It's already pretty sexy. This will just be like iPhone 3G ->iPhone 3Gs. They just make it better.
Now where can I pay?! :D
Same here. They can keep the iPhone 4 design for years and years. I love it. As far as a bigger screen, i don't really care either way. Give me dual-core A5, doubled RAM, and 64 GB, a better camera sensor, and i'm happy. I don't want 8 MP camera, just a 5 MP camera with a bigger/better sensor. :)
Pared
Apr 25, 02:02 PM
That's an awful idea. Posts will get downrated because someone disagrees with a perfectly valid opinion? I've already seen posts downrated because someone said they prefer Android over Apple or had a good thing to say about Microsoft. Hell, I'd probably get downrated just for my avatar.
As long as people are going to act like little children, using these ratings to hide posts is a horrible idea.
Then if that is the worry, you should remove the negative aspect and disallow anyone from "potentially acting like children."
As long as people are going to act like little children, using these ratings to hide posts is a horrible idea.
Then if that is the worry, you should remove the negative aspect and disallow anyone from "potentially acting like children."
vincenz
Apr 15, 05:18 PM
How is "gay history" different than regular history? lol
One has "gay" and the other doesn't? :p
One has "gay" and the other doesn't? :p
MacsAttack
Nov 16, 12:52 PM
I think it would just be an additional code in the x86 part of the UB. Correct me if I'm wrong...
Probably you are wrong.
The firmware would have to be written to work with the net hardware, but AMD chips are i86 compatible processors with the same 64 bit extensions that Intel use (Intel had to suck it up and use the same 64 bit extensions as AMD when the universe + dog rejected their take on 64-bit processing).
Probably you are wrong.
The firmware would have to be written to work with the net hardware, but AMD chips are i86 compatible processors with the same 64 bit extensions that Intel use (Intel had to suck it up and use the same 64 bit extensions as AMD when the universe + dog rejected their take on 64-bit processing).
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 26, 10:55 AM
P.S. The box surrounding the up/down buttons is baboon-ass ugly.
I agree. What browser are you using? IE at work has the ugly boxes you are describing, but Safari at home, doesn't. It looks MUCH better.
I agree. What browser are you using? IE at work has the ugly boxes you are describing, but Safari at home, doesn't. It looks MUCH better.
miles01110
Apr 14, 03:43 PM
It's the same cumulative dose, however over a vastly different timeframe.
No, it is not. Educate yourself on the facts, then rejoin the conversation.
No, it is not. Educate yourself on the facts, then rejoin the conversation.
IJ Reilly
Oct 19, 03:37 PM
I don't doubt this, but from someone who has been using Windows since 3.1.1, take my word that Vista is a gigantic improvement over XP. While I agree that MS's claims of grandure aren't justified, there's no denying that Vista is a noteworthy upgrade (rather than an 8-month downgrade until SP1 surfaces).
So what? Really, not be flip, but XP was a big improvement over 98, and 98 was a bit improvement over 95, etc. A very significant number of people simply do not care. If XP or 98 or whatever they are using suffices, then they are not going to take the Vista plunge.
You're half right and half wrong. Some people wouldn't even consider upgrading (whether it's because they don't know what Vista is / how it's different or due to apathy). More people, however, will (one way or another) become convinced that an upgrade is necessary. They're also convinced that whatever slop MS puts on their plate is good enough (as you suggested). They say, "This upgrade from XP to Vista is good enough for MS so it's good enough for me. No need to explore the other options."
Microsoft has taught its customers that the risks can easily outweigh the benefits. That lesson may be finally sinking in.
And sadly, it doesn't matter how they're sold. Once people start using Vista and see that it's an improvement over what they've been using. They won't consider a switch to the Mac. People talk often about iLemmings, but it really goes QUITE understated the number of MS Lemmings there are. (Think "1984" ad.) MS has great power over those who are unconscious to the computing world. Vista is not going to change that. The only thing that will drive people to the Mac is their becoming "conscious." That is much harder to do and Apple deserves MUCH applause for the amount of waking up they've done to the MS Lemmings.
Well it does and it doesn't. If Microsoft is looking for a big upgrade movement, then I think they're not going to get it. And I don't think that a lot people will walk into Best Buy and buy a new PC because they like the look of Vista. As always, I believe the need that drives new PC purchases is to get new hardware, not the newest version of Windows. I think I've got history on my side of this debate. But we shall see!
So what? Really, not be flip, but XP was a big improvement over 98, and 98 was a bit improvement over 95, etc. A very significant number of people simply do not care. If XP or 98 or whatever they are using suffices, then they are not going to take the Vista plunge.
You're half right and half wrong. Some people wouldn't even consider upgrading (whether it's because they don't know what Vista is / how it's different or due to apathy). More people, however, will (one way or another) become convinced that an upgrade is necessary. They're also convinced that whatever slop MS puts on their plate is good enough (as you suggested). They say, "This upgrade from XP to Vista is good enough for MS so it's good enough for me. No need to explore the other options."
Microsoft has taught its customers that the risks can easily outweigh the benefits. That lesson may be finally sinking in.
And sadly, it doesn't matter how they're sold. Once people start using Vista and see that it's an improvement over what they've been using. They won't consider a switch to the Mac. People talk often about iLemmings, but it really goes QUITE understated the number of MS Lemmings there are. (Think "1984" ad.) MS has great power over those who are unconscious to the computing world. Vista is not going to change that. The only thing that will drive people to the Mac is their becoming "conscious." That is much harder to do and Apple deserves MUCH applause for the amount of waking up they've done to the MS Lemmings.
Well it does and it doesn't. If Microsoft is looking for a big upgrade movement, then I think they're not going to get it. And I don't think that a lot people will walk into Best Buy and buy a new PC because they like the look of Vista. As always, I believe the need that drives new PC purchases is to get new hardware, not the newest version of Windows. I think I've got history on my side of this debate. But we shall see!
atakordie
Sep 7, 09:15 PM
Yeah, the audience he was performing to was not what I would consider his primary listenership. Plus, it isn't music and it sucks. (I know... just an opinion.) And thanks for the PG-13ness.
Benjy91
Apr 7, 09:59 AM
Is Windows 8 then Windows 7.0, like Windows Seven is actually Windows 6.1?
Thats just the NT version. Windows 8 will be 6.2
7 was 6.1,
Vista was 6.0
XP was 5.0
Technically Windows 7 is the 10th version of Windows, if you don't count Windows Server.
Windows 7 is the 7th version if you count from Windows 95.
Thats just the NT version. Windows 8 will be 6.2
7 was 6.1,
Vista was 6.0
XP was 5.0
Technically Windows 7 is the 10th version of Windows, if you don't count Windows Server.
Windows 7 is the 7th version if you count from Windows 95.
No comments:
Post a Comment