nmrrjw66
Apr 15, 02:36 PM
What is Gay History? History, while interesting, has always struck me as unimportant in educating Children for essential workforce skills. Leave history for Colleges or elective courses.
drsmithy
Oct 5, 02:33 AM
It'd be pretty easy to check actually, and really quite legal. The part of Mac OS X that actually implements SMP is the kernel, which is part of Darwin. You can install Darwin without fear of repurcusions, on your toaster, if you want.
Isn't the version of Darwin underpinning OS X/Intel no longer Open Source ?
Isn't the version of Darwin underpinning OS X/Intel no longer Open Source ?
lordonuthin
Apr 20, 07:36 PM
thanks. things aren't quite working out right at the moment. i think i might have messed up the motherboard somehow. my homebuilt i7 just isn't working right. i'm away for work during the week, but i think this coming weekend will spent on this computer again. i might have to buy another motherboard i'm thinking though
Ouch, I know how that is, I've had to replace things that I've broken trying to fix them; not that I would actually admit to breaking anything of course :p
It would drive me nuts being away from my computers knowing they need worked on. I guess I'm addicted - maybe... oh, I put -advmethods in the linux machines and they took off with new wu's so all is well for now. I did lose a bigadv unit on the 17th, or 14th I can't remember, when they had a glitch in one of the servers :(
Ouch, I know how that is, I've had to replace things that I've broken trying to fix them; not that I would actually admit to breaking anything of course :p
It would drive me nuts being away from my computers knowing they need worked on. I guess I'm addicted - maybe... oh, I put -advmethods in the linux machines and they took off with new wu's so all is well for now. I did lose a bigadv unit on the 17th, or 14th I can't remember, when they had a glitch in one of the servers :(
Aniej
Jan 9, 04:37 PM
I posted a story to digg (http://www.digg.com/apple/MacRumors_spoils_keynote_for_watchers_on_their_spoiler_free_page) regarding the spoiling issue. I think Arn was extremely responsive to the issue and avoiding these kinds of inadvertent spoiling is difficult to do in this day and age. My brother even txted me a spoiler. Is it possible to be completely unspoiled regarding something like this?
There is no spoiling information so far in the story, but I imagine most of us are avoiding digg like the plague.
I mean that's great, but a bit of foresight would be better. I don't understand why a simple, non-postable page or thread could not be dedicated to just one simple link. That's the irritating point. Couple that with the people who posted spoilers on a thread dedicated to not spoiling the event for those of us who brought up the idea and were interested in it and it just kind of sucks to have people who have no concern for anyone else or the reasoning to stop for a second and ask should I really post what I am about to.
There is no spoiling information so far in the story, but I imagine most of us are avoiding digg like the plague.
I mean that's great, but a bit of foresight would be better. I don't understand why a simple, non-postable page or thread could not be dedicated to just one simple link. That's the irritating point. Couple that with the people who posted spoilers on a thread dedicated to not spoiling the event for those of us who brought up the idea and were interested in it and it just kind of sucks to have people who have no concern for anyone else or the reasoning to stop for a second and ask should I really post what I am about to.
more...
techzone707
Apr 30, 11:38 AM
I cannot wait for Lion!
tdhurst
Jan 10, 05:10 PM
Wow...and the world wonders why the tech blogger crowd is having a hard time being taken seriously as journalists.
more...
lostontheisland
Apr 5, 03:51 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
hahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.........
Whoever spends their time looking at adverts is a lost cause and has no life. Seriously I think this is the most ridiculous thing apple has come up with.
no no i think you will find buying an iPad 2 for over �600 and having to wait over a month for it to be delivered is top of the list!
hahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.........
Whoever spends their time looking at adverts is a lost cause and has no life. Seriously I think this is the most ridiculous thing apple has come up with.
no no i think you will find buying an iPad 2 for over �600 and having to wait over a month for it to be delivered is top of the list!
atari1356
Sep 25, 11:03 AM
Why are people rating this news as negative? It seems like a decent update to a good program, and it's free for existing Aperture users. What were you expecting?
more...
dalvin200
Sep 12, 07:33 AM
I'm still waiting for my TV Shows in the UK :(
If Corrie makes it into the store, then i'm leaving!! lol..
If Corrie makes it into the store, then i'm leaving!! lol..
Puppies
Nov 23, 05:24 PM
We'll see if Macbook/Pro discounts are enough to sway me towards one :)
In any event, it gives me an excuse to click on Apple.com tomorrow.
In any event, it gives me an excuse to click on Apple.com tomorrow.
more...
BeyondtheTech
Sep 28, 12:20 PM
Maybe when his house is all put together, he'll realize that the next AppleTV should be more like Windows Media Center, with dual ATSC tuners, DVR capability, and expandable storage space. That's the only thing tainting my beautiful almost-all-Apple home network.
tk421
Oct 19, 12:39 PM
Check out this to boost Mac OS X market share:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39284186,00.htm
If Apple does it, Windows (read M$) will be out of business in three years!
That idea is certainly not new. It's been debated lots of times on this site, and it's not that simple. Even the article itself doesn't say Microsoft will be out of business. It says Apple market share could be 20%.
One of the problems with being software-only is that Apple makes a lot of money from their hardware. Another problem is that they have less control over the product. If they can't control the hardware, the software will face more issues.
Anyway, I doubt they'd license the OS, and I wouldn't want them to.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39284186,00.htm
If Apple does it, Windows (read M$) will be out of business in three years!
That idea is certainly not new. It's been debated lots of times on this site, and it's not that simple. Even the article itself doesn't say Microsoft will be out of business. It says Apple market share could be 20%.
One of the problems with being software-only is that Apple makes a lot of money from their hardware. Another problem is that they have less control over the product. If they can't control the hardware, the software will face more issues.
Anyway, I doubt they'd license the OS, and I wouldn't want them to.
more...
skunk
Apr 21, 11:11 AM
I give it three phooeys.
Mitthrawnuruodo
Aug 1, 10:41 AM
How can a Norwegian law affect Denmark like this?:confused:Gjennom EØS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Area)-avtalen... :(
more...
Transporteur
Apr 8, 04:26 AM
@SPEEDwithJJ: Watch the Family Guy episode "New Kidney in Town" and you'll know :D
Crotch burn! :D
Crotch burn! :D
Rodimus Prime
Apr 9, 09:46 PM
The fact that you typed ALL OF THAT up and posted it in a thread about "Windows 8 Rumors" is amazing. You are my new favorite poster here at MR. Your trolling knows no bounds.
man you post that and then make me fire up IE so I can read his trolling post and remind myself why I have him on the ignore list. Quick skim and just reminded me not to take him off.
Reason for IE being fired up is that is my only browser on this computer that I do not have set to Autolog in.
man you post that and then make me fire up IE so I can read his trolling post and remind myself why I have him on the ignore list. Quick skim and just reminded me not to take him off.
Reason for IE being fired up is that is my only browser on this computer that I do not have set to Autolog in.
more...
prady16
Nov 16, 01:00 PM
Please don't confuse the customer with too many options!
Stick with either Intel or AMD, not both!
Stick with either Intel or AMD, not both!
AidenShaw
Oct 4, 06:01 AM
They might get laughed at but apple will be the ones laughing when their the first to debut santa rosa with 800mhz fsb and nand flash. Hopefully this is whats going to happen
Apple won't be first, they'll either announce the same day as HP/Dell/Lenovo/Acer/Asus/... - or they'll announce later.
With Yonah, Merom, Woodcrest and Conroe, the pattern has been "later".
At some point the consumer experience is not appreciably improved by processor improvements. Except for media processing intensive applicatons, we are there.
That alone ia an amazing statement for the Apple platform.
Can any other platform say that or even promise that any time within 2 years?
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.
Apple won't be first, they'll either announce the same day as HP/Dell/Lenovo/Acer/Asus/... - or they'll announce later.
With Yonah, Merom, Woodcrest and Conroe, the pattern has been "later".
At some point the consumer experience is not appreciably improved by processor improvements. Except for media processing intensive applicatons, we are there.
That alone ia an amazing statement for the Apple platform.
Can any other platform say that or even promise that any time within 2 years?
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.
CalBoy
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
ShakyJay
Dec 23, 11:29 PM
I wouldn't believe it. They allegedly don't tell their own stores anything because they feel they can't trust the staff (who are mostly college aged kids) not to post glamour it on their facebook, etc. No way would they tell another company like Radio Shack especially this early
Trust me Verizon employees do not know if they are getting the iPhone 6 months in advance...The boss's don't trust them to change out light bulbs in their stores, why would they give them critical data that could change their stocks????
Trust me Verizon employees do not know if they are getting the iPhone 6 months in advance...The boss's don't trust them to change out light bulbs in their stores, why would they give them critical data that could change their stocks????
Chundles
Sep 12, 08:33 AM
You are really disenchanted by this thread arent you?
But at the end of the day its your fault. You are the leader you must take responsibility.
I sure am, just a broken, shadow of my former self.
As the highest-posting 68040 I feel distraught at my ineptitude as leader. but in about 13 more posts I'll be the most junior 601 and then I'll pass the buck up the line. :D
But at the end of the day its your fault. You are the leader you must take responsibility.
I sure am, just a broken, shadow of my former self.
As the highest-posting 68040 I feel distraught at my ineptitude as leader. but in about 13 more posts I'll be the most junior 601 and then I'll pass the buck up the line. :D
aristobrat
Jan 12, 07:24 PM
Have not watched the keynote. Not going to bother.
I'd like to see a bit more commitment from Apple (the company previously known as Apple Computers) on the computer side before I consider recomending any kind of Mac to people again.
You didn't watch the actual source of all of this information, but yet you feel that Apple might not be committed to the Mac anymore? Oye. Watch the first five minutes of it. :)
I think that those who think that SJ & Apple are beyond criticism merely confirm the excellent points you've raised in your post.
I find that most folks here are very critical of Apple and its products and don't usually hesitate to criticize where they feel appropriate. Just because not everyone participating in this thread don't agree with the OP's opinion that SJ is an arrogant SOB doesn't mean that everyone worships him either.
If all the iPhone mockups out there had missed the mark, the iPhone would be revolutionary, but there were quite a few that were based on the idea of a huge display and no keys.
I missed the markup where the full-screen video iPod was combined with the iPhone into on device.
The modest memory, for one, and for another the absence of 3G which is somewhat of a shocker - 3G has been a staple of top-of-the-line phones for years now.
Welcome to America. We're just now getting 3G (in regards to GSM networks, anyhow).
If not the business market, then who? It can't be kids, as it has no games, and allegedly no support for custom ringtones. It can't be business users, since they'll want Outlook or Lotus Notes sync, and possibly a navigator, and they'll most definitely not want to use frickin' iTunes to sync up. Which leaves, I dunno... Mac enthusiasts and 30-somethings who are hoping for 15 minutes of fame by the watercooler? He did say his goal was 10 million units.[/QUOTE]
I'd like to see a bit more commitment from Apple (the company previously known as Apple Computers) on the computer side before I consider recomending any kind of Mac to people again.
You didn't watch the actual source of all of this information, but yet you feel that Apple might not be committed to the Mac anymore? Oye. Watch the first five minutes of it. :)
I think that those who think that SJ & Apple are beyond criticism merely confirm the excellent points you've raised in your post.
I find that most folks here are very critical of Apple and its products and don't usually hesitate to criticize where they feel appropriate. Just because not everyone participating in this thread don't agree with the OP's opinion that SJ is an arrogant SOB doesn't mean that everyone worships him either.
If all the iPhone mockups out there had missed the mark, the iPhone would be revolutionary, but there were quite a few that were based on the idea of a huge display and no keys.
I missed the markup where the full-screen video iPod was combined with the iPhone into on device.
The modest memory, for one, and for another the absence of 3G which is somewhat of a shocker - 3G has been a staple of top-of-the-line phones for years now.
Welcome to America. We're just now getting 3G (in regards to GSM networks, anyhow).
If not the business market, then who? It can't be kids, as it has no games, and allegedly no support for custom ringtones. It can't be business users, since they'll want Outlook or Lotus Notes sync, and possibly a navigator, and they'll most definitely not want to use frickin' iTunes to sync up. Which leaves, I dunno... Mac enthusiasts and 30-somethings who are hoping for 15 minutes of fame by the watercooler? He did say his goal was 10 million units.[/QUOTE]
hob
Jan 5, 03:29 PM
Although the data transferred may be the same or more with on-demand streams, when it's live there will be much higher simultaneous usage. With high-end hosting in general, simultaneous usage is the killer and not really total bandwidth usage. With the popularity of Apple these days the number of simultaneous streams could be extremely high (I mean, if MacRumors gets 100,000 visitors simultaneously think what Apple would get themselves).
I don't think expense is the issue here.
Apple can either:
1. Offer the stream only to the stores
2. Pay for massive bandwidth. Have you seen the profit from last quarter alone?! The people watching would most probably have bought an apple product of 5 recently!
I don't think expense is the issue here.
Apple can either:
1. Offer the stream only to the stores
2. Pay for massive bandwidth. Have you seen the profit from last quarter alone?! The people watching would most probably have bought an apple product of 5 recently!
sunfast
Nov 16, 12:41 PM
I can't see Apple ditching intel this early somehow.
unless Intel ****s up...
slips up? Tell me I'm right! :D
unless Intel ****s up...
slips up? Tell me I'm right! :D
