VicMacs
Sep 9, 01:57 AM
now is the Xeon processor faster than the core 2 duo?
paradox00
Apr 15, 10:16 AM
It's be a good idea if Thunderbolt was capable of handling USB 3 as well, like the thunderbolt port in the MacBook Pro can also do mini display.
I guess that way it'd at least be used more, but also nobody would be uncertain about getting Thunderbolt because they know even if it is a flop the port is still useful...
It is, provided the system supports USB 3.0 which the current macs do not (but IvyBridge ones will). The only reason people think it will flop is because they don't understand what it is (it's an extension of the PCIe bus, not a USB 3.0 replacement).
I guess that way it'd at least be used more, but also nobody would be uncertain about getting Thunderbolt because they know even if it is a flop the port is still useful...
It is, provided the system supports USB 3.0 which the current macs do not (but IvyBridge ones will). The only reason people think it will flop is because they don't understand what it is (it's an extension of the PCIe bus, not a USB 3.0 replacement).
daneoni
Sep 12, 03:24 PM
what do you mean my windows is close not to upgrade??
and also, is there any chance that i might be succeeding in returning it... or even getting a refund??? i mean i took the vinyl cover off and just totally used it... can i return it right back to the apple store??
I meant return window..its just one day. Im not sure about the return but just give it a shot. If they ask, tell them you'd like to buy the new version. Be polite but firm as much as possible and you should be fine. Worst case scenario is they say no BUT you won't feel bad because you're current iPod is definately not out of date from what i see today
and also, is there any chance that i might be succeeding in returning it... or even getting a refund??? i mean i took the vinyl cover off and just totally used it... can i return it right back to the apple store??
I meant return window..its just one day. Im not sure about the return but just give it a shot. If they ask, tell them you'd like to buy the new version. Be polite but firm as much as possible and you should be fine. Worst case scenario is they say no BUT you won't feel bad because you're current iPod is definately not out of date from what i see today
MacinDoc
Sep 10, 10:48 AM
Great news that Kentsfield is coming early, however I am curious to see what Apple does with it (if anything). Since it is based on the Conroe chipset, and Apple has elected not to incorporate Conroe into any of the Mac line-up (yet), I wonder what Kentsfield's role will be (if any) in the Mac world.
Once again, all signs point towards that Conroe Mini-tower... :eek: ;) :D
Agreed.
Once again, all signs point towards that Conroe Mini-tower... :eek: ;) :D
Agreed.
MacinDoc
Sep 9, 11:48 AM
My point is that with the new processors and RAM upgrades, the iMac is headed towards more powerful use that could potentially switch over a PC gamer. If you wanted to do some serious gaming on the 24" iMac you could....if not for the poor video card options.
Throw a dog a bone here and at least give us a 512MB option.
I'm not a gaming expert, but from what I've read, 512MB is no faster than 256MB for most current gaming applications, it's the throughput of the GPU that counts. Do any gamers out there want to comment on this?
Throw a dog a bone here and at least give us a 512MB option.
I'm not a gaming expert, but from what I've read, 512MB is no faster than 256MB for most current gaming applications, it's the throughput of the GPU that counts. Do any gamers out there want to comment on this?
Dr Kevorkian94
Mar 22, 02:40 PM
Wife said Yes
It would suck if
fast 5 wallpaper
wallpaper rapidshare links
vin diesel fast and furious
vin diesel wallpaper fast and
vin diesel fast and furious
fast five 2011 hindi.
from fast five wallpapers
Fast Five Movie Trailer
See more wallpapers in
fast-five-9009-1680x1050
fast five poster wallpaper.
fast five poster wallpaper.
fast five poster wallpaper.
It would suck if
hcho3
Apr 19, 09:20 AM
Respond strongly? You mean defend yourself?
Samsung has almost no chance of winning against apple in this lawsuit in phone design/UI and etc.
Samsung clearly copied apple. Samsung phones were nothing like Galaxy S phones until iPhone came out in 2007.
Samsung did copy apple. They are about to lose billions of dollars on this one.
Samsung has almost no chance of winning against apple in this lawsuit in phone design/UI and etc.
Samsung clearly copied apple. Samsung phones were nothing like Galaxy S phones until iPhone came out in 2007.
Samsung did copy apple. They are about to lose billions of dollars on this one.
dsnort
Oct 27, 03:38 PM
My cousin's iBook died last winter. I discovered he disposed of it, not sure if he did environmentally-well or not. But since he should've given it to me, even though dead, I had to shoot him. That's one that won't hose the environment anymore!
(this post is partly hyperbole.....no Apple is ever "dead")
I seriously hope you disposed of the body in an ecologically sound manner! :D
(this post is partly hyperbole.....no Apple is ever "dead")
I seriously hope you disposed of the body in an ecologically sound manner! :D
Steelers7510
Apr 4, 11:45 AM
I'm actually surprised this doesn't happen more often. Applestores must be filled with cash. I would think one would be a bit easier to rob than a bank.
I doubt they leave large amounts of cash in the stores over night.
I doubt they leave large amounts of cash in the stores over night.
Philsy
Sep 26, 09:23 AM
Very hard to say, but 3G is not taking to the rest of the world very well, especially the US as they can't get 2/2.5G to work properly yet. This is about the only occasion when the UK really is doing well.
Fair point, but I'd like to think that Apple will be looking to the future; imagine being able to buy music via your phone - couldn't do that with 2G.
Besides, the US is only a small part of the global market... ;)
Fair point, but I'd like to think that Apple will be looking to the future; imagine being able to buy music via your phone - couldn't do that with 2G.
Besides, the US is only a small part of the global market... ;)
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 10:27 AM
Yes because everyone loves to carry around external breakout boxes with their sleek portable Macbooks.... :rolleyes:
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
iMeowbot
Aug 29, 01:05 AM
if apple wants to stay competivie, they need to release updates tomorrow.. not wait for paris but tomorrow. Plus i can order a new iMac this week and still get my free ipod nano :D
I'll note that the Dell notebook isn't shipping until 14 September (6th for the low end), and the desktop version shows a ship date in November. Apple have plenty of time.
i don't know, but i am not sure about this Intel thing yet!:mad:
If you really had your heart set on the PowerBook G5 form factor, the Tadpole Bullfrogs (http://www.tadpole.com/products/notebooks.asp) come pretty close. SPARC is fairly unusual, the other kids on the street probably won't have them.
I'll note that the Dell notebook isn't shipping until 14 September (6th for the low end), and the desktop version shows a ship date in November. Apple have plenty of time.
i don't know, but i am not sure about this Intel thing yet!:mad:
If you really had your heart set on the PowerBook G5 form factor, the Tadpole Bullfrogs (http://www.tadpole.com/products/notebooks.asp) come pretty close. SPARC is fairly unusual, the other kids on the street probably won't have them.
callme
Mar 29, 01:03 PM
I use both.... and all I can say is "CUT and paste". Windows has had it for years, OS X SL doesn't. Same with window snap.
I love OS X, but, like with a lot of Apple products, its the "little things" that matter...
Both are great operating systems, and I will continue to use both since I cannot run Visual Studio on Mac, or XCode on Windows... :)
It does have CUT and Paste.
Command-X = Cut
Command-P = Paste
Command-C = Copy
I love OS X, but, like with a lot of Apple products, its the "little things" that matter...
Both are great operating systems, and I will continue to use both since I cannot run Visual Studio on Mac, or XCode on Windows... :)
It does have CUT and Paste.
Command-X = Cut
Command-P = Paste
Command-C = Copy
aristotle
Apr 20, 10:55 AM
What's the problem here? It is stored on "YOUR" device and you have the option to encrypt your backups.
If you are investigated for a crime that you actually committed then it is "YOUR" fault. It is also your choice to carry an iPhone and turn on location services.
I don't see how this affects regular law biding citizens. This information does not leave your phone other than to go to a backup which you can choose to encrypt. This is basically a log file and you can choose to wipe your device and start from scratch instead of restoring from a backup.
Seriously, this rampant paranoia is a mental illness and anyone affected by it should seek professional help. The average person is actually not interesting enough to spy on.
If you are investigated for a crime that you actually committed then it is "YOUR" fault. It is also your choice to carry an iPhone and turn on location services.
I don't see how this affects regular law biding citizens. This information does not leave your phone other than to go to a backup which you can choose to encrypt. This is basically a log file and you can choose to wipe your device and start from scratch instead of restoring from a backup.
Seriously, this rampant paranoia is a mental illness and anyone affected by it should seek professional help. The average person is actually not interesting enough to spy on.
ergle2
Sep 10, 01:41 AM
Please explain - I have no idea what "that" is....
---
Regardless of the tool, however, it is usually much better to let the OS dynamically schedule threads across the cores. Unless the programmer has some reason to try to control this, the alternative is some resources (CPUs) being overcommitted, while other CPUs are idle.
It doesn't matter who has the better tools - it's usually better to let the OS decide microsecond by microsecond how best to schedule the CPUs, than to have the developer make those decisions at edit time.
I've used the SetProcessAffinityMask APIs fairly often, but it's always been for specific test or benchmark situations. I have a hard time thinking of a situation where a general application would want to statically control the scheduler - it's just "bad think" to even try. (Except for those weird-a$$ NUMA Opterons - you can be really scr3wed if you have to go through HyperTransport to get to memory. I check NUMA topology, and use affinity to keep the AMD architecture from killing me.)
I've owned SMP machines in the past and often found it more useful to force CPU affinity of CPU-heavy tasks to a single processor, as Windows 2000 (which was current at the time) by default had a habit of swapping it between chips, resulting in a lot of cache-dirtying. I think it was the load balancing code, but it's been a while now and I don't have those machines handy currently. However, you could see some significant improvement in processing time on some non-parallelizable cpu-bound tasks.
I've no idea if MacOS does this, but at least in the case of Core 2 it shouldn't matter anywhere near as much, as the L2 is fully shared.
---
Regardless of the tool, however, it is usually much better to let the OS dynamically schedule threads across the cores. Unless the programmer has some reason to try to control this, the alternative is some resources (CPUs) being overcommitted, while other CPUs are idle.
It doesn't matter who has the better tools - it's usually better to let the OS decide microsecond by microsecond how best to schedule the CPUs, than to have the developer make those decisions at edit time.
I've used the SetProcessAffinityMask APIs fairly often, but it's always been for specific test or benchmark situations. I have a hard time thinking of a situation where a general application would want to statically control the scheduler - it's just "bad think" to even try. (Except for those weird-a$$ NUMA Opterons - you can be really scr3wed if you have to go through HyperTransport to get to memory. I check NUMA topology, and use affinity to keep the AMD architecture from killing me.)
I've owned SMP machines in the past and often found it more useful to force CPU affinity of CPU-heavy tasks to a single processor, as Windows 2000 (which was current at the time) by default had a habit of swapping it between chips, resulting in a lot of cache-dirtying. I think it was the load balancing code, but it's been a while now and I don't have those machines handy currently. However, you could see some significant improvement in processing time on some non-parallelizable cpu-bound tasks.
I've no idea if MacOS does this, but at least in the case of Core 2 it shouldn't matter anywhere near as much, as the L2 is fully shared.
Lara F
Apr 16, 01:13 PM
Are you also avoiding how I said it's too difficult for you to carry around an inch long adapter?
Is it "difficult" to carry an adaptor? Of course not (weight and size wise).
But in real life, you run into situations where you don't have it on hand. Like the noon conference at my residency program where we had problems with the laptop on which an attending was to give a presentation. One of the other residents had a MBP and volunteered its use, but...no DP adaptor to connect to the projector. I can only imagine how many times that scenario must occur each day at businesses, etc.
It's a poor solution compared to having USB 3 built in.
Is it "difficult" to carry an adaptor? Of course not (weight and size wise).
But in real life, you run into situations where you don't have it on hand. Like the noon conference at my residency program where we had problems with the laptop on which an attending was to give a presentation. One of the other residents had a MBP and volunteered its use, but...no DP adaptor to connect to the projector. I can only imagine how many times that scenario must occur each day at businesses, etc.
It's a poor solution compared to having USB 3 built in.
wazgilbert
Apr 28, 04:58 PM
Please don't fight gentleman...
I really thought all the CCE CFCC AACE PMP PMI ZGFHABZZZ letters where a joke... What does it all meeeeeeannn?? :eek: :eek:
Yes it's all willy-waving, which was in fact my point.
and to Mr Winters - you haven't met me before, that comment you refer to isn't one of mine. Also it's wise to be careful who you try to belittle with 'boy' references, you have no idea who I am or how experienced or qualified I am compared to you.
As ever, if you're new here, don't try to impress (or troll) by waving experience or qualification around to justify your opinion. We all know MS isn't dead when making 5.23 BILLION profits, hell, we all know that businesses do not ever need to make a profit. To stay in business, all one has to do is make "black zero"; as after all, pay all your costs, offset against depreciation and secure investment and then what do you need profit for? to pay the taxman? no fun there - usually it's to keep shareholders happy, end of.
I really thought all the CCE CFCC AACE PMP PMI ZGFHABZZZ letters where a joke... What does it all meeeeeeannn?? :eek: :eek:
Yes it's all willy-waving, which was in fact my point.
and to Mr Winters - you haven't met me before, that comment you refer to isn't one of mine. Also it's wise to be careful who you try to belittle with 'boy' references, you have no idea who I am or how experienced or qualified I am compared to you.
As ever, if you're new here, don't try to impress (or troll) by waving experience or qualification around to justify your opinion. We all know MS isn't dead when making 5.23 BILLION profits, hell, we all know that businesses do not ever need to make a profit. To stay in business, all one has to do is make "black zero"; as after all, pay all your costs, offset against depreciation and secure investment and then what do you need profit for? to pay the taxman? no fun there - usually it's to keep shareholders happy, end of.
valexa
Apr 20, 10:47 AM
Is the Program to read it Mac only or is there a PC version??
http://petewarden.github.com/iPhoneTracker/#4
A Mac is a Personal Computer (PC), so is a desktop running some Linux flavor.
http://petewarden.github.com/iPhoneTracker/#4
A Mac is a Personal Computer (PC), so is a desktop running some Linux flavor.
Lesser Evets
Apr 30, 02:13 PM
:eek: How in the world can you make that statement? My 50gb Blu-Ray discs would disagree with you.
I understand where you are coming from. With your feet planted in set in concrete, unable to fathom future developments based on the experimental or high-end tech of the day, the Blu-Ray seems endlessly of value. Much like the tape reels of the 60s.
The BluRay is going away for one very specific reason: mechanical. By 2016 the flash memory chips for 50gb will probably be so everyday and cheap that bulky, mechanical BluRay will seem awkward. By 2019 I'd bet you can store several times more than a BluRay on medium-priced thumb-drive.
Proof? Look back 6 years when a 1gb thumb-drive was a huge chunk of cash. Look back 10 years when a 512MB thumb-drive was almost prohibitive to buy. The future is non-mechanical.
I understand where you are coming from. With your feet planted in set in concrete, unable to fathom future developments based on the experimental or high-end tech of the day, the Blu-Ray seems endlessly of value. Much like the tape reels of the 60s.
The BluRay is going away for one very specific reason: mechanical. By 2016 the flash memory chips for 50gb will probably be so everyday and cheap that bulky, mechanical BluRay will seem awkward. By 2019 I'd bet you can store several times more than a BluRay on medium-priced thumb-drive.
Proof? Look back 6 years when a 1gb thumb-drive was a huge chunk of cash. Look back 10 years when a 512MB thumb-drive was almost prohibitive to buy. The future is non-mechanical.
BobbyDigital
Sep 13, 11:26 PM
touch screen dialing sucks, not being able to feel buttons is actually a big deal, even though most numbers are dialed through contacts list.
Very true... I wish there was a way to make a touchscreen have a tactile feel... If there was a way, I'm sure Apple would be the one to do it.
Very true... I wish there was a way to make a touchscreen have a tactile feel... If there was a way, I'm sure Apple would be the one to do it.
clintob
Oct 13, 12:25 AM
I really can't believe some of the posts that have been made here.
To suggest that the people of Africa deserve to be wiped out by aids as they haven't evolved or kept up with the rest of the world is beyond contempt. I want to say something else but I'm just totally lost for words by your comments.
Yet another person who apparently either does not know how to read, or chooses to only read a portion of a discussion...
Nobody in their right mind would ever say that anyone deserves to be wiped out by a disease because their lifestyle and culture are different. That's a completely asinine and foolish line of reasoning. If you read closely, you'd see that the discussion was over (1) whether it is our place to impose our will, our culture, and our system of education on a society that has opposed that very idea all along, and (2) whether that imposition, if it were even possible, would solve the problem, or if the problem is instead more deeply rooted in that culture as a whole and is beyond repair by education and contraception.
It's a perfectly valid, intelligent, and reasonable discussion. It has nothing to do with approving of genocide or allowing the spread of disease. It's far more important than that.
I notice no one has commented on the Pope and the Catholic Church forbidding the use of condoms and the effect that has on spreading infection even further.
Oh boy... the Catholic Church is WAY too easy of a target. We should probably leave that one alone.
To suggest that the people of Africa deserve to be wiped out by aids as they haven't evolved or kept up with the rest of the world is beyond contempt. I want to say something else but I'm just totally lost for words by your comments.
Yet another person who apparently either does not know how to read, or chooses to only read a portion of a discussion...
Nobody in their right mind would ever say that anyone deserves to be wiped out by a disease because their lifestyle and culture are different. That's a completely asinine and foolish line of reasoning. If you read closely, you'd see that the discussion was over (1) whether it is our place to impose our will, our culture, and our system of education on a society that has opposed that very idea all along, and (2) whether that imposition, if it were even possible, would solve the problem, or if the problem is instead more deeply rooted in that culture as a whole and is beyond repair by education and contraception.
It's a perfectly valid, intelligent, and reasonable discussion. It has nothing to do with approving of genocide or allowing the spread of disease. It's far more important than that.
I notice no one has commented on the Pope and the Catholic Church forbidding the use of condoms and the effect that has on spreading infection even further.
Oh boy... the Catholic Church is WAY too easy of a target. We should probably leave that one alone.
Dezinformatsiya
Jan 16, 05:28 PM
Sophos has quite a low detection rate in comparison to some others in my experience, but it's a solid AV, and one can't fault what's free.
iMacZealot
Sep 17, 08:29 PM
(oops, double clicked submit)
KingCrimson
Apr 30, 04:44 PM
If you look closely though, Microsoft made LESS in revenue ($16billion to Apple's 20billion) but almost equally matches Apple in profit (5.3 billion to Apple's ~6billion). All things equal, Microsoft is still a better company in terms of profitability range due to their significant lower revenue but a close call on profit standards.
That's quite a spin. Almost a pure software company SHOULD have higher profit margins to a 50/50 hardware/software company. The fact is AAPL stock is so high because investors like that AAPL has many profit engines and a good history of bringing new ones online every year. MSFT has not had a real hit in forever.
That's quite a spin. Almost a pure software company SHOULD have higher profit margins to a 50/50 hardware/software company. The fact is AAPL stock is so high because investors like that AAPL has many profit engines and a good history of bringing new ones online every year. MSFT has not had a real hit in forever.