Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:05 AM
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Nuck81
Dec 7, 11:42 PM
would those that have played this game reccomend getting it? or are there too many cons (standard cars, multiple versions of one car, bad AI in racing, bad physics in damage esp with standard, etc) that would lead to buyers remorse?
Keep in mind, I have played quite abit of Forza, but now have a PS3 and want agood racing sim but just keep hearing bad things about this game (largely being an incomplete game)
Standard cars- You can't tell the difference on the track, you can't tell the difference on the way they drive, you can't tell the difference on replays, You can only tell a difference in that there is no cockpit mode (most people drive hood or bumper cam) or in photo mode which you use a few times and then never look do it again.
Multiple versions of one car- Yes there are a lot of Skylines, but with 1,000 cars are you going to run out of different rides? Plus there are a lot of rare Gems. The Chaparral 2J, Tommy Karai ZZII, Tank Car, I can keep going.
Bad AI- Yes sir, the AI does suck pretty bad.
Bad Physics in damage- Forza's canned animation damage is better? I'm a level 26 and my cars bend, dent, deform, get tire donuts from rubbing other cars, and lose hoods and doors. The standard cars don't lose parts, but they dent, deform, and get dirty.
The game is a blast and very addicting. No buyers remorse will be had, unless you have a preconceived negative opinion about the game to begin with.
Keep in mind, I have played quite abit of Forza, but now have a PS3 and want agood racing sim but just keep hearing bad things about this game (largely being an incomplete game)
Standard cars- You can't tell the difference on the track, you can't tell the difference on the way they drive, you can't tell the difference on replays, You can only tell a difference in that there is no cockpit mode (most people drive hood or bumper cam) or in photo mode which you use a few times and then never look do it again.
Multiple versions of one car- Yes there are a lot of Skylines, but with 1,000 cars are you going to run out of different rides? Plus there are a lot of rare Gems. The Chaparral 2J, Tommy Karai ZZII, Tank Car, I can keep going.
Bad AI- Yes sir, the AI does suck pretty bad.
Bad Physics in damage- Forza's canned animation damage is better? I'm a level 26 and my cars bend, dent, deform, get tire donuts from rubbing other cars, and lose hoods and doors. The standard cars don't lose parts, but they dent, deform, and get dirty.
The game is a blast and very addicting. No buyers remorse will be had, unless you have a preconceived negative opinion about the game to begin with.
Phobophobia
Jul 20, 01:24 PM
More like $13,950
:rolleyes:
You're both wrong. The price is infinite because it doesn't exist, and yet there is demand. ;)
:rolleyes:
You're both wrong. The price is infinite because it doesn't exist, and yet there is demand. ;)
JS77
Apr 10, 03:28 AM
wow. You'd think a fcp users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
+1,000,000
+1,000,000
Hallivand
Mar 25, 10:34 PM
Since the release of Leopard, the subsequent releases haven't had the wow factor of before.
Just what I think anyway.
Just what I think anyway.
iJon
Apr 10, 09:30 AM
I highly doubt all these rumors are BS. My friend who is attending NAB mentioned to me weeks ago that a friend running a booth said that Apple had schedule way more training sessions then previous years. This was all mentioned to him before all the rumors surfaced here on this site.
Considering Final Cut hasn't been updated in years I would say it's very easy to believe a new version is coming out.
This is a little more out there but my friend has a theory that Apple has let Kevin Smith use the new Final Cut to cut and make his new film that is coming it. The importance of this is that he feels movie making is going the way of music making these days. He believes anything under 20 million is going to be funded independently, not released via movie studios and will sell the movies directly to the theaters.
He feels only the big blockbuster movies like Transformers and stuff will be left the studios, much like many musicians are skipping the record companies and making and releasing music themselves.
Like I said, the Kevin Smith idea he had is just a theory he has, not a rumor. The Final Cut rumors are spot on and if I was a betting man I would expect to see a new version demoed next week.
Considering Final Cut hasn't been updated in years I would say it's very easy to believe a new version is coming out.
This is a little more out there but my friend has a theory that Apple has let Kevin Smith use the new Final Cut to cut and make his new film that is coming it. The importance of this is that he feels movie making is going the way of music making these days. He believes anything under 20 million is going to be funded independently, not released via movie studios and will sell the movies directly to the theaters.
He feels only the big blockbuster movies like Transformers and stuff will be left the studios, much like many musicians are skipping the record companies and making and releasing music themselves.
Like I said, the Kevin Smith idea he had is just a theory he has, not a rumor. The Final Cut rumors are spot on and if I was a betting man I would expect to see a new version demoed next week.
Mundy
Sep 13, 09:38 AM
Are these processors 32 or 64 bit? I told one of my PC-lovin' IT guys about the 8 core Mac this morning and he said, "32 bit processors are ancient technology no matter how many you stuff into a box, but I guess they are OK for entertainment computers." :rolleyes:
Clovertown is a 64-bit CPU.
Ask your PC-loving IT guy if he uses Windows XP64 and more than 4 gigabytes of RAM. If not, then 32-bit processors are apparently okay for him, too.
Clovertown is a 64-bit CPU.
Ask your PC-loving IT guy if he uses Windows XP64 and more than 4 gigabytes of RAM. If not, then 32-bit processors are apparently okay for him, too.
braddouglass
Apr 6, 12:46 PM
Rev D. has no overheating issues. My CPU doesn't go over 70�C when watching 1080p Flash video in fullscreen. The fan sometimes kicks in but it's still very comfortable to use on your lap, since it's barely even warm. Older MBAs suffered from overheating, that is true.
Shouldn't the flash HD have a significant role in overheating? I would think with the Flash HD with no moving parts it would be hard to over heat unless you sit there blocking the fan the whole time. :confused:
Shouldn't the flash HD have a significant role in overheating? I would think with the Flash HD with no moving parts it would be hard to over heat unless you sit there blocking the fan the whole time. :confused:
Magrathea
Apr 6, 11:15 PM
Youre aware the newest mbp (high end) 15, and 17 haveva 1gb graphics memory, right?
Yes but not Nvidia so I don't think they can use the CUDA think. correct my if I'm wrong where PP gurus.
Yes but not Nvidia so I don't think they can use the CUDA think. correct my if I'm wrong where PP gurus.
gnasher729
Apr 27, 08:35 AM
A "bug" right? ;)
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
There was never anything to worry about. However, paranoia strikes, everyone goes mad without any reason, so what is Apple supposed to do? Note that the same paranoia has been striking against Windows phones as well now (look at theregister.com), with dozens and dozens of clueless idiots complaining that Windows is even worse than Apple, or equally bad as Apple, or almost as bad as Apple, based on the fact that Windows is using the same crowd sourcing that Apple (and Google) uses, and a general misunderstanding of what is actually happening.
The only actual _real_ privacy problem that I have seen so far is that Google's database (they have a database of WiFi locations, just as Apple, Windows, Skyhook, and I think Nokia) is not secured enough and lets anyone get access to lookup the location of any WiFi base station (my home network is located within about 100 meters or about 20 homes; the centre of the circle is quite exactly where I live). Which means if for some reason you want to go into hiding, you better don't take your WiFi router with you. (People got all paranoid about the iPhone, but anyone trying to find you first has to find your iPhone, and usually that means they've found you as well, whether there is any data on the phone or not). This problem with Google's database affects _anyone_ with a WiFi router in the whole world, whether they have any phone or not.
How much is it costing me to send the data to apple so they can crowdsource locations for everyone? I doubt AT&T isn't counting this towards data use.
Apple sends this preferably over WiFi, in which case it costs you almost nothing. But you have benefits: Your GPS works immediately when turned on instead of taking up to several minutes (like the bloody TomTom in my car does, which is pretty annoying at times), and you can find yourself quite precisely on a map in the middle of London where GPS just doesn't work because of all the tall buildings; New Yorkers probably appreciate it just as much.
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
There was never anything to worry about. However, paranoia strikes, everyone goes mad without any reason, so what is Apple supposed to do? Note that the same paranoia has been striking against Windows phones as well now (look at theregister.com), with dozens and dozens of clueless idiots complaining that Windows is even worse than Apple, or equally bad as Apple, or almost as bad as Apple, based on the fact that Windows is using the same crowd sourcing that Apple (and Google) uses, and a general misunderstanding of what is actually happening.
The only actual _real_ privacy problem that I have seen so far is that Google's database (they have a database of WiFi locations, just as Apple, Windows, Skyhook, and I think Nokia) is not secured enough and lets anyone get access to lookup the location of any WiFi base station (my home network is located within about 100 meters or about 20 homes; the centre of the circle is quite exactly where I live). Which means if for some reason you want to go into hiding, you better don't take your WiFi router with you. (People got all paranoid about the iPhone, but anyone trying to find you first has to find your iPhone, and usually that means they've found you as well, whether there is any data on the phone or not). This problem with Google's database affects _anyone_ with a WiFi router in the whole world, whether they have any phone or not.
How much is it costing me to send the data to apple so they can crowdsource locations for everyone? I doubt AT&T isn't counting this towards data use.
Apple sends this preferably over WiFi, in which case it costs you almost nothing. But you have benefits: Your GPS works immediately when turned on instead of taking up to several minutes (like the bloody TomTom in my car does, which is pretty annoying at times), and you can find yourself quite precisely on a map in the middle of London where GPS just doesn't work because of all the tall buildings; New Yorkers probably appreciate it just as much.
iMeowbot
Sep 19, 08:43 AM
All you people who keep whining about "But I want 64 bit!!!" need to step back and think about what possible benefit a 64-bit system will give you. Those of you who need to address more than 4 gigs of RAM are excused. The rest of you, tell me WHY you need 64-bit computing.
There is a general unease about the AMD64 instruction set. We are already seeing a few programs that only run on Intel Macs. What's to stop developers from ignoring the x86 target in new software, especially on the high end, given the short sales cycle of x86-only Macs? The Mac Pro didn't even have a 32-bit version.
There is a general unease about the AMD64 instruction set. We are already seeing a few programs that only run on Intel Macs. What's to stop developers from ignoring the x86 target in new software, especially on the high end, given the short sales cycle of x86-only Macs? The Mac Pro didn't even have a 32-bit version.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 04:10 AM
Why is most straight people assume that gay people do all those? I'm gay and I don't do a thing in that article. I know.. I'm boring but hey that's not the point.
Mots from The World God Only
the world god only knows 2nd
The World God Only Knows.
Stream the latest episode
The World God Only Knows II
The anime is about a guy named
But when the so-called
andrewfee
Aug 26, 05:38 AM
Apple support in the UK is terrible. :( When I had an iMac G5 (Rev.A) I had no end of problems and was without the machine for at least 2-3 months. (which actually cost me some work, as I had just started to do some web design for a local business)
After 5 faults (the last two being it coming back from repair with a damaged screen and a dead hard drive) I eventually convinced them to replace it, but rather than getting another iMac, I figured I'd go for a "safe" option and go for a Rev.D Powerbook as I figured they would have sorted out all the faults. Now, to be fair, I did get a maxed out 17" one as compensation (although they screwed that up and I had to get the RAM sent out separately and fit it myself) but I'd rather have had a perfectly working iMac.
Not much with the Powerbook either though - I had a dead sound board within a couple of weeks of owning it (which meant I was without it for a week or so) and I've now been without the proper use of it for two months again. When it came back from service the first time after being "fixed" it had this:
http://static.flickr.com/61/200198290_8368452c2c.jpg
I've had an iSkin cover on it from day one, so it couldn't have been caused by me (see the next pic) and other than a hairline scratch next to the trackpad (you can't even see it in the photo) it was perfect - it hasn't even been out of my house. Not the first scratched machine I've had either. (if I remember correctly, the first Powerbook was scratched out of the box)
The screen brightness wasn't fixed either, they just disabled my calibrated profile, which gets back maybe 5cd/m2:
http://static.flickr.com/64/200198281_9d631b8680.jpg
As you can see, it used to be quite good:
http://static.flickr.com/56/130208615_cb043ed264.jpg
They replaced the main logic board, but the buzzing that started (and it makes "chirping" noises when running iMovie) is still there.
Funnily enough, as soon as I called to complain, they got the part in the next day (or so they claim) and have said I should have it back next week. I've been told to call up again next Thursday - if I have it back (and working!) by then, I'll be entitled to some kind of compensation, if not, then they'll sort out a replacement machine.
For �280 I'm appalled at the level of service.
I've had far more downtime since switching to a Mac than any other computer - back when I had a store-bought PC years ago from somewhere local, I was without it maybe for a week over a period of several years. When I started building my own machines (at least 5/6 years ago now) that was down to a matter of days. (I could either pick up the parts locally the same day, or order online with next-day shipping)
Since buying the first iMac G5 (got one the day they were available, if I remember correctly) it must have been at least 4-6 months I've been without my computer now. (right now I'm now back to using an old PC I've built from spare parts - but there are at least two parts on their way out - keeps crashing and sometimes refuses to boot, but I'm not going to be buying more hardware for it, unless Apple want to pay the bill)
It probably wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the fact that I'm disabled, and my only real contact with the "outside world" and friends is via the internet.
I absolutely love the OS, and Apple's software, and the hardware is fantastic when it works, but I'm having doubts as to whether my next machine will be from them or not. (realistically, I don't think I could drop OSX for Windows, but I can't believe how unreliable these things are)
At least they're not as bad as Samsung though - they had my two-month-old LCD HDTV in repair for over four months (the store said I had to wait for the repair to be done and get them the TV back to get a refund) which left me with a 14" Portable CRT during that time, and when I eventually did get it back, it went up in smoke as soon as I plugged it in and turned it on - literally! :eek:
After 5 faults (the last two being it coming back from repair with a damaged screen and a dead hard drive) I eventually convinced them to replace it, but rather than getting another iMac, I figured I'd go for a "safe" option and go for a Rev.D Powerbook as I figured they would have sorted out all the faults. Now, to be fair, I did get a maxed out 17" one as compensation (although they screwed that up and I had to get the RAM sent out separately and fit it myself) but I'd rather have had a perfectly working iMac.
Not much with the Powerbook either though - I had a dead sound board within a couple of weeks of owning it (which meant I was without it for a week or so) and I've now been without the proper use of it for two months again. When it came back from service the first time after being "fixed" it had this:
http://static.flickr.com/61/200198290_8368452c2c.jpg
I've had an iSkin cover on it from day one, so it couldn't have been caused by me (see the next pic) and other than a hairline scratch next to the trackpad (you can't even see it in the photo) it was perfect - it hasn't even been out of my house. Not the first scratched machine I've had either. (if I remember correctly, the first Powerbook was scratched out of the box)
The screen brightness wasn't fixed either, they just disabled my calibrated profile, which gets back maybe 5cd/m2:
http://static.flickr.com/64/200198281_9d631b8680.jpg
As you can see, it used to be quite good:
http://static.flickr.com/56/130208615_cb043ed264.jpg
They replaced the main logic board, but the buzzing that started (and it makes "chirping" noises when running iMovie) is still there.
Funnily enough, as soon as I called to complain, they got the part in the next day (or so they claim) and have said I should have it back next week. I've been told to call up again next Thursday - if I have it back (and working!) by then, I'll be entitled to some kind of compensation, if not, then they'll sort out a replacement machine.
For �280 I'm appalled at the level of service.
I've had far more downtime since switching to a Mac than any other computer - back when I had a store-bought PC years ago from somewhere local, I was without it maybe for a week over a period of several years. When I started building my own machines (at least 5/6 years ago now) that was down to a matter of days. (I could either pick up the parts locally the same day, or order online with next-day shipping)
Since buying the first iMac G5 (got one the day they were available, if I remember correctly) it must have been at least 4-6 months I've been without my computer now. (right now I'm now back to using an old PC I've built from spare parts - but there are at least two parts on their way out - keeps crashing and sometimes refuses to boot, but I'm not going to be buying more hardware for it, unless Apple want to pay the bill)
It probably wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the fact that I'm disabled, and my only real contact with the "outside world" and friends is via the internet.
I absolutely love the OS, and Apple's software, and the hardware is fantastic when it works, but I'm having doubts as to whether my next machine will be from them or not. (realistically, I don't think I could drop OSX for Windows, but I can't believe how unreliable these things are)
At least they're not as bad as Samsung though - they had my two-month-old LCD HDTV in repair for over four months (the store said I had to wait for the repair to be done and get them the TV back to get a refund) which left me with a 14" Portable CRT during that time, and when I eventually did get it back, it went up in smoke as soon as I plugged it in and turned it on - literally! :eek:
kupua
Nov 29, 12:19 AM
No way Jose...hahahahahahahaha
How much did they invest in the development in the iPod. Yah right just as I though, zip. If MS is that stupid, it just shows what leverage they have on the market for their Zune
How much did they invest in the development in the iPod. Yah right just as I though, zip. If MS is that stupid, it just shows what leverage they have on the market for their Zune
qtx43
Mar 31, 05:11 PM
That was a hoot changing the search to Bing. Only thing gutsier would be to somehow replace every admob ad to a competitor.
I wouldn't leave Google completely blameless here. They knew who they were dealing with. They need eyeballs to sell (ad business) so they made their bed. Same reason why the software marketplace on android sucks, they designed it for their bottom line (eyeballs). They aren't making a product for people to use, they're making a channel to deliver a product (eyeballs) to their customers (advertisers).Except Google makes a big deal about how they support open source and aren't evil (presumably other profit seeking corporations are evil). And the open source fanatics lap it up. Take a look over at Groklaw, for example, and it's all a big conspiracy to discredit Google. So, I would change "[not] completely blameless" to "is completely hypocritical", then you'd be right on. I think Free and Open Source is great for many things, and proprietary works too, just don't blow smoke up my butt and tell me it's a rim job.
I wouldn't leave Google completely blameless here. They knew who they were dealing with. They need eyeballs to sell (ad business) so they made their bed. Same reason why the software marketplace on android sucks, they designed it for their bottom line (eyeballs). They aren't making a product for people to use, they're making a channel to deliver a product (eyeballs) to their customers (advertisers).Except Google makes a big deal about how they support open source and aren't evil (presumably other profit seeking corporations are evil). And the open source fanatics lap it up. Take a look over at Groklaw, for example, and it's all a big conspiracy to discredit Google. So, I would change "[not] completely blameless" to "is completely hypocritical", then you'd be right on. I think Free and Open Source is great for many things, and proprietary works too, just don't blow smoke up my butt and tell me it's a rim job.
barkomatic
Mar 31, 04:00 PM
not when Google blocks handset makers from releasing innovations that would be good for consumers but bad for google. they may have tried to do such strong-arming -- a geo-services company claims it was shut-out by the makers due to google not wanting makers to license optional alternatives to google services.
From the sounds of it, Google is trying to prevent the release of phones that run poorly and are *bad* for consumers. Google is a private company and they can do what they want--just like Apple. Handset makers can go back to their lousy proprietary mobile operating systems--but I really doubt they will. This is a win for consumers in the long run.
It's a temporary lose for those who like to tinker though.
From the sounds of it, Google is trying to prevent the release of phones that run poorly and are *bad* for consumers. Google is a private company and they can do what they want--just like Apple. Handset makers can go back to their lousy proprietary mobile operating systems--but I really doubt they will. This is a win for consumers in the long run.
It's a temporary lose for those who like to tinker though.
iliketyla
Mar 31, 08:46 PM
This is where the Android "community" is going to split.
The ones we've heard from today don't give a crap about "open" or "closed" or Google or anything else other than the fact that Android is not Apple and is stealing some sales from Apple. They'll defend whatever Google does, because all they want is a platform that's not by Apple to take over the mobile space.
The true believers in the "open" propaganda, as ridiculous as it is and as untrue as it's always been, are probably still in a state of shock. By tomorrow they'll split into two warring camps. One will defend everything Google does because they perceive—wrongly of course—that Android is still in some indefinable way more open than iOS, and they'll blow that little invisible kernel of "openness" up until that's all they can see.
The other camp will be viciously angry at Google's betrayal of the True Religion™ and will be flailing around for some other messiah to deliver them from the "Walled Garden" of Apple and now, Android. These are the people who were saying the other day that "Motorola could rot" with their own OS.
Any suggestions on who the zealots will turn to in their hour of despair? I honestly can't think of a candidate, but then I'm not nuts—at least not that way.
Yeah! That's what'll happen!
Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.
To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.
To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.
And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.
Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
The ones we've heard from today don't give a crap about "open" or "closed" or Google or anything else other than the fact that Android is not Apple and is stealing some sales from Apple. They'll defend whatever Google does, because all they want is a platform that's not by Apple to take over the mobile space.
The true believers in the "open" propaganda, as ridiculous as it is and as untrue as it's always been, are probably still in a state of shock. By tomorrow they'll split into two warring camps. One will defend everything Google does because they perceive—wrongly of course—that Android is still in some indefinable way more open than iOS, and they'll blow that little invisible kernel of "openness" up until that's all they can see.
The other camp will be viciously angry at Google's betrayal of the True Religion™ and will be flailing around for some other messiah to deliver them from the "Walled Garden" of Apple and now, Android. These are the people who were saying the other day that "Motorola could rot" with their own OS.
Any suggestions on who the zealots will turn to in their hour of despair? I honestly can't think of a candidate, but then I'm not nuts—at least not that way.
Yeah! That's what'll happen!
Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.
To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.
To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.
And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.
Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
jlewis2k1
Aug 11, 11:41 AM
am i the only one here that really thinks this is just a pathetic to even think apple is coming out with a phone? Personally, I can not see apple coming out with one. Honestly, I'm quite sick of hearing all of these posts about potential iPhone stuff. i just dont believe it would happen.
Stridder44
Jul 20, 02:27 PM
I disagree. I think Apple will use Core 2 Duo (Conroe) in the iMac, and Merom in the MBP. The iMac could hold a G5, why not Conroe?
On top of that, you'll notice that a 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $70 less than the 1.83 GHz Yonah that's in the iMac now, $70 less than a 2 GHz Merom, and $200 less than a 2.16 GHz Merom, increasing Apple's profit margins on the iMac considerably or allowing a price drop- plus they can advertise it as a desktop processor.
In fact, even if Conroe was too hot (which I highly doubt, since the iMac had a G5), a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz still saves $70 over a 2 GHz Merom.
But what about the MacBook!! *weeps*
On top of that, you'll notice that a 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $70 less than the 1.83 GHz Yonah that's in the iMac now, $70 less than a 2 GHz Merom, and $200 less than a 2.16 GHz Merom, increasing Apple's profit margins on the iMac considerably or allowing a price drop- plus they can advertise it as a desktop processor.
In fact, even if Conroe was too hot (which I highly doubt, since the iMac had a G5), a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz still saves $70 over a 2 GHz Merom.
But what about the MacBook!! *weeps*
KnightWRX
Apr 6, 10:58 AM
What do you intend to do on an Air that will require what little extra power the nvidia gfx offers over Intel. You sure as hell can't game with it.
You sure as hell can.
You sure as hell can.
BWhaler
Jul 14, 03:35 PM
Since apple is part of the Blu Ray consortium wouldn't you think they will use blu ray only?
Not a chance in the near future. Blu Ray and Sony are in utter shambles right now.
Not a chance in the near future. Blu Ray and Sony are in utter shambles right now.
absynth
Apr 11, 01:34 PM
who cares about iphone 5, where's my white iphone4 dammit! :mad:
georgee2face
Mar 22, 02:07 PM
My apologies to the"greens", but these tablets ( and my ipad) will NEVER be a true enterprise product with out some sort of native printing and a FIRST CLASS STYLUS/WRITING APPS. PERIOD.
I use mine in two different business, but it takes drop box, print work-arounds and crude writing apps to use it for business.
I enjoy it for all the other reasosns, but business goes to my MAC AIR.
I use mine in two different business, but it takes drop box, print work-arounds and crude writing apps to use it for business.
I enjoy it for all the other reasosns, but business goes to my MAC AIR.
gerrycurl
Jul 14, 05:59 PM
the question still remains--will the powermacs be able to use standard, off the shelf, pc video cards?
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
