![happy birthday pics. [attachment1:3bnssd3m]Happy.](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tMzWcpaqFxhtc-ioI7LnCBZRWz1IPCZBcr4hgbVOfYMGOOgFAFfuf-ubrVzoK6yyT2Sy46zn7x5Vl5Hb0-FcRx06_2Cb5F1P2VAsW0Y77DICCV6ZWqCo6wTNOr3K8B-bgLmjcpnXQuH1m4BPr_j02jGBheDTh1NqDbhrk-GnqFLg-pC_EpFenoX60ZrAsGpTjv=s0-d "[attachment1:3bnssd3m]Happy.")
lordonuthin
May 11, 12:26 AM
yeah i'm sorry to hear no bigadv units for that monster. yeah reinstalling fah might help. let us know how it goes
got a big one going now.
got a big one going now.
KnightWRX
Apr 29, 07:44 PM
So KDE4 is a bad 90s Linux Window Manager?
As far as the look goes ? Yes. As far as the architecture behind it goes ? No (gone is the fake transluscency hacks of Rasterman and Enlightenment and in are the compositing extensions). Context man, I see your break from MacRumors didn't teach you to stick to context. :rolleyes:
As far as the look goes ? Yes. As far as the architecture behind it goes ? No (gone is the fake transluscency hacks of Rasterman and Enlightenment and in are the compositing extensions). Context man, I see your break from MacRumors didn't teach you to stick to context. :rolleyes:
snberk103
Apr 13, 12:53 PM
When was the last time a European or Japanese plane were hijacked before 9/11? That's an ambiguous statistic. Nobody was hijacking planes before and nobody's hijacked planes since.
1980s - Aer Ligus Dublin - London; Air France Frankfurt - Paris; Rio Airways Killen, Texas - Dallas, Texas; TWA Athens - Beirut; Egypt Air Athens - Cairo; Malev Hungarian Airlines Prague - ?? ;
1990s - Lufthansa Frankfort - Cairo; FedEx flight Memphis - ??; Air Malta Malta - Turkey; All Nippon (domestic flight);
I've only listed those flights that departed from a European (and one Japanese) airport.... not European airlines that departed from non-European airports. After 9/11 there were still a number of hijackings, but the closest they come to European departure points are Nicosia, and Tirana. Though there was one from a Mexican Airport and one from a Caribbean airport. The Mexican hijacking was by a man threatening a bomb, but I don't think they actually found one.
Nobody hijacks Israeli planes either, and they're subject to much more terrorist attention than we are.
I'm not sure of your point. But the Israelis use a different screening model, plus they need to look after only a handful of airports domestically. At airports internationally they screen passengers themselves after the local authorities have screened the passengers.... so everybody gets screened twice, and in two different ways.
In fact, TSA has twice failed to stop a bomber on a plane since 9/11. Both the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber were stopped by passengers.
TSA's measures aren't working, but a measure of common sense can easily mitigate the damage of someone smuggling a boxcutter or knife on to a plane.
And how may people have the TSA found? And how many people have not even bothered to try, because they were afraid of getting caught?
1980s - Aer Ligus Dublin - London; Air France Frankfurt - Paris; Rio Airways Killen, Texas - Dallas, Texas; TWA Athens - Beirut; Egypt Air Athens - Cairo; Malev Hungarian Airlines Prague - ?? ;
1990s - Lufthansa Frankfort - Cairo; FedEx flight Memphis - ??; Air Malta Malta - Turkey; All Nippon (domestic flight);
I've only listed those flights that departed from a European (and one Japanese) airport.... not European airlines that departed from non-European airports. After 9/11 there were still a number of hijackings, but the closest they come to European departure points are Nicosia, and Tirana. Though there was one from a Mexican Airport and one from a Caribbean airport. The Mexican hijacking was by a man threatening a bomb, but I don't think they actually found one.
Nobody hijacks Israeli planes either, and they're subject to much more terrorist attention than we are.
I'm not sure of your point. But the Israelis use a different screening model, plus they need to look after only a handful of airports domestically. At airports internationally they screen passengers themselves after the local authorities have screened the passengers.... so everybody gets screened twice, and in two different ways.
In fact, TSA has twice failed to stop a bomber on a plane since 9/11. Both the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber were stopped by passengers.
TSA's measures aren't working, but a measure of common sense can easily mitigate the damage of someone smuggling a boxcutter or knife on to a plane.
And how may people have the TSA found? And how many people have not even bothered to try, because they were afraid of getting caught?
Eraserhead
Apr 16, 04:21 PM
Your only role models should be the ones your personally know.
What if you don't know any role models (e.g. you are poor?)
Your only role models should be the ones your personally know. Teaching "gay history" is more about promoting homosexuality than helping children.
I would presume that "gay history" just means that when you cover Leonardo da Vinci you point out that he was gay.
What if you don't know any role models (e.g. you are poor?)
Your only role models should be the ones your personally know. Teaching "gay history" is more about promoting homosexuality than helping children.
I would presume that "gay history" just means that when you cover Leonardo da Vinci you point out that he was gay.
JeffDM
Oct 3, 11:11 AM
When will this hacking nerd do something REALLY positive and productive to the world?
Last time I heard, his occupation was to break into companies' IPR without any legal permission to do so...not commendable, to say the least.
It's currently the only way to get non-Disney movies onto an iPod and many other similar devices. It's also a way for users to get the videos they've paid for onto media devices that don't have a DVD drive. For the movie industry to say that they have to buy the movie again is completely ludicrous on their part.
His work allowed people to use the media and devices they paid for in the way that they want to use it. I would call that productive.
I know you probably don't agree with it but frankly, I think the movie industry is being too greedy here.
The DMCA changed that, and until it's tested in court anything where encryption is used or even potentially used is not "safe" to reverse engineer in the US.
DVDJon is in the EU, which I don't think has such a law yet. The DMCA only applies to the US. Counterpart laws are in the works.
There might be some trouble if he decides to come to the US. Adobe had some Russian guy arrested when he came to the US for making a program that applied ROT13 to Adobe's "encrypted" files to make them useable.
He's just another guy trying to make a quick buck...
I think that's a bit of an ignorant comment. It's taken him long enough to get around to doing so, so I don't think "quick" applies. He's been breaking encryption systems for maybe ten years now, I'm not sure if he's made any money on it so far.
My knowledge on these areas is pretty slim but would Apple be able to license FairPlay content only or would that open up the risk of other companies creating MP3 players that could read FairPlay content and, hence, compete with the iPod? ...or is that some sore of seperate licensure?
I doubt that licencing the format would have to mean that it allows competing players. The licensing contracts can be very specific such that it allows only encryptors, not decryptors, and be limited to certain circumstances.
Last time I heard, his occupation was to break into companies' IPR without any legal permission to do so...not commendable, to say the least.
It's currently the only way to get non-Disney movies onto an iPod and many other similar devices. It's also a way for users to get the videos they've paid for onto media devices that don't have a DVD drive. For the movie industry to say that they have to buy the movie again is completely ludicrous on their part.
His work allowed people to use the media and devices they paid for in the way that they want to use it. I would call that productive.
I know you probably don't agree with it but frankly, I think the movie industry is being too greedy here.
The DMCA changed that, and until it's tested in court anything where encryption is used or even potentially used is not "safe" to reverse engineer in the US.
DVDJon is in the EU, which I don't think has such a law yet. The DMCA only applies to the US. Counterpart laws are in the works.
There might be some trouble if he decides to come to the US. Adobe had some Russian guy arrested when he came to the US for making a program that applied ROT13 to Adobe's "encrypted" files to make them useable.
He's just another guy trying to make a quick buck...
I think that's a bit of an ignorant comment. It's taken him long enough to get around to doing so, so I don't think "quick" applies. He's been breaking encryption systems for maybe ten years now, I'm not sure if he's made any money on it so far.
My knowledge on these areas is pretty slim but would Apple be able to license FairPlay content only or would that open up the risk of other companies creating MP3 players that could read FairPlay content and, hence, compete with the iPod? ...or is that some sore of seperate licensure?
I doubt that licencing the format would have to mean that it allows competing players. The licensing contracts can be very specific such that it allows only encryptors, not decryptors, and be limited to certain circumstances.
yellow
Apr 13, 10:51 AM
http://www.risikolebensversicherungvergleich.de/logos/asstel_full.jpg
Looks like it should be the name of a cellular company in the US.
"Asstel.. We screw you like no other." :)
Looks like it should be the name of a cellular company in the US.
"Asstel.. We screw you like no other." :)
quigleybc
Oct 3, 01:07 PM
Here are my predictions (hold on to your pocket-protectors):
Steve will enter the stage, the crowd will go wild, and he'll work on quieting them with lines such as, "I'd like to get started; we have a lot of great products I'd like to show you..."
We'll all proceed to connect to MacRumors and complain about how ****** stupid Apple is, yet continue buy every new release of anything they've ever produced.
Ya, that might happen, but last year he brought out the MBP which a pretty big announcement, so I'm hoping for good results again this year.
Like maybe a 12" MPB ? or a normal priced Black MacBook...
Steve will enter the stage, the crowd will go wild, and he'll work on quieting them with lines such as, "I'd like to get started; we have a lot of great products I'd like to show you..."
We'll all proceed to connect to MacRumors and complain about how ****** stupid Apple is, yet continue buy every new release of anything they've ever produced.
Ya, that might happen, but last year he brought out the MBP which a pretty big announcement, so I'm hoping for good results again this year.
Like maybe a 12" MPB ? or a normal priced Black MacBook...
Pigumon
Sep 29, 02:09 AM
Wow, pretty crappy design. Rooms all in a row? What are those, military barracks?
Even the iphone has finally forgone the too simplistic approach of Apple, this house should learn from the iPhone.
Even the iphone has finally forgone the too simplistic approach of Apple, this house should learn from the iPhone.
JML42691
Dec 13, 10:42 AM
Dont underestimate the power of marketing. They might have this LTE/CDMA combo where the LTE is not all that functional but is there only for the publicity. Think about the splash of the FIRST 4G iPhone!
That would seem very un-Apple like, like somebody said earlier in this thread, they wouldn't allow homescreen background images on two of their phones because of performance issues (which can't be more than a fraction of a second), so why would they allow not fully-functioning LTE capabilities. Apple isn't a company that'll do something just so they can say they did it first, look at multitasking, Steve's quote when they announced it was something like, "we were certainly not the first to do it but we were the first to do it right." In Apple's eyes, if it isn't perfect they won't do it.
That would seem very un-Apple like, like somebody said earlier in this thread, they wouldn't allow homescreen background images on two of their phones because of performance issues (which can't be more than a fraction of a second), so why would they allow not fully-functioning LTE capabilities. Apple isn't a company that'll do something just so they can say they did it first, look at multitasking, Steve's quote when they announced it was something like, "we were certainly not the first to do it but we were the first to do it right." In Apple's eyes, if it isn't perfect they won't do it.
linknprk
Apr 5, 03:26 PM
why does macrumors link to the appshopper description of the app instead of the actual apple link?
Seems like a useless middle step
Seems like a useless middle step
twoodcc
Apr 11, 03:23 PM
Mate if you think thats bad, I'n holding out for a Mac mini and there has been no rumors for it! Would love to see a intel i5 :D
yeah i hear ya. an i5 mac mini would be very nice. but again, i doubt it will happen this year, if ever
yeah i hear ya. an i5 mac mini would be very nice. but again, i doubt it will happen this year, if ever
KnightWRX
Apr 27, 06:53 PM
everybody is giving his point of view about why or why not Pro developers should help new ones.)
No one has given a point of view about that. You quite misunderstand what everyone is saying.
As for your code, you still have not really given us a clear indication of at what stage you are now and what isn't working. Now we know you want to do a sort of count down timer. I'm guessing you're trying to make a cooking timer kind of app since you said you were a pastry chef and that was what your first app was based on. Is this correct ? (<-- not a quiz question).
Now, what is not working ? Is the timer getting created ? Is it calling the method identified by the target and selector attributes when the interval you specified ends ? Is it repeating or not repeating (depending on how you set the repeat parameter on it) ?
When a timer repeats, it will simply call back the selector in the target specified.
Does your button that "cancels" it call your cancel method ? What have you done to check this ?
With the little code you posted, and since you haven't provided screenshots of your associations in Interface Builder, these are all pending questions we have that are preventing us from helping you thoroughly. This is not a quiz, these are things we need to know to help you.
So, self refers to my controller.. interesting.
No, self refers to the instance of the object that is executing the currently running code. It is highly context dependant.
Inside a method of your view controller, yes, self refers to your view controller. Inside a method in your view object, self refers to the view object. Inside the NSTimer object, self refers to the NSTimer.
No one has given a point of view about that. You quite misunderstand what everyone is saying.
As for your code, you still have not really given us a clear indication of at what stage you are now and what isn't working. Now we know you want to do a sort of count down timer. I'm guessing you're trying to make a cooking timer kind of app since you said you were a pastry chef and that was what your first app was based on. Is this correct ? (<-- not a quiz question).
Now, what is not working ? Is the timer getting created ? Is it calling the method identified by the target and selector attributes when the interval you specified ends ? Is it repeating or not repeating (depending on how you set the repeat parameter on it) ?
When a timer repeats, it will simply call back the selector in the target specified.
Does your button that "cancels" it call your cancel method ? What have you done to check this ?
With the little code you posted, and since you haven't provided screenshots of your associations in Interface Builder, these are all pending questions we have that are preventing us from helping you thoroughly. This is not a quiz, these are things we need to know to help you.
So, self refers to my controller.. interesting.
No, self refers to the instance of the object that is executing the currently running code. It is highly context dependant.
Inside a method of your view controller, yes, self refers to your view controller. Inside a method in your view object, self refers to the view object. Inside the NSTimer object, self refers to the NSTimer.
Sydde
Apr 9, 07:42 PM
Ohio has a lot of blue collars. They will need about a quarter million to file a referendum on government union busting. They are optimistic, the effort is underway (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700125855/Opponents-of-new-union-law-rally-in-Ohios-capital.html?s_cid=rss-5). I wonder if Thomas Veil will sign this one (with his real name)?
Dagless
Apr 5, 03:31 PM
Hahaha.
Nope.
Nope.
Full of Win
Apr 29, 04:45 PM
I heard microsoft is making some changes to its next OS release too. Apparently the blue screen of death will be a black screen of death in Windows 8.
btw- does anyone know why the current version is named Windows 7? Why 7?
As for Lion, I am looking forward to having the ability to switch to an iOS appearance for apps. It will be nice to organize then like that. The idea has grown on me.
To stay ahead of the 6 in 10.6. When the XBOX 2 was released, the rumor was that it was called the 360, as to put it on equal naming as the Playstation 3. Microsoft did not want to be '2' and them '3', so they added a number that started with 3.
btw- does anyone know why the current version is named Windows 7? Why 7?
As for Lion, I am looking forward to having the ability to switch to an iOS appearance for apps. It will be nice to organize then like that. The idea has grown on me.
To stay ahead of the 6 in 10.6. When the XBOX 2 was released, the rumor was that it was called the 360, as to put it on equal naming as the Playstation 3. Microsoft did not want to be '2' and them '3', so they added a number that started with 3.
Cooknn
Sep 12, 09:20 AM
Perhaps they'll include HD-DVD burners in the new MBP's. :)I figure that's why the new Mac Pro's come with the extra optical drive bay - to accomodate a Blu-Ray / HD-DVD drive when they hit the streets. Then we can burn true HD content (with Dolby Digital EX sound).
-hh
Oct 19, 10:16 AM
The market share (and Princeton report) are favorable news for the Mac platform and for Apple.
But it is interesting to read this from Gartner, in the light that this very same Company is also in the news right now for their "Macs should be made by Dell" splash (actual paper was "Apple Should License the Mac to Dell")
In conjunction with this articles observation that Dell's PC marketshare has been sliding (lost worldwide #1 to HP, etc), along with business reports that aren't rosey on Dell's margins (nor their get well plan, which isn't working), the newsfolk who picked up on Gartner really got their headline wrong. It really should have been IMO:
"Dell sliding bad - needs rescue in form of Mac licence from Apple".
In said report (the other one, not this one) Gartner suggested that 'Apple should concentrate on what it does best - create software - and make use of Dell's production and distribution infrastructure.' In this report, there's not a peep of such 'black clouds on the horizon' for Apple ... must be two different guys in the Gartner shop :)
Quite interesting, since the bottom line right now is that the Mac Pro is known to be less expensive than the Dell equivalent, for what does that suggest about expertise in cutting deals with Intel, and efficiently running production & distrubution?
The reality is that Apple generally contracts out much of their manufacturing, true. However, so does Dell. As such, why should Apple bother to pay to go through Dell? That's called using a "Middle Man" and this intermediate step would increase costs, which would then either lower Apple's unit profits, or force them to raise prices ... which hearkens the 'Macs cost more' paradigm.
This is why Gartner's suggestion seems to be more aimed to help Dell through their current fiscal troubles but does not help Apple in any meaningful way at this time.
Perhaps Apple will need Dell for access to Dell's assemblers, but that would only occur when Apple's total market share gets huge - say exceeds 33%. Barring a Vista-catastrophy, at the current rate of market share growth, we're still more than a year or two away from having to cross that bridge, which ironically gives Michael Dell plenty of time to become more retrospective and apologetic about inflammatory comments he has made of Apple in the past.
-hh
PS: if you look more closely at Apple's 3Q numbers, you'll see that desktop sales were relatively flat: the growth was in laptops.
But it is interesting to read this from Gartner, in the light that this very same Company is also in the news right now for their "Macs should be made by Dell" splash (actual paper was "Apple Should License the Mac to Dell")
In conjunction with this articles observation that Dell's PC marketshare has been sliding (lost worldwide #1 to HP, etc), along with business reports that aren't rosey on Dell's margins (nor their get well plan, which isn't working), the newsfolk who picked up on Gartner really got their headline wrong. It really should have been IMO:
"Dell sliding bad - needs rescue in form of Mac licence from Apple".
In said report (the other one, not this one) Gartner suggested that 'Apple should concentrate on what it does best - create software - and make use of Dell's production and distribution infrastructure.' In this report, there's not a peep of such 'black clouds on the horizon' for Apple ... must be two different guys in the Gartner shop :)
Quite interesting, since the bottom line right now is that the Mac Pro is known to be less expensive than the Dell equivalent, for what does that suggest about expertise in cutting deals with Intel, and efficiently running production & distrubution?
The reality is that Apple generally contracts out much of their manufacturing, true. However, so does Dell. As such, why should Apple bother to pay to go through Dell? That's called using a "Middle Man" and this intermediate step would increase costs, which would then either lower Apple's unit profits, or force them to raise prices ... which hearkens the 'Macs cost more' paradigm.
This is why Gartner's suggestion seems to be more aimed to help Dell through their current fiscal troubles but does not help Apple in any meaningful way at this time.
Perhaps Apple will need Dell for access to Dell's assemblers, but that would only occur when Apple's total market share gets huge - say exceeds 33%. Barring a Vista-catastrophy, at the current rate of market share growth, we're still more than a year or two away from having to cross that bridge, which ironically gives Michael Dell plenty of time to become more retrospective and apologetic about inflammatory comments he has made of Apple in the past.
-hh
PS: if you look more closely at Apple's 3Q numbers, you'll see that desktop sales were relatively flat: the growth was in laptops.
NebulaClash
Dec 13, 03:01 PM
^ this.
Right. One of the problems people have when they try to predict what Apple might do is they assume the past = the future. "Oh, Apple only does yearly updates, so this rumor is impossible." Well, Apple does what it does . . . until it doesn't. They don't do books, but now they do. They don't do movies, but now they do, etc.
Apple is not a MacRumors poster stubbornly sticking to the only thing they know. Apple changes as market conditions change. If they think they can increase profitability and market share by making semi-yearly phone updates, they are going to switch to semi-yearly phone updates. Simple as that.
So a Q1 2011 Verizon phone is quite possible.
Right. One of the problems people have when they try to predict what Apple might do is they assume the past = the future. "Oh, Apple only does yearly updates, so this rumor is impossible." Well, Apple does what it does . . . until it doesn't. They don't do books, but now they do. They don't do movies, but now they do, etc.
Apple is not a MacRumors poster stubbornly sticking to the only thing they know. Apple changes as market conditions change. If they think they can increase profitability and market share by making semi-yearly phone updates, they are going to switch to semi-yearly phone updates. Simple as that.
So a Q1 2011 Verizon phone is quite possible.
puckhead193
Jan 6, 09:13 PM
do you think apple is doing this because apple will release a limited edition product like only 200 of something
SchneiderMan
Apr 11, 05:55 PM
Purchased Gidly via Godaddy :)
http://img858.imageshack.us/img858/6214/gidly.png
http://img858.imageshack.us/img858/6214/gidly.png
Veri
Oct 1, 03:55 PM
[Humanity] has a very long history of common people being subject to the will & whim of the rich & powerful & connected.
FTFY.
The USA exists precisely because some of those common people got tired of such treatment and made it clear they would do with their land what they saw fit.
You're just making history up. There is no allodial title to land in US law. There is no allodial title to land in Californian law. Where Jobs is and where I am, all land belongs to the government. Independence was from the British Crown, and while the US and/or its states might have had the opportunity to create absolute property ownership, today you have no recognition by the US and only a couple of states even considering it.
How [the past] gets in the way of the present & future.
There's enough space. But the eloquence of your argument would have been improved if you'd just quoted policy straight from 1984 :D.
FTFY.
The USA exists precisely because some of those common people got tired of such treatment and made it clear they would do with their land what they saw fit.
You're just making history up. There is no allodial title to land in US law. There is no allodial title to land in Californian law. Where Jobs is and where I am, all land belongs to the government. Independence was from the British Crown, and while the US and/or its states might have had the opportunity to create absolute property ownership, today you have no recognition by the US and only a couple of states even considering it.
How [the past] gets in the way of the present & future.
There's enough space. But the eloquence of your argument would have been improved if you'd just quoted policy straight from 1984 :D.
codo
Oct 28, 02:49 PM
They might just end up releasing the source a version later so hackers intent on spreading the latest and greatest simply can't - whilst still providing the code for legitimate uses.
Just out of interest - What do people actually do with this source? I mean, are there other operating systems based on it? Or is it useful for OS X developers so they can refine their code to integrate with OS X? Forgive my ignorance, just wondering.
Just out of interest - What do people actually do with this source? I mean, are there other operating systems based on it? Or is it useful for OS X developers so they can refine their code to integrate with OS X? Forgive my ignorance, just wondering.
Geckotek
Jan 2, 08:33 PM
Call it what you want, I just don't think Verizon will expect how many people will actually switch on or close to release day.
Because they refuse to read analysts predictions or run statistics of their own? Yeah, not buying it.
FYI, there were already reports that Verizon is testing their network and preparing it for an onslaught of iPhone users.
Also, once again I need to point out that most of AT&Ts issues revolved around their own network deficiencies and a bad WCDMA migration. Verizon has neither of those 2 issues.
Because they refuse to read analysts predictions or run statistics of their own? Yeah, not buying it.
FYI, there were already reports that Verizon is testing their network and preparing it for an onslaught of iPhone users.
Also, once again I need to point out that most of AT&Ts issues revolved around their own network deficiencies and a bad WCDMA migration. Verizon has neither of those 2 issues.
joeboy_45101
Nov 16, 10:35 PM
Don't forget! It took Intel 6 years to really surpass AMD on performance. The current AMD Athlon is no slouch either. If it was a choice between the Athlon 64 or a Pentium 4, like it was a year ago, many here would be jumping for joy over a switch to AMD.
The reality is ,though, that Apple seems pretty satisfied with Intel right now and I believe they made the right choice. If Apple does decide to use AMD processors then it would probably be for the iTV or the Mac Mini. These things won't be competing on raw power but on quality and price. An order I believe AMD can fill.
The reality is ,though, that Apple seems pretty satisfied with Intel right now and I believe they made the right choice. If Apple does decide to use AMD processors then it would probably be for the iTV or the Mac Mini. These things won't be competing on raw power but on quality and price. An order I believe AMD can fill.
No comments:
Post a Comment