LarryC
Mar 4, 02:39 PM
In the US, there's one key reason why small cars don't sell (above and beyond the reasons I already listed), and that is that popular wisdom holds that you will die in a small car when someone in a large SUV or truck hits you. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy as people buy big cars because they don't feel safe in small ones, with the result that they become part of the "problem". Ultimately it's down to selfishness. Apparently people would rather kill someone else in an accident than risk being killed themselves.
It's idiotic, but this "wisdom" will only be unlearned slowly. Smaller cars are much safer now then they once were - safer than trucks and SUVs.
Do you have any supporting evidence to back up this claim of yours that small cars are safer than trucks and SUV's? It might be selfish in your eyes that I bought an SUV for my wife to drive around in, I call it being being protective and reasonable! I should also add that I drive a 2009 Dodge RAM and I love it!
It's idiotic, but this "wisdom" will only be unlearned slowly. Smaller cars are much safer now then they once were - safer than trucks and SUVs.
Do you have any supporting evidence to back up this claim of yours that small cars are safer than trucks and SUV's? It might be selfish in your eyes that I bought an SUV for my wife to drive around in, I call it being being protective and reasonable! I should also add that I drive a 2009 Dodge RAM and I love it!
gikku
Jan 2, 05:25 AM
Leopard for G3s, please.
An iMac with an adjustable screen height, with dual C2D chips.
A Macbook with a proper keys on the board.
A new low end range of desktops and notebooks with a core solo chip, for volume sales.
Mac Mini C2D 2.33Ghz
An iMac with an adjustable screen height, with dual C2D chips.
A Macbook with a proper keys on the board.
A new low end range of desktops and notebooks with a core solo chip, for volume sales.
Mac Mini C2D 2.33Ghz
SMM
Jan 11, 09:46 PM
I really couldn't care less about the sales.
Think about it, if the iPhone doesn't sell, would that put in doubt the fact that it is the best thing out?
Was there a point here I missed?
Think about it, if the iPhone doesn't sell, would that put in doubt the fact that it is the best thing out?
Was there a point here I missed?
yg17
Mar 24, 12:02 PM
No trying to substitute facts and history with your own beliefs. Homosexuality is not natural, there is no natural way for reproduction which is the whole purpose of sex or the "reproduction system" as it may be classified.
So someone who is sterile due to medical reasons shouldn't be allowed to marry either? There's no natural way for them to reproduce.
So someone who is sterile due to medical reasons shouldn't be allowed to marry either? There's no natural way for them to reproduce.
spicyapple
Nov 28, 03:10 PM
...here is a link (http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/11631/) to the CNN review of the zune.
It's funny when Soledad asks if it can do email. She might have thought so because of its size compared with the Blackberry. And then she whips out the shuffle... OMG that is classic.
Does anyone remember Soledad in a kid's computer TV show some years back? She played a computer....
It's funny when Soledad asks if it can do email. She might have thought so because of its size compared with the Blackberry. And then she whips out the shuffle... OMG that is classic.
Does anyone remember Soledad in a kid's computer TV show some years back? She played a computer....
MattDell
Sep 6, 08:34 PM
I do backup all of my ipod videos on DVD.
That brings up something that has really bugged me for a while. I think it is absurd that if you delete something you bought from Apple, you have to pay to get it back! If I buy a song, I should be buying a license to that song... not just one 'instance' of that particular song.
Apple keeps track of all the songs you buy anyway, so it's my opinion that you should be able to just "get another copy" if you have already purchased a song.
I think this would be especially great for movies. That way you won't have to eat up precious hard drive space. You could purchase your movie, download it, watch it, delete it, and then re-download the movie if you want to view it again.
-Matt
That brings up something that has really bugged me for a while. I think it is absurd that if you delete something you bought from Apple, you have to pay to get it back! If I buy a song, I should be buying a license to that song... not just one 'instance' of that particular song.
Apple keeps track of all the songs you buy anyway, so it's my opinion that you should be able to just "get another copy" if you have already purchased a song.
I think this would be especially great for movies. That way you won't have to eat up precious hard drive space. You could purchase your movie, download it, watch it, delete it, and then re-download the movie if you want to view it again.
-Matt
aswitcher
Aug 7, 03:56 AM
Dude, it's even better than that! Its song capacity is only limited by how many cassette tapes you can carry!
Is there a car phone version that plugs directly into the tape deck?
Is there a car phone version that plugs directly into the tape deck?
appleguy123
Apr 12, 09:04 PM
[img]http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/275779449.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJF3XCCKACR3QDMOA&Expires=1302661120&Signature=nuq9DTy9AX2iOGRh%2Fy1XWUXDzaA%3D[/mg]
well, in cast there was any doubt.
Yes!
well, in cast there was any doubt.
Yes!
iTravis
Apr 26, 12:48 PM
Yes Amazon jump on the "it's generic" bandwagon. :rolleyes:
Please lets just keep this thread about the response and not "But how is it generic. . ." "Apple didn't create App. . ." "Well Amazon is right it's generic. . ."
I don't think it's generic that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. I'm moving on.
Please lets just keep this thread about the response and not "But how is it generic. . ." "Apple didn't create App. . ." "Well Amazon is right it's generic. . ."
I don't think it's generic that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. I'm moving on.
DeusInvictus7
Nov 24, 07:28 PM
Picked these up earlier today. So much fun!
GT 5
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8b/GT5-boxart-final-EU.jpg
Logitech Driving Force GT
http://playseats.biz/files/logitech-driving-force-gt-for-sony-playstation-3.jpg
hit me up online if you wanna race :) PSN Name is my forum name.
GT 5
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8b/GT5-boxart-final-EU.jpg
Logitech Driving Force GT
http://playseats.biz/files/logitech-driving-force-gt-for-sony-playstation-3.jpg
hit me up online if you wanna race :) PSN Name is my forum name.
Ashtangi
Aug 29, 09:52 AM
As a few have already mentioned - there would have to be some price adjustments. Right now, the Core Duo commands a $200 premium over the Core Solo. But assuming that the "new" lineup consists of a 1.66 and 1.83 Core Duo, Apple would either have to seriously adjust the price points - or majorly strip down the 1.66 Core Duo. Perhaps remove the combo drive? Or use the smaller HD?
RaceTripper
Feb 8, 11:14 AM
...Nice M3. Love the Alpine White. I still miss my Carbon Black/Cinammon SMG.
reflex
Aug 29, 09:20 AM
Yonah doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Merom is pin-compatible and costs exactly the same amount. Besides, it would be a PR boost for Apple to have the entire lineup 64-bit and "Leopard ready".
They can still update the mini in February or March to be "Leopard ready".
They can still update the mini in February or March to be "Leopard ready".
AppliedVisual
Oct 23, 10:40 PM
Resistance is futile.
That's right.... I bought a MBP nearly a month ago and while I'm very happy with it, I'm still here.... :o
That's right.... I bought a MBP nearly a month ago and while I'm very happy with it, I'm still here.... :o
Horrortaxi
May 2, 02:59 AM
I must have missed something. What does latin have to do with "Saving" Apple? :confused:
Nothing at all. He was showing us how smart he is. I tremble before his ostentatious display of knowledge. He is truly my superior. He doesn't need a point--that's how cool he is.
Nothing at all. He was showing us how smart he is. I tremble before his ostentatious display of knowledge. He is truly my superior. He doesn't need a point--that's how cool he is.
quadgirl
Sep 1, 01:07 PM
It needs:
Glossy Screen (Even if it's only an option)
Up to 3GB RAM (at least; 4GB would be nice)
Merom (Obviously)
Why Merom (Obviously). Honestly, Apple have been using a laptop processor in all their machines since January (until the Mac Pro). because only the Yonah was available.
Would you honestly be happy spend a shed load of money on a 23" Imac that STILL has a laptop processor? Come on, Conroe will be in the new iMacs
Glossy Screen (Even if it's only an option)
Up to 3GB RAM (at least; 4GB would be nice)
Merom (Obviously)
Why Merom (Obviously). Honestly, Apple have been using a laptop processor in all their machines since January (until the Mac Pro). because only the Yonah was available.
Would you honestly be happy spend a shed load of money on a 23" Imac that STILL has a laptop processor? Come on, Conroe will be in the new iMacs
iJawn108
Aug 7, 03:51 AM
*hopes for 802.11n airports!*;)
TerryJ
Jul 14, 11:53 AM
So, easily seen. The employ the exact same codecs.
They CAN use the same codecs. The problem on the BD side is that... all of the Sony discs (and other studios so far) use MPEG2 for video and standard DD or PCM for audio.
Also, the current generation BD decks (Samsung and forthcoming Sony deck) cannot decode DD+, Dolby TruHD audio formats. They can only do same DD and DTS as old DVDs. HD DVD decks can decode DD+ and Dolby TruHD (TruHD can only be decoded to stereo in the current decks, though, unfortunately.) Also, the software needs to have audio encoded in DD+ and Dolby TruHD. All HD DVD discs have at least DD+. No BDs have DD+.
If Sony and other studios started using VC-1 or H.264 for video, things might look better for BD... but they aren't using it. I don't think there are any plans for Sony to author discs using VC-1... ever. It's all MPEG2 as far as I have heard.
[Warner Home Video has already released HD DVDs in VC-1... so it would stand to reason they'd just use the same encode for their BDs, but I guess we'll see if that is true.]
That's the trick. Talking pure specs, on paper, before anything was ever released, and BD seemed like it should be equal or better. Reality... I mean actual implementation, of course, is a different matter.
-Terry
They CAN use the same codecs. The problem on the BD side is that... all of the Sony discs (and other studios so far) use MPEG2 for video and standard DD or PCM for audio.
Also, the current generation BD decks (Samsung and forthcoming Sony deck) cannot decode DD+, Dolby TruHD audio formats. They can only do same DD and DTS as old DVDs. HD DVD decks can decode DD+ and Dolby TruHD (TruHD can only be decoded to stereo in the current decks, though, unfortunately.) Also, the software needs to have audio encoded in DD+ and Dolby TruHD. All HD DVD discs have at least DD+. No BDs have DD+.
If Sony and other studios started using VC-1 or H.264 for video, things might look better for BD... but they aren't using it. I don't think there are any plans for Sony to author discs using VC-1... ever. It's all MPEG2 as far as I have heard.
[Warner Home Video has already released HD DVDs in VC-1... so it would stand to reason they'd just use the same encode for their BDs, but I guess we'll see if that is true.]
That's the trick. Talking pure specs, on paper, before anything was ever released, and BD seemed like it should be equal or better. Reality... I mean actual implementation, of course, is a different matter.
-Terry
Doctor Q
Mar 22, 04:58 PM
I guess I'm glad about this news.
However, I don't know anybody who has bought an iPod in the past couple of years.
However, I don't know anybody who has bought an iPod in the past couple of years.
twoodcc
Feb 23, 08:33 PM
I'm not going to go to all that trouble, VM's seem like kind of a pain.
VMs really aren't that bad. it's worth it. with just 1 gpu and and VM, i'm getting around 25k ppd. with 2 gpu, you'd get over 30kppd.
I've just tried it in bios without much luck.
oh. which motherboard do you have? i've had a little trouble with mine, i'm stuck at 3.7 ghz (still not bad).
This (http://www.overclockers.com/3-step-guide-overclock-core-i3-i5-i7/) guide might help you some
VMs really aren't that bad. it's worth it. with just 1 gpu and and VM, i'm getting around 25k ppd. with 2 gpu, you'd get over 30kppd.
I've just tried it in bios without much luck.
oh. which motherboard do you have? i've had a little trouble with mine, i'm stuck at 3.7 ghz (still not bad).
This (http://www.overclockers.com/3-step-guide-overclock-core-i3-i5-i7/) guide might help you some
celticpride678
Apr 3, 12:51 AM
??? My 25gb partition was clean and blank when I installed Lion DP 1 and I think that's the case for most others as well. I'm not sure where you heard that, if I'm understanding you correctly.
It worked for me too on DP1. On DP2, I had to install Snow Leopard first.
It worked for me too on DP1. On DP2, I had to install Snow Leopard first.
BenRoethig
Aug 29, 11:45 AM
I would like to see a "media center" with a basic built-in TV-tuner so I could use it as a TIVO. It cant be that hard to add a TV-tuner...
I'm thinking something similar. 3.5x8.5x8.5. Basically a larger MacMini with a 3.5" hard drive, dedicated graphics, and video chipset similar to the Miglia TV Max.
I'm thinking something similar. 3.5x8.5x8.5. Basically a larger MacMini with a 3.5" hard drive, dedicated graphics, and video chipset similar to the Miglia TV Max.
lordonuthin
Mar 5, 06:32 PM
And congrats for 10mio points!
Thanks
congrats to whiterabbit for 10 million points!
And Thanks
I should be picking up steam again, soon.
Thanks
congrats to whiterabbit for 10 million points!
And Thanks
I should be picking up steam again, soon.
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
0 comments:
Post a Comment