MBHockey
Nov 3, 01:03 PM
In Fusion, can you have more than the measly 8MB of vram that Parallels gives you to work with in Windows?
CAD programs barely run with 8MB of vram.
CAD programs barely run with 8MB of vram.
HawaiiMacAddict
Apr 14, 03:49 AM
What if it's an actual Apple-branded TV? That's one of the latest rumors making the rounds, again :eek: Actually, if Apple did come out with their own HD (1080p) TV, I would be very interested in purchasing it. It would have TV built into it (of course), and therefore would be able to do everything TV can do, only without having to attach a set-top box to the TV. Additionally, since Apple is designing it, the new actual HDTV would be magical :D
I really don't see Apple making an HDTV, but I've been known to be wrong before (although I don't like to admit it :o).
I really don't see Apple making an HDTV, but I've been known to be wrong before (although I don't like to admit it :o).
milo
Jul 28, 02:54 PM
It has something unique, look at all the press covering it now, and how many of us are talking about it.
Just because it's being talked about doesn't make it unique. So what is unique about it?
And people are only talking about it because it's an announcement from a huge company. Which has nothing to do with whether it will actually sell well or not.
Just because it's being talked about doesn't make it unique. So what is unique about it?
And people are only talking about it because it's an announcement from a huge company. Which has nothing to do with whether it will actually sell well or not.
rhett7660
Mar 2, 10:44 AM
:mad: Emiilo is busy being a director and winegrower, thank you very much :mad: :p
As to Charlie - I'm of two minds - I do think that part of this is definitely publicity. He probably hasn't had so many requests for interviews in years! On the other hand, even though that drug test he took was supposedly negative - I think that's probably a temporary thing and he will back to hitting the crack pipe pretty darn soon if he hasn't started up again already.
As to losing his children - yes it's sad for him, but definitely good for them. although with a drug-addicted mom - perhaps there is a well meaning relative that could step in for the boys? Charlie has 5 kids. His oldest is married I think, so don't know what she has had to deal with. But Denise always had custody of the 2 girls and I think for while there he wasn't even allowed visitation, so sadly, I don't think losing visitation rights is going to change anything for Charlie.
I agree, given his state of mind right now, I wouldn't be surprised if this is all Chucks fault too. Charlie doesn't seem to want to take responsibility for his actions. But hey, he is making millions, or was making millions why should he! :)
As to Charlie - I'm of two minds - I do think that part of this is definitely publicity. He probably hasn't had so many requests for interviews in years! On the other hand, even though that drug test he took was supposedly negative - I think that's probably a temporary thing and he will back to hitting the crack pipe pretty darn soon if he hasn't started up again already.
As to losing his children - yes it's sad for him, but definitely good for them. although with a drug-addicted mom - perhaps there is a well meaning relative that could step in for the boys? Charlie has 5 kids. His oldest is married I think, so don't know what she has had to deal with. But Denise always had custody of the 2 girls and I think for while there he wasn't even allowed visitation, so sadly, I don't think losing visitation rights is going to change anything for Charlie.
I agree, given his state of mind right now, I wouldn't be surprised if this is all Chucks fault too. Charlie doesn't seem to want to take responsibility for his actions. But hey, he is making millions, or was making millions why should he! :)
more...
jellomizer
Oct 23, 12:28 PM
If Vista can run soley in a virtuallized environment without breaking the EULA, but not be installed on a machine that also is using it in a virtualized way. How does this affect anyone-(Mac or PC)?
If I own a PC and I want to run Vista, why would I want to also run Vista, on the same machine, in a virtual environment?
For Mac users, why would we want to install Vista-(via BootCamp) and then also use it under virtualization?
What situation is there that you would want to run the same OS on the same box, one natively installed and one in virtualization?:confused:
Very confused about how this affects anyone?
Well it is an issue on who you want incharge. For example If I am doing some web development I may want to virtualize Vista to insture the page renders correctly in IE 7. Then switch back to my Mac Enviroment. But there are other times say I want to play a windows game I would want Windows to have full control. So I want to run it nativly.
I think Microsoft wants to make sure you are not putting the same copy of windows on different virtual devices so you can have 10 Versions of windows from the same license. (ALthough it is on the same box)
If I own a PC and I want to run Vista, why would I want to also run Vista, on the same machine, in a virtual environment?
For Mac users, why would we want to install Vista-(via BootCamp) and then also use it under virtualization?
What situation is there that you would want to run the same OS on the same box, one natively installed and one in virtualization?:confused:
Very confused about how this affects anyone?
Well it is an issue on who you want incharge. For example If I am doing some web development I may want to virtualize Vista to insture the page renders correctly in IE 7. Then switch back to my Mac Enviroment. But there are other times say I want to play a windows game I would want Windows to have full control. So I want to run it nativly.
I think Microsoft wants to make sure you are not putting the same copy of windows on different virtual devices so you can have 10 Versions of windows from the same license. (ALthough it is on the same box)
Clix Pix
Jan 10, 08:27 PM
I stumbled on to this discussion and continued reading the thread out of fascination.....
This woman clearly has some mental health issues. Aside from the obvious obesity, she clearly may have some physical issues, too, which are only contributing to this overall situation. That is most unfortunate and I really do hope that she is receiving both medical and psychological help, as she certainly is demonstrating that she is very needy, very in need of help outside of herself and her own little world.
It's interesting, isn't it? Onlookers recoil in horror at the sight of a very obese, morbidly obese, beyond-morbidly obese, individual and shudder. Someone who is 400, 500, 600 pounds or more just isn't a lovely sight.
On the opposite end of the spectrum onlookers also recoil in horror at the sight of a very emaciated individual, someone who is skeletal, skin-and-bones..... Someone who is an adult, even a short one, weighing in at 40, 50 or 60 pounds just isn't a lovely sight, either.
Funny how very often the emaciated ones (those suffering from anorexia nervosa, which is a clinical diagnosis outlined and fully described in the psychiatric literature and the DSM -- Diagnostic and Statistical Manual -- issued on a periodic basis by psychiatrists) -- do wind up in a clinical setting, either a medical floor or a psychiatric floor...... It's pretty clear to even the most naive of laypersons that there is something wrong when a person seems to be starving him/herself to death and is presenting as skeletal.
Funny that when someone is going to the opposite extreme and stuffing him/herself to death that it isn't acknowledged in the same way and that very often it is only when someone has really gone to extremes such as weighing several hundred pounds over mere "overweight" status that anyone really takes notice. When someone presents weighing 600, 700, 800 pounds, yes, that is suggestive of the need for clinical intervention, both medical and psychological, isn't it?
On both ends of that spectrum, people die. Anorexics weighing 30 or 40 or 50 pounds die -- they also can die at much higher weights, closer to "normal" weights, too, actually, if the refeeding process and clinical treatment isn't handled carefully. Yes, they can die at so-called "normal" weights due to some underlying psychological issues never being addressed at all or not being addressed successfully even as the weight is seemingly restored.
Undoubtedly many people who have gotten to the point of morbid obesity or beyond that also have died, even during the process of attempting to restore weight to a healthier or more normal level....and again, chances are that this is due to the underlying psychological issues never being addressed or being inadequately addressed.
Sad, isn't it? Going to extremes in any direction is not a good thing and when this occurs it usually is pointing to significant underlying issues in an individual's life which really need to be addressed along with the particular weight situation.
Don't be repelled by the severely obese person you meet or the severely emaciated person you meet; these are real people with real feelings, real issues hiding in there somewhere and the bottom line is that these are people who need help.
This woman clearly has some mental health issues. Aside from the obvious obesity, she clearly may have some physical issues, too, which are only contributing to this overall situation. That is most unfortunate and I really do hope that she is receiving both medical and psychological help, as she certainly is demonstrating that she is very needy, very in need of help outside of herself and her own little world.
It's interesting, isn't it? Onlookers recoil in horror at the sight of a very obese, morbidly obese, beyond-morbidly obese, individual and shudder. Someone who is 400, 500, 600 pounds or more just isn't a lovely sight.
On the opposite end of the spectrum onlookers also recoil in horror at the sight of a very emaciated individual, someone who is skeletal, skin-and-bones..... Someone who is an adult, even a short one, weighing in at 40, 50 or 60 pounds just isn't a lovely sight, either.
Funny how very often the emaciated ones (those suffering from anorexia nervosa, which is a clinical diagnosis outlined and fully described in the psychiatric literature and the DSM -- Diagnostic and Statistical Manual -- issued on a periodic basis by psychiatrists) -- do wind up in a clinical setting, either a medical floor or a psychiatric floor...... It's pretty clear to even the most naive of laypersons that there is something wrong when a person seems to be starving him/herself to death and is presenting as skeletal.
Funny that when someone is going to the opposite extreme and stuffing him/herself to death that it isn't acknowledged in the same way and that very often it is only when someone has really gone to extremes such as weighing several hundred pounds over mere "overweight" status that anyone really takes notice. When someone presents weighing 600, 700, 800 pounds, yes, that is suggestive of the need for clinical intervention, both medical and psychological, isn't it?
On both ends of that spectrum, people die. Anorexics weighing 30 or 40 or 50 pounds die -- they also can die at much higher weights, closer to "normal" weights, too, actually, if the refeeding process and clinical treatment isn't handled carefully. Yes, they can die at so-called "normal" weights due to some underlying psychological issues never being addressed at all or not being addressed successfully even as the weight is seemingly restored.
Undoubtedly many people who have gotten to the point of morbid obesity or beyond that also have died, even during the process of attempting to restore weight to a healthier or more normal level....and again, chances are that this is due to the underlying psychological issues never being addressed or being inadequately addressed.
Sad, isn't it? Going to extremes in any direction is not a good thing and when this occurs it usually is pointing to significant underlying issues in an individual's life which really need to be addressed along with the particular weight situation.
Don't be repelled by the severely obese person you meet or the severely emaciated person you meet; these are real people with real feelings, real issues hiding in there somewhere and the bottom line is that these are people who need help.
more...
David Sharpe
Jul 25, 12:21 PM
After Jobs walks out, but before he starts the Keynote. Someone should ask Steve to empty his pockets. First the mini, then the nano, this time should be the Video iPod. I am hoping for a couple more things this Keynote.
MultiMediaWill
May 1, 11:08 PM
My thoughts on Osama: He must have registered his real address on PSN.
more...
blacktape242
Mar 1, 10:58 AM
your idol huh.....way to reach your full potential.
sheen has gone completely mental.
"cocaine is a hell of a drug!"
sheen has gone completely mental.
"cocaine is a hell of a drug!"
mklos
Dec 3, 09:56 AM
Router, firewall I feel OK.
I hate to tell you this, but they are really no help when it comes to spyware. I don't know what you were referring to there, but with adware/spyware they won't help you one bit. Adware comes mostly through port 80, which is the port the internet comes through. So if you want, you can set your router/firewall to block port 80, but then you don't have any internet.
That being said, someone could figure out how to get around a firewall. As with any software based firewall, there are vulnerabilities in it, even the OS X one. A router (hardware based), well, thats a little different.
But there are things Apple could do to make OS X more secure. Hopefully Leopard will patch a bunch of holes and make it even harder for adware and anything else to get in. Then release patches for Panther/Tiger. They've done this in the past with Tiger security enhancements and then releasing a patch for Panther.
I believe SecurityWorks (or whatever they're called), works with Apple now instead of against them to aid in finding "holes" in the system. This is the way it should be. They should be hiring people/companies to find holes in the OS and to report them exclusively to Apple ONLY so they can be fixed.
We Mac users are way to secure with ourselves and one day its going to bite us in the butt bigtime. A lot of us throw the talk to the hand up when OS X starts getting bashed about its insecurity. This is a bad thing and some of us need to shape up. These very people will be the first to bitch and complain about their Mac getting spyware and/or viruses when it happens. And of course, its all Apple's fault!
I hate to tell you this, but they are really no help when it comes to spyware. I don't know what you were referring to there, but with adware/spyware they won't help you one bit. Adware comes mostly through port 80, which is the port the internet comes through. So if you want, you can set your router/firewall to block port 80, but then you don't have any internet.
That being said, someone could figure out how to get around a firewall. As with any software based firewall, there are vulnerabilities in it, even the OS X one. A router (hardware based), well, thats a little different.
But there are things Apple could do to make OS X more secure. Hopefully Leopard will patch a bunch of holes and make it even harder for adware and anything else to get in. Then release patches for Panther/Tiger. They've done this in the past with Tiger security enhancements and then releasing a patch for Panther.
I believe SecurityWorks (or whatever they're called), works with Apple now instead of against them to aid in finding "holes" in the system. This is the way it should be. They should be hiring people/companies to find holes in the OS and to report them exclusively to Apple ONLY so they can be fixed.
We Mac users are way to secure with ourselves and one day its going to bite us in the butt bigtime. A lot of us throw the talk to the hand up when OS X starts getting bashed about its insecurity. This is a bad thing and some of us need to shape up. These very people will be the first to bitch and complain about their Mac getting spyware and/or viruses when it happens. And of course, its all Apple's fault!
more...
Abstract
Oct 23, 07:51 AM
As if that's going to stop people. Most people don't even know about these usage restrictions.
inkswamp
Jul 28, 03:59 PM
$9,500,000,000 - that's just sitting around in cash with no long term debt. I think Apple's got plenty of "stamina"...
Exactly! I don't understand all this doom-and-gloom everytime MS talks about the music download market. They can't even get their friggin' OS out on time and we're supposed to worry that they can take over a highly competitive market that is still too new for anyone but Apple to really get their head around? I think not. Look at the video game market. After several years and two iterations of their precious XBox, they have still made hardly a dent in that market (despite all the headlines it gets, it's still no threat to Nintendo.)
Plus, you have to factor in the seemingly limitless well of great ideas that Apple has at their disposal that MS does not. MS may have a lot more cash to bully their way into the market, but Apple will continuously outfox them on the sheer basis that they have better ideas and are quick to the draw.
And, as if that's not enough, MS is trying to bully their way into many markets simultaneously while holding ground on the ones they dominate, so it's not like they can throw 100% of their assets at the music market. They have a lot of resources, but they are limited and are spread between gaming, Windows, office software, hardware, MSN, their search portal, .NET, Origami/tablet PC, etc. They are not all-powerful, and I think their effort in music will be halfhearted and ultimately unsuccessful.
And you know what else matters? The fact that when Steve Jobs gets up on stage and talks about music, you can tell that he's really passionate about it. He's not just up there to sell tunes. He's a music lover and other music lovers relate to that and appreciate it. It's infectious. And it matters. I've seen MS and other companies talk about music (most often while wearing a suit which is enough to stop you right there) and the way they talk--there's no passion. You can tell that they view it at arms-length, like some kind of commodity, and surround their efforts with insulting marketing campaigns that play down to the lowest common denominator and that does not help.
I don't think Apple has anything to worry about. As long as they keep going, they're fine. I see no reason to think otherwise.
Exactly! I don't understand all this doom-and-gloom everytime MS talks about the music download market. They can't even get their friggin' OS out on time and we're supposed to worry that they can take over a highly competitive market that is still too new for anyone but Apple to really get their head around? I think not. Look at the video game market. After several years and two iterations of their precious XBox, they have still made hardly a dent in that market (despite all the headlines it gets, it's still no threat to Nintendo.)
Plus, you have to factor in the seemingly limitless well of great ideas that Apple has at their disposal that MS does not. MS may have a lot more cash to bully their way into the market, but Apple will continuously outfox them on the sheer basis that they have better ideas and are quick to the draw.
And, as if that's not enough, MS is trying to bully their way into many markets simultaneously while holding ground on the ones they dominate, so it's not like they can throw 100% of their assets at the music market. They have a lot of resources, but they are limited and are spread between gaming, Windows, office software, hardware, MSN, their search portal, .NET, Origami/tablet PC, etc. They are not all-powerful, and I think their effort in music will be halfhearted and ultimately unsuccessful.
And you know what else matters? The fact that when Steve Jobs gets up on stage and talks about music, you can tell that he's really passionate about it. He's not just up there to sell tunes. He's a music lover and other music lovers relate to that and appreciate it. It's infectious. And it matters. I've seen MS and other companies talk about music (most often while wearing a suit which is enough to stop you right there) and the way they talk--there's no passion. You can tell that they view it at arms-length, like some kind of commodity, and surround their efforts with insulting marketing campaigns that play down to the lowest common denominator and that does not help.
I don't think Apple has anything to worry about. As long as they keep going, they're fine. I see no reason to think otherwise.
more...
Nemesis
Oct 23, 05:33 PM
This is great news!
So more and more people will finally realise that running Mac OS X only is far, far, far cheaper, more stabile and less troublesome.
Way to go Microsoft, we love you! Please make Business Edition three times more expensive too, make software registration five time more complicated and annoying as hell, include more ironcurtain restrictions, so people can buy more and more Macs.
So more and more people will finally realise that running Mac OS X only is far, far, far cheaper, more stabile and less troublesome.
Way to go Microsoft, we love you! Please make Business Edition three times more expensive too, make software registration five time more complicated and annoying as hell, include more ironcurtain restrictions, so people can buy more and more Macs.
Glass
Jul 11, 03:48 PM
They will. Microsoft doing this will definitely cause Apple to be less stingy with the R&D and get some great small products to market.
God, I really hope that Leopard is more of an upgrade than Tiger was.
You don't think tiger was a significant upgrade? wtf?? lol.. it was packed with new features.
God, I really hope that Leopard is more of an upgrade than Tiger was.
You don't think tiger was a significant upgrade? wtf?? lol.. it was packed with new features.
more...
cmaier
Apr 22, 01:52 PM
So we agree that their lawsuit isn't "a specific claim against a specific model". ;)
No. They made specific claims against specific models. It's just that a few of the claims are against lines of products. But others are much more specific.
No. They made specific claims against specific models. It's just that a few of the claims are against lines of products. But others are much more specific.
Tommyg117
Jul 24, 05:49 PM
I thought they already had one. Oh well, I bought the wireless regular bluetooth mouse but I never use it for my powerbook.
more...
arkmannj
May 3, 08:09 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Mac Mini: Core2Duo
:( :rolleyes:
maybe our day will come soon,
Mac Mini: Core2Duo
:( :rolleyes:
maybe our day will come soon,
tigres
Apr 15, 08:59 PM
Is iTunes up-to-date?
Yepper. Everything is. Thx
Yepper. Everything is. Thx
SAD*FACED*CLOWN
Apr 25, 07:57 AM
For all the T-Mobile users just keep your fingers crossed and hope that the merger doesn't pass. wouldn't it be really nice to finally have an iphone at an affordable rate.:o
why do people believe this is possible? Apple will not allow one carrier to undersell the other on the SAME DEVICE...just won't happen it's bad for sales...which is why there is no competition between AT&T and Verizon...similar plans on voice text and data...otherwise everyone would play carrier swap every few month to get the best deal...if Tmobile gets the iPhone while still independent from AT&T you better believe you won't get unlimited everything for 70 bucks
why do people believe this is possible? Apple will not allow one carrier to undersell the other on the SAME DEVICE...just won't happen it's bad for sales...which is why there is no competition between AT&T and Verizon...similar plans on voice text and data...otherwise everyone would play carrier swap every few month to get the best deal...if Tmobile gets the iPhone while still independent from AT&T you better believe you won't get unlimited everything for 70 bucks
iFiend
May 4, 11:44 AM
I personally believe these days that the look of the phone comes secondary to what is "under the hood".
Yes it helps if it's a good shape with a good screen but if Apple continue to release devices that a technically better the the rest then people will lap it up - the death grip didnt stop so many iPhone 4s being sold did it - people accepted it as the device packed a punch
People buy iPhones because they work well, look good, and are cool/in. I would say that 80% of the iPhone buying world doesn't give a damn what's "under the hood." I fail to see how you could possibly think otherwise.
Yes it helps if it's a good shape with a good screen but if Apple continue to release devices that a technically better the the rest then people will lap it up - the death grip didnt stop so many iPhone 4s being sold did it - people accepted it as the device packed a punch
People buy iPhones because they work well, look good, and are cool/in. I would say that 80% of the iPhone buying world doesn't give a damn what's "under the hood." I fail to see how you could possibly think otherwise.
enda1
Jul 26, 05:58 PM
Of course I read the damn thing. Is it not clear from the report that the invention really is the proximity detector. Synaptics or whatever they are called already have advanced touch devices on the market, thats nothing new. Maybe the software side of things, ie. how to interpert the inputs is novel but really its the ability to "remote control" your ipod without anything but your bare hands.
By the way, just watched Superman Returns there, not too shabby!
By the way, just watched Superman Returns there, not too shabby!
Rowbear
Apr 5, 03:20 PM
http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/6686/wtr3.jpg
Stunning. Did you use a graduated ND filter on the sky ?
Stunning. Did you use a graduated ND filter on the sky ?
maflynn
Sep 17, 06:45 AM
Here's my latest acquisition to the flynn family. I got it from a member here at MR in the Marketplace.
http://ftp1.net/img/dellmini10v.jpg
I needed a portable computer to supplement my desktop, for when I travel (which is infrequent). This is why I opted for a netbook, I needed the ability to connect to my companies network and access programs/computers/servers (something an iPad cannot do) and also hold my photos when I do travel.
The used mini fit that bill, its a hackintosh, so I still get to use OSX, its cheap, small and functional.
http://ftp1.net/img/dellmini10v.jpg
I needed a portable computer to supplement my desktop, for when I travel (which is infrequent). This is why I opted for a netbook, I needed the ability to connect to my companies network and access programs/computers/servers (something an iPad cannot do) and also hold my photos when I do travel.
The used mini fit that bill, its a hackintosh, so I still get to use OSX, its cheap, small and functional.
macbook123
Apr 26, 10:31 PM
As much as I wish it would happen, I doubt Apple has fully internalized that the glossy glass screens were a horrendous design decision. I bet is it'll be two more years until they will be forever phased out, along with the enormous black bezels on the majority of products. But Apple is typically slow in realizing their mistakes, no surprise given their successes.
No comments:
Post a Comment