OdduWon
Dec 12, 09:06 PM
I thought Microsoft already announced this? ohhh no wait my bad, what I meant was a PC to Mac conversion system, I think its codename is Windows.:D
yeah, windows vista X :D
yeah, windows vista X :D
redeye be
Jun 2, 03:09 AM
I first thought this whole Folding thing had to do with laundry.
Once they've learnt enough i guess they would be able to use the knowledge in other fields of science, maybe even the cleaning sciences if you find this more important than the health aspect.
So you were seriously interseted in a widget about folding laundry?
:p :D ;)
Once they've learnt enough i guess they would be able to use the knowledge in other fields of science, maybe even the cleaning sciences if you find this more important than the health aspect.
So you were seriously interseted in a widget about folding laundry?
:p :D ;)
Eye4Desyn
Apr 12, 04:10 PM
I still prefer the nation's fastest network (AT&T) over the most reliable (VZW) any day. Not to mention my GSM 32GB iPad 1 can be used internationally as well. Besides, in my neck of the woods, AT&T service has been very reliable for data consumption. No complaints here.
bytethese
Jun 18, 03:29 PM
I went to a talk at a Computer Forensics Show a few months ago and the speaker talked about SDXC cards and how it's based on an MS standard. As far as I recall, the circuitry in the chip is different but the pinsouts are the same as SDHC. If so, any current Mac with an SD card slot should be able to be updated appropriately to read SDXC cards. Any thoughts on this?
more...
iJohnHenry
Apr 27, 07:27 PM
I thought this was funny.
Imagine President Trump feuding with global enemies. �I�ve met Kim Jong Il. Guy�s a midget. Who cares what a midget thinks! I take dumps bigger than that guy.
Easy to do, when you are full of it.
Imagine President Trump feuding with global enemies. �I�ve met Kim Jong Il. Guy�s a midget. Who cares what a midget thinks! I take dumps bigger than that guy.
Easy to do, when you are full of it.
R.Perez
Apr 9, 12:42 AM
I thought you described yourself as an anarchist. What's your definition of an anarchist? Someone who supports a lot of state control?
Anarchism is as much about abolishing capitalism as it is about abolishing the state. I am also practical in that I can separate what I consider ideal, from it is a practical reality given the current situation. Funny how you intentionally distracted from the fact that the cuts are about ideology and have nothing to do with the budget.
The state is, at least to a certain degree, accountable to some semblance of democratic control (as problematic as it may be), corporations are inherently undeomocratic institutions by design. I will also always put the working class above the haves and the corporate fat cats.
Anarchism is as much about abolishing capitalism as it is about abolishing the state. I am also practical in that I can separate what I consider ideal, from it is a practical reality given the current situation. Funny how you intentionally distracted from the fact that the cuts are about ideology and have nothing to do with the budget.
The state is, at least to a certain degree, accountable to some semblance of democratic control (as problematic as it may be), corporations are inherently undeomocratic institutions by design. I will also always put the working class above the haves and the corporate fat cats.
more...
Friscohoya
Jun 10, 05:02 PM
Just buy T-Mobile. Its cheap and compatible with the current iphone hardware. Looks like its worth around 10 billion. They could just write a check. Its actually right up apple's alley given their hostorical desire to control everything under the umbrella. They would obviously have to make significant investments to to get the network up to par with ATT and Verizon, but the returns are there. The iphone would be untouchable if Apple controlled the networks. They would change the whole industry. Better yet, Deutch Telekom wants to sell.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6141ZD20100205
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6141ZD20100205
John.B
Mar 13, 01:28 PM
Is it possible that 4.2.6 and 4.3 have different DST settings? Sure. Unlikely? You bet. Odds are we're seeing an issue with carriers and it localized in spots.
My work phone is with Sprint (WinMo), and it adjusted two hours forward. :confused:
My work phone is with Sprint (WinMo), and it adjusted two hours forward. :confused:
more...
King Cobra
Sep 15, 12:31 PM
>Does this include everything that comes standard on a Mac box?
You certainly don't get the most stable OS with a PC.
>Does this include everything that comes standard on a Mac box?
You certainly don't get the most stable OS with a PC.
:D
scem, I think in due time the price of Apple's hardware will come down. Take a look at the prices of the Macintosh/Apple product line. The Macintosh II was valued at I think over $6000. The G4/G3 motherboard was worth up to $3500 I think. Now, the Dual 1.25GHz model sells for around $3300, if you don't feel like chugging in THAT much RAM.
My guess is that in a couple of years Apple's PowerMacs will be reduced to near equivalent prices as when the first dual GHz PowerMacs came out, topping out at $3000.
You certainly don't get the most stable OS with a PC.
>Does this include everything that comes standard on a Mac box?
You certainly don't get the most stable OS with a PC.
:D
scem, I think in due time the price of Apple's hardware will come down. Take a look at the prices of the Macintosh/Apple product line. The Macintosh II was valued at I think over $6000. The G4/G3 motherboard was worth up to $3500 I think. Now, the Dual 1.25GHz model sells for around $3300, if you don't feel like chugging in THAT much RAM.
My guess is that in a couple of years Apple's PowerMacs will be reduced to near equivalent prices as when the first dual GHz PowerMacs came out, topping out at $3000.
jsw
Sep 13, 08:58 AM
...I'm effed. :rolleyes:
Well, if what you say to him works, you might actually be "effed", but sadly you won't remember it. Then you'll really wonder about the looks he gives you. :D
Well, if what you say to him works, you might actually be "effed", but sadly you won't remember it. Then you'll really wonder about the looks he gives you. :D
more...
skellener
Apr 5, 08:05 PM
So does this mean we would need an adapter for the 30pin connector to HDMI out?
Apple Digital AV Adapter - $39 (http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC953ZM/A?fnode=MTc0MjU4NjE&mco=MTcyMTgxNTk)
A second 30-pin connector built into the AV adapter lets you charge and sync your device while it�s connected to your HDMI-compatible display.
http://storeimages.apple.com/1832/as-images.apple.com/is/image/AppleInc/MC953?wid=326&hei=326&fmt=jpeg&qlt=95&op_sharpen=0&resMode=bicub&op_usm=0.5,0.5,0,0&iccEmbed=0&layer=comp
Apple Digital AV Adapter - $39 (http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC953ZM/A?fnode=MTc0MjU4NjE&mco=MTcyMTgxNTk)
A second 30-pin connector built into the AV adapter lets you charge and sync your device while it�s connected to your HDMI-compatible display.
http://storeimages.apple.com/1832/as-images.apple.com/is/image/AppleInc/MC953?wid=326&hei=326&fmt=jpeg&qlt=95&op_sharpen=0&resMode=bicub&op_usm=0.5,0.5,0,0&iccEmbed=0&layer=comp
LastName
Mar 26, 08:09 PM
""They're going to see it all eventually so who cares how they get it." Which seemed to be about web content, said the tipster."
How can that be interpreted about web content ? :confused:
A lot of people depend on their Internet porn, I guess.
How can that be interpreted about web content ? :confused:
A lot of people depend on their Internet porn, I guess.
more...
Andronicus
Aug 19, 12:06 PM
If you don't like Facebook, why do you have the app installed on your phone?
I do not have the p on my phone, but I have email on my phone. And when someone messages me on fb it sends a notice to my email.
I do not have the p on my phone, but I have email on my phone. And when someone messages me on fb it sends a notice to my email.
MacRumors
Mar 25, 08:24 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/25/kodak-still-pushing-for-1-billion-in-patent-royalties-from-apple-and-rim/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/25/092346-kodak_logo.jpg
more...
hayden panettiere bob
hayden panettiere bob
more...
Actress Hayden Panettiere was
rosaries tattoo designs. Ankle
Hayden Panettiere Style:
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/25/092346-kodak_logo.jpg
more...
trainguy77
Jun 2, 07:34 PM
That was wierd. When i came to this forum just now. I thing stuck to my screen even when i scolled up and down, it said "macrumors - FoldingTracker (a widget just for you!)"
anyone had this before. It does not do it again. I got a screen shot of it. I will post it later.
(i did a fast crop of it)
anyone had this before. It does not do it again. I got a screen shot of it. I will post it later.
(i did a fast crop of it)
AHDuke99
Apr 19, 10:20 AM
It's jailbroken. And the video says its 4.0 on the about screen. If this was iOS 5, it would be an embarrassment.
more...
sk58781111
Oct 7, 10:47 AM
3.5" was great in 2007 but not anymore. Apple needs to make a 4.2" iPhone ;)
tech4all
Oct 26, 08:29 PM
Nice about the update, although I don't really use the email for .Mac, lol. The storage space issue others seem to have a problem with isn't really a problem for me....at least not yet.
I'd recommend .Mac to anyone who wants to do this kind of stuff. Can you think of a way to do all of the above for < $100/year without being an uber geek who knows all about FTP and WebDAV and POP/SMTP? :D
Very true. I said it before and I'll say it again. With .Mac and iLife '06 (especially iWeb) making a simple website to show photos to your family and friends is simple for practically anyone to use. (great now I'm starting to sound like a commercial :p)
I'd recommend .Mac to anyone who wants to do this kind of stuff. Can you think of a way to do all of the above for < $100/year without being an uber geek who knows all about FTP and WebDAV and POP/SMTP? :D
Very true. I said it before and I'll say it again. With .Mac and iLife '06 (especially iWeb) making a simple website to show photos to your family and friends is simple for practically anyone to use. (great now I'm starting to sound like a commercial :p)
clintob
Oct 27, 01:40 PM
I really want .mac, but it's just not compelling enough.
I keep my bookmarks sync'd between my Mac at home and my PC at work in Firefox with Foxmarks. Free extension.
I use gmail and yahoo for webmail. 2+gb of storage each. I'm debating which to stick with for calendar. I can use gmail and sync ical to it right now. However someone is already starting a service (http://groups-beta.google.com/group/spanningsync/browse_thread/thread/33374a59c38cbe15)which will let you completely sync Google cal and ical by being able to make changes to both (effectively duplicating what .mac gives you)
I could convert another gmail account into storage space with a plug in. Right now I use mediamax (http://www.mediamax.com/) for 25gb of FREE storage.
Flickr offers ways to publish right from iphoto for a very easy and free way to share photos online.
So for me to cough up the dough, .mac needs more, much more.
All of the above are compeltely valid points. However, there are two large weaknesses to this idea.
First, you're assuming that .mac users want to use Firefox as their browser. Many of us believe strongly that Safari is a better browser. I don't use plugins or extensions - I want my browser clean, slick, and simple. I like my fonts to appear the way they're intended. I was my interface consistent with the rest of my Apps.
Second, and more importantly, look at what you've done in each point. You've addressed each of .mac's features using a separate third party. Sure, you can duplicate any number of the features elsewhere. The reason .mac is useful is because it's all in one place. For many users, the idea of having to to Google for their Mail, Flickr for their photos, MediaMax for their storage, and all the while depend on third-party plugins to make it go round... it all just sounds like a headache. Sure, if you know what you're doing it works fine. But $8.25 a month really isn't that much for the simplicity and ease-of-use that .mac offers the average user.
Sure, we'd all love to see .mac get better. And I'm sure in time it will, but let's stop hating on it so much. For the day-to-day user, .mac is a great tool, simple and easy to use, and really isn't all that expensive in the scheme of things. It's two latte's a month... big deal.
I keep my bookmarks sync'd between my Mac at home and my PC at work in Firefox with Foxmarks. Free extension.
I use gmail and yahoo for webmail. 2+gb of storage each. I'm debating which to stick with for calendar. I can use gmail and sync ical to it right now. However someone is already starting a service (http://groups-beta.google.com/group/spanningsync/browse_thread/thread/33374a59c38cbe15)which will let you completely sync Google cal and ical by being able to make changes to both (effectively duplicating what .mac gives you)
I could convert another gmail account into storage space with a plug in. Right now I use mediamax (http://www.mediamax.com/) for 25gb of FREE storage.
Flickr offers ways to publish right from iphoto for a very easy and free way to share photos online.
So for me to cough up the dough, .mac needs more, much more.
All of the above are compeltely valid points. However, there are two large weaknesses to this idea.
First, you're assuming that .mac users want to use Firefox as their browser. Many of us believe strongly that Safari is a better browser. I don't use plugins or extensions - I want my browser clean, slick, and simple. I like my fonts to appear the way they're intended. I was my interface consistent with the rest of my Apps.
Second, and more importantly, look at what you've done in each point. You've addressed each of .mac's features using a separate third party. Sure, you can duplicate any number of the features elsewhere. The reason .mac is useful is because it's all in one place. For many users, the idea of having to to Google for their Mail, Flickr for their photos, MediaMax for their storage, and all the while depend on third-party plugins to make it go round... it all just sounds like a headache. Sure, if you know what you're doing it works fine. But $8.25 a month really isn't that much for the simplicity and ease-of-use that .mac offers the average user.
Sure, we'd all love to see .mac get better. And I'm sure in time it will, but let's stop hating on it so much. For the day-to-day user, .mac is a great tool, simple and easy to use, and really isn't all that expensive in the scheme of things. It's two latte's a month... big deal.
TheRealTVGuy
Jan 4, 10:02 AM
I thought there were some free map/gps/turn-by-turn direction apps out there (ala Google Maps). Is this not the case? Can anyone tell me why you would want to purchase one of the Garmin/Tom-Tom apps?
zelmo
May 25, 11:57 AM
Thanks! Very cool widget. Now all I need is a folding farm, or at least a computer that will fold faster. My 1.33GHz PB (not running 24/7, more like 18/5) and 800MHz iMac aren't exactly tearing through the WU's.
BC2009
Mar 25, 11:07 AM
Exactly, for those folks who think Kodak was just a film company you're totally off base. They had the diversity but not the vision to adjust to the transition and ended up wholesale auctioning their future. Kinda what we're doing as a country right now.
Kodak believed that their "customers" were the drug stores that did the film developing -- and those drug stores hated the idea of digital photography. So instead of focusing on the their real customers (i.e.: those who used their camera and film) they played to the whims of the drug stores and the entire digital revolution passed them by.
Funny though, one of the best cameras we ever had for producing decent photos was the one that used their magnetic film and showed you what the picture you just took looked like on a little LCD screen. If you did not like the picture you could mark it for "do not develop" and then take another. You saved money on developing bad photos this way and you were still using film (albeit a new kind of film). I can still remember the commercial for that camera with the young couple visiting in Italy trying to get different locals to take photos of them in a specific spot so they could make it look just like an old photo they had of one of their parents in the same spot from decades earlier. Each photo that turned out wrong was marked to not be developed and then they would try again until they got the perfect shot. Funny how they did not see that digital photography accomplished the same thing but in a better way. They really missed the boat.
Kodak believed that their "customers" were the drug stores that did the film developing -- and those drug stores hated the idea of digital photography. So instead of focusing on the their real customers (i.e.: those who used their camera and film) they played to the whims of the drug stores and the entire digital revolution passed them by.
Funny though, one of the best cameras we ever had for producing decent photos was the one that used their magnetic film and showed you what the picture you just took looked like on a little LCD screen. If you did not like the picture you could mark it for "do not develop" and then take another. You saved money on developing bad photos this way and you were still using film (albeit a new kind of film). I can still remember the commercial for that camera with the young couple visiting in Italy trying to get different locals to take photos of them in a specific spot so they could make it look just like an old photo they had of one of their parents in the same spot from decades earlier. Each photo that turned out wrong was marked to not be developed and then they would try again until they got the perfect shot. Funny how they did not see that digital photography accomplished the same thing but in a better way. They really missed the boat.
Abyssgh0st
Mar 11, 05:32 AM
At University now, I believe I'm number 5 or 6.
bella92108
Apr 1, 12:35 PM
Cons - smaller networks wouldn't survive; most niche networks would become less focused in order to appeal to a wider demographic; diversity in program would be jeopardized.
And how is that a con? The reason cable companies say they charge so much is because they give 100s of channels. If there were only 40, they couldn't hide behind that.
And since when is the goal of business to protect the undesirable? If 10 chain restaurants open in your town and nobody eats at 2 of them, should the other 8 raise their prices and give the overage to the 2 nobody likes? No, the 2 should shut down. No sense in having a business if nobody wants the business. Cable channels are a business.
And how is that a con? The reason cable companies say they charge so much is because they give 100s of channels. If there were only 40, they couldn't hide behind that.
And since when is the goal of business to protect the undesirable? If 10 chain restaurants open in your town and nobody eats at 2 of them, should the other 8 raise their prices and give the overage to the 2 nobody likes? No, the 2 should shut down. No sense in having a business if nobody wants the business. Cable channels are a business.
0 comments:
Post a Comment