puckhead193
Sep 7, 10:19 PM
Kanye West does not care about mac people.
if the price is right he'll care about anything ;)
if the price is right he'll care about anything ;)
AhmedFaisal
Apr 13, 07:15 AM
I don't see anything wrong with it at all. People use children to carry goods all the time and the TSA agent was totally professional about it talking through each step. The rules are there to provide a layer of safety and if you think that it doesn't and don't like the rules, ride the bus!
Better yet, let's remove the TSA agents and let someone fly a plane into another building. :rolleyes:
That again? You do realize that 9/11 had very little to do with airport security but everything to do with incompetence on the side of the secret service and negligence on the side of the US government? TSA has not made airtravel any safer than prior to 9/11.
Better yet, let's remove the TSA agents and let someone fly a plane into another building. :rolleyes:
That again? You do realize that 9/11 had very little to do with airport security but everything to do with incompetence on the side of the secret service and negligence on the side of the US government? TSA has not made airtravel any safer than prior to 9/11.
Hephaestus
Mar 18, 06:00 PM
From your original post --> "It seems that most people feel some kind of envy to me because I own an iPhone 4."
Just sayin...
Ok fair enough, that was poorly phrased. What I meant was "It seems that some smart phone owners feel some kind of envy to me because I own an iPhone 4."
Just sayin...
Ok fair enough, that was poorly phrased. What I meant was "It seems that some smart phone owners feel some kind of envy to me because I own an iPhone 4."
Warbrain
Nov 16, 12:47 PM
this is bull, noway....
but amd would be cheaper I bet...
No it wouldn't. You might pay less for chips, but you will need to wait much longer as AMD doesn't anywhere near the capacity to produce processors like Intel does, therefore making Apple pay more in the end. That's part of the reason Apple went with Intel.
but amd would be cheaper I bet...
No it wouldn't. You might pay less for chips, but you will need to wait much longer as AMD doesn't anywhere near the capacity to produce processors like Intel does, therefore making Apple pay more in the end. That's part of the reason Apple went with Intel.
more...
Aperture
Jan 15, 09:51 PM
As others have said, it may have been funny for one time on the big wall of TVs. Definitely not at a live presentation.
JohnnyQuest
Mar 17, 01:43 PM
... and we all know that there's nothing ethically questionable about stealing from morons, right?
Preach.
Preach.
more...
mrw00tastic
Apr 25, 12:43 PM
If that is a guy holding that phone he needs to cut those nails...Damn hippy!
MusicallySilent
Jan 11, 03:43 PM
As much as I doubt it would happen I would really like
Large Mac Mini/Midtower Mac pro
1 socket with quad
2 pci E
4 Ram slots
2-4 HDD spaces
1 Superdrive
Starting at 999 or maybe slightly less with a dual core.
Large Mac Mini/Midtower Mac pro
1 socket with quad
2 pci E
4 Ram slots
2-4 HDD spaces
1 Superdrive
Starting at 999 or maybe slightly less with a dual core.
more...
dsnort
Aug 1, 11:47 AM
For shawnce, I luv the movies of Bawl-mer
UnReel ATX
Apr 6, 12:28 PM
These :] time to get ******.
more...
tkermit
Apr 5, 05:59 PM
If you ever want to be really successful and maybe even wealthy, then this app is vital.
Wow. Just...wow.
Wow. Just...wow.
barkomatic
Apr 26, 10:46 AM
This video is very sad and disturbing but it doesn't surprise me considering how much violent bigotry is out there and being quietly encouraged by members of certain political movements.
The fault of the employees here is not that they didn't attempt to break up the fight but that they actually encouraged the assailants--terrible. I hope McDonald's is able to determine the identity of those employees and fire them.
Aside from that, I think an employee is obligated to call the police or security in these situations but is not obligated to put themselves in harm's way by trying to intervene--though they may rightly choose to. Unfortunately, we live in such a litigious society that I can easily see an employee breaking up a fight being sued by the perpetrators. It's a hard judgement to make in the heat of the moment.
At least the victim has quite a case for a huge lawsuit against McDonald's. I can't imagine the company wouldn't want to settle this quickly considering the awful publicity.
The fault of the employees here is not that they didn't attempt to break up the fight but that they actually encouraged the assailants--terrible. I hope McDonald's is able to determine the identity of those employees and fire them.
Aside from that, I think an employee is obligated to call the police or security in these situations but is not obligated to put themselves in harm's way by trying to intervene--though they may rightly choose to. Unfortunately, we live in such a litigious society that I can easily see an employee breaking up a fight being sued by the perpetrators. It's a hard judgement to make in the heat of the moment.
At least the victim has quite a case for a huge lawsuit against McDonald's. I can't imagine the company wouldn't want to settle this quickly considering the awful publicity.
more...
fxtech
Mar 28, 03:15 PM
What exactly is a 'hater'? Someone that disagrees with the company line? Someone with a dissenting opinion?
That and someone who doesn't live on Kool Aid.
That and someone who doesn't live on Kool Aid.
donlphi
Sep 25, 11:01 AM
So... what are we supposed to run this monstrosity on? The G5 QUADS had a hard enough time running the first one. I can't imagine running this on an iMac or worse... a mac mini.
JOKE JOKE JOKE
JOKE JOKE JOKE
more...
bdj21ya
Oct 12, 09:52 AM
iBeard, you're assuming that the only thing a larger screen is good for is movies/tv. With a 4" screen on the pod, you have a larger viewing area for more than movies/tv. You have it for games, pictures, chat(when available), text, better view of album artwork, and so on. It may not be for you because you may only use your pod for music, but you gotta admit there's a huge market for it.
J
It's not just that though, a 4 inch screen that you can move around easily (without scratching the spinning DVD) would be awesome for watching movies. I would even go so far as to say that it could be a larger viewing area than your bigscreen plasma.
J
It's not just that though, a 4 inch screen that you can move around easily (without scratching the spinning DVD) would be awesome for watching movies. I would even go so far as to say that it could be a larger viewing area than your bigscreen plasma.
twoodcc
Apr 4, 09:41 PM
That's too bad, yeah heat is bad.
Yeah. I guess it's heat. I have two gtx 260's going and an i7 over clocked to 3.5 ghz. But it was working great 2 months ago
Yeah. I guess it's heat. I have two gtx 260's going and an i7 over clocked to 3.5 ghz. But it was working great 2 months ago
more...
bluewire
Mar 23, 05:26 PM
bump...TELL US WHAT HAPPENED! CSI: Mac Rumors! :confused:
Lord Blackadder
Aug 3, 11:20 AM
While that part is true that we would burn more fuel at power planets one advantage you are forgetting about is the power planets are by far much more efficient at producing power than the internal combustion engine on your car. On top of that it is much easier to capture and clean the pollution the power planet produces over what the cars produce. On top of that we can easily most our power over to other renewable choices.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
Oblivious
Jul 25, 12:11 AM
I hope it turns out nicely... the iPod needs a good competitor to keep the engineers at Apple on their toes.:)
Alas, if it ends up very similar to that proto design, it's doomed to fail. It looks ugly as *****. Microsoft.:rolleyes:
Alas, if it ends up very similar to that proto design, it's doomed to fail. It looks ugly as *****. Microsoft.:rolleyes:
nim81
Mar 13, 04:46 AM
While Symbian might have been first, I was talking strictly about iOS vs Android as that was what the poster hinted at.
Backgrounding certain tasks is fine, and yes it works well even though it's not a replacement for multi-tasking. What I hate is the task manager they came up with that is near useless since it doesn't actually give you a list of running tasks. It's a list of everything you've done with the phone, in like ever. You need to manually clean it up and even then, you don't know what is and isn't running.
I wasn't talking about design and updates. More like the marketing effort and the stagnation between said spec bumps. They marketed the crap out of the Rev A, then it just fell out of sight. Same for AppleTV 1st generation.
But thanks for assuming and correcting me on something I didn't mention or hint at. Real classy.
Honestly I think Apple got the multitasking almost spot on... the way it manages it is perfect for a device with limited battery/processing power.
In the last 6 months I've "fixed" two phones for people (1x Android, 1 x Symbian) who've installed an app that's running constantly in the background and making the phone unusable to the point they thought it was broken. I used to find it with my own Nokia N95, the multitasking ability was excellent but you had to be careful what you left running or the battery could run down in a few hours.
I think Apple have made an excellent trade-off in that way, it used to bug the hell out of me that I couldn't use sat nav or internet radio apps in the background, but since iOS 4 I've really not found any situation where I need "true" multitasking and the current implementation has little effect on the battery.
That said, I agree with what you say about the task manager, it feels really clunky. I don't know what would be the best way to change it, but I'm sure there has to be something better.
Going back to what the OP is saying, no Apple is of course not unique in innovating, to suggest so is just blinkered. Taking the point of the multitasking or even copy and paste, I'm pretty sure that if other mobile OSs weren't doing this, Apple would have been happy to sit back and say sorry, you just can't do that. They can be quite an arrogant company like that.
Backgrounding certain tasks is fine, and yes it works well even though it's not a replacement for multi-tasking. What I hate is the task manager they came up with that is near useless since it doesn't actually give you a list of running tasks. It's a list of everything you've done with the phone, in like ever. You need to manually clean it up and even then, you don't know what is and isn't running.
I wasn't talking about design and updates. More like the marketing effort and the stagnation between said spec bumps. They marketed the crap out of the Rev A, then it just fell out of sight. Same for AppleTV 1st generation.
But thanks for assuming and correcting me on something I didn't mention or hint at. Real classy.
Honestly I think Apple got the multitasking almost spot on... the way it manages it is perfect for a device with limited battery/processing power.
In the last 6 months I've "fixed" two phones for people (1x Android, 1 x Symbian) who've installed an app that's running constantly in the background and making the phone unusable to the point they thought it was broken. I used to find it with my own Nokia N95, the multitasking ability was excellent but you had to be careful what you left running or the battery could run down in a few hours.
I think Apple have made an excellent trade-off in that way, it used to bug the hell out of me that I couldn't use sat nav or internet radio apps in the background, but since iOS 4 I've really not found any situation where I need "true" multitasking and the current implementation has little effect on the battery.
That said, I agree with what you say about the task manager, it feels really clunky. I don't know what would be the best way to change it, but I'm sure there has to be something better.
Going back to what the OP is saying, no Apple is of course not unique in innovating, to suggest so is just blinkered. Taking the point of the multitasking or even copy and paste, I'm pretty sure that if other mobile OSs weren't doing this, Apple would have been happy to sit back and say sorry, you just can't do that. They can be quite an arrogant company like that.
thesdx
Jan 10, 03:53 PM
That was just plain stupid. Nice way to ruin your career, Gizmodo. No Macworld for you. (I hope)
Nekbeth
Apr 26, 08:52 PM
thanks ulbador, the OP understands now :D
If OP wasn't confused he wouldn't have created a thread.
If OP wasn't confused he wouldn't have created a thread.
daneoni
Apr 29, 09:15 PM
1.17GB. Chunky
R.Perez
Apr 27, 06:56 PM
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)
Really? That doesn't matter? Well then why don't we have men compete in all the women's events at the Olympics? Oh wait, it does matter
I'm not defending the attackers. I think it was terrible. Horrifying video. It's hard to believe people are like this.
I do think this whole "biology doesn't matter, it's how you feel in your heart" nonsense is obviously nonsense.
He has every right to dress like a girl. I don't even mind if he uses a female bathoom. But those things don't make someone female. The characteristics that allow doctors to assign genders to new-borns do not change as people get older.
You are equating biological / genetic sex and gender as the same thing.
They aren't.
Really? That doesn't matter? Well then why don't we have men compete in all the women's events at the Olympics? Oh wait, it does matter
I'm not defending the attackers. I think it was terrible. Horrifying video. It's hard to believe people are like this.
I do think this whole "biology doesn't matter, it's how you feel in your heart" nonsense is obviously nonsense.
He has every right to dress like a girl. I don't even mind if he uses a female bathoom. But those things don't make someone female. The characteristics that allow doctors to assign genders to new-borns do not change as people get older.
You are equating biological / genetic sex and gender as the same thing.
They aren't.