mikemac11
May 2, 06:18 PM
This article is misleading. It doesn't uninstall anything. Just removes the app from LaunchPad list.
iSax1234
Mar 24, 12:13 PM
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.
You're twisting the argument. Guy + Girl have the possibility to make baby (if they're sterile that's an isolated case). Guy + Guy or Girl + Girl will never be able to have sexual intercourse and have children. Marriage today to most people is nothing more than a loosely binded formal contract, since it can be terminated at any time with little to no repercussions.
You're twisting the argument. Guy + Girl have the possibility to make baby (if they're sterile that's an isolated case). Guy + Guy or Girl + Girl will never be able to have sexual intercourse and have children. Marriage today to most people is nothing more than a loosely binded formal contract, since it can be terminated at any time with little to no repercussions.
jgould
Mar 1, 05:31 PM
New set up, still awaiting my 27" Display and 15" i7 MacBook Pro :D
http://www.octometa.com/setup/old2.JPG
Are the little glowing boxes hard drives? If so, how much space do you have sitting there?
http://www.octometa.com/setup/old2.JPG
Are the little glowing boxes hard drives? If so, how much space do you have sitting there?
zin
Apr 16, 05:15 PM
I'm currently learning how to drive a stick-shift. Rather easy after a few weeks.
PBF
Apr 2, 09:30 AM
edit: isn't there a way to show the left hdd space at the bottom of the finder like on snow leopard? i hate clicking on info all the time to see how much space i got left
command + forward slash ;)
command + forward slash ;)
roland.g
Sep 1, 12:49 PM
23" Imac is a great size. Add HD resolution then that's great.
I would love to see dual display support. But I highly doubt they will allow it. Apple wants to make sure there is a distinction between their consumer and pro line. It would be cool to have the Imac 23" with a 23" Cinema display next to it.
You can already do that. The current iMacs support dual display, just not the 30"
I would love to see dual display support. But I highly doubt they will allow it. Apple wants to make sure there is a distinction between their consumer and pro line. It would be cool to have the Imac 23" with a 23" Cinema display next to it.
You can already do that. The current iMacs support dual display, just not the 30"
SevenInchScrew
Nov 27, 10:05 AM
How is Hot Pursuit? Is it open world?
It is really awesome, from what little I've played so far. I don't have my copy yet, it is still in transit for delivery today. But I played it at a friend's, and it is really awesome. It isn't open world, you pick the events to do, but you can also play them from both sides, racers and cops. I haven't played much of it, but what I have is excellent.
I love NFS games, and I love Burnout games. Thus, a NFS game developed by the guys who normally make the Burnout games is just about as perfect as an arcade racer can get for me. Forza 3 is still my favorite console "simulation" racer, but this newest Hot Pursuit is likely going to be my favorite arcade racer, and will get played for MANY hours.
SHIFT was a terrible game.
Ugh, I agree.
I disagree. I quite enjoyed what I played of it before, and for $10, I will easily get my moneys worth out of it.
It is really awesome, from what little I've played so far. I don't have my copy yet, it is still in transit for delivery today. But I played it at a friend's, and it is really awesome. It isn't open world, you pick the events to do, but you can also play them from both sides, racers and cops. I haven't played much of it, but what I have is excellent.
I love NFS games, and I love Burnout games. Thus, a NFS game developed by the guys who normally make the Burnout games is just about as perfect as an arcade racer can get for me. Forza 3 is still my favorite console "simulation" racer, but this newest Hot Pursuit is likely going to be my favorite arcade racer, and will get played for MANY hours.
SHIFT was a terrible game.
Ugh, I agree.
I disagree. I quite enjoyed what I played of it before, and for $10, I will easily get my moneys worth out of it.
AppliedVisual
Nov 25, 06:50 PM
I also think that it is no coincidence that Apple hasn't replaced the old PPC XServe Cluster Node yet. :-) Considering the relatively low part cost if moving from dual to quad cores.. I suspect that Apple will return the XServe Cluster Node and it may be Dual quad-core only.
ffakr
The quad core CPUs in Xserve definitely make sense. However, I'm not sure what you're saying.. Apple started shipping Xserve on Nov. 1st with the dual-core Xeon CPUs and they're currently listed with 24hour shipping times.
ffakr
The quad core CPUs in Xserve definitely make sense. However, I'm not sure what you're saying.. Apple started shipping Xserve on Nov. 1st with the dual-core Xeon CPUs and they're currently listed with 24hour shipping times.
jessica.
Feb 18, 07:27 AM
are you kidding, right? the rules just a few posts above yours clearly state that you MUST use TIMG tags above 800px!
It just gets better when the OP insists on quoting images after starting a thread with that very rule written in it!
It just gets better when the OP insists on quoting images after starting a thread with that very rule written in it!
chinesechikn
Mar 26, 08:19 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
guzhogi
Jul 18, 09:58 AM
I like to know that I can listen to (or view) my music on my schedule, at my convenience, on my time. If someone's telling me that I've got to hew to THEIR schedule, then it's just ceased being convenient.
It's not supposed to be convenient, it's supposed to make the movie companies money. ;)
It's not supposed to be convenient, it's supposed to make the movie companies money. ;)
YS2003
Oct 23, 10:37 PM
FWI Dell Just Lowered The List Of All Their Monitors •*30" $1279 24" $679 Right Now (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productlisting.aspx?c=us&category_id=6198&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs). We paid $1349 last week in a sale and now it's been trumped. New 30" list is only $1599 and 24" list is $799.
2007FP 20" 1600x1200 is now only $359.20 (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4687). This is amazing.
A quick question. Does Dell's 30" monitor have the AC adaptor which covers 100 V to 240 V and 50 Hz - 60 Hz? The spec on 24" showed it does. But, I was not able see that spec on 30".
2007FP 20" 1600x1200 is now only $359.20 (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4687). This is amazing.
A quick question. Does Dell's 30" monitor have the AC adaptor which covers 100 V to 240 V and 50 Hz - 60 Hz? The spec on 24" showed it does. But, I was not able see that spec on 30".
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 12:41 AM
Well, personally I would consider "loyalists" part of military assets. And I'm sure most generals do as well because that's the way they talk about killing soldiers. Thus inflicting "material" damage should include the people who operate the weapons via command.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
Benguitar
Nov 25, 11:02 PM
My gosh, they gigantic case joke was funny at first, then he tells you it's not amusing to him anymore, so you continue. You're beating a dead horse. In fact, this horse's insides are smeared all over the road.
Yes, Thank you, Beating a dead horse.
I'm a manager at an eyewear boutique. This is not Sunglasses Hut. We do not carry Oakley. We specialize in high-end, independent, mostly European designers that most people haven't heard of.
$400 is average for a pair of frames. The average pair of rx glasses without insurance is between $700 and $900.
I have never seen a case as intense as that gun case used to protect eyewear, ever! But don't take offense, each to his own.
Just wanted to raise awareness to all these people stating that $200-$400 is "expensive" for eyewear when they are spending $$$$$$ on phones, computers, tvs, etc; which are probably replaced more frequently than the glasses which help them see and are the first accessory others see on them.
Glasses should be as important of an investment as your fancy electronics.
Check out these brands if you're interested: ic! Berlin, Face a Face, Orgreen, Bevel, undostrial, strada del sol, historie du voire, theo, and so many more.
- eyewear nerd:cool:
Cool, Good for you, I personally have never liked "boutique" stuff, Just because of bad experiences with guitarists who worship the term and think anything else is horrible.
That being said, I've never heard of Oakley as "boutique" But if they do, I will admit that would have made me sound like a hypocrite. Also, I was not aware that that case is a gun case, That is just speculation made by another MacRumors member. As I said, I purchased it at a photography store and it is a Pelican Case.
From what I've seen most gun cases are metal? Eh, Whatever. Not another argument please.
Now... To end the eyeglasses argument forever, It is no longer my latest purchase.
I purchased a blue iPod Shuffle for my good friend and physical trainer.
http://images.apple.com/ipodshuffle/images/hero1_20100901.jpg
Yes, Thank you, Beating a dead horse.
I'm a manager at an eyewear boutique. This is not Sunglasses Hut. We do not carry Oakley. We specialize in high-end, independent, mostly European designers that most people haven't heard of.
$400 is average for a pair of frames. The average pair of rx glasses without insurance is between $700 and $900.
I have never seen a case as intense as that gun case used to protect eyewear, ever! But don't take offense, each to his own.
Just wanted to raise awareness to all these people stating that $200-$400 is "expensive" for eyewear when they are spending $$$$$$ on phones, computers, tvs, etc; which are probably replaced more frequently than the glasses which help them see and are the first accessory others see on them.
Glasses should be as important of an investment as your fancy electronics.
Check out these brands if you're interested: ic! Berlin, Face a Face, Orgreen, Bevel, undostrial, strada del sol, historie du voire, theo, and so many more.
- eyewear nerd:cool:
Cool, Good for you, I personally have never liked "boutique" stuff, Just because of bad experiences with guitarists who worship the term and think anything else is horrible.
That being said, I've never heard of Oakley as "boutique" But if they do, I will admit that would have made me sound like a hypocrite. Also, I was not aware that that case is a gun case, That is just speculation made by another MacRumors member. As I said, I purchased it at a photography store and it is a Pelican Case.
From what I've seen most gun cases are metal? Eh, Whatever. Not another argument please.
Now... To end the eyeglasses argument forever, It is no longer my latest purchase.
I purchased a blue iPod Shuffle for my good friend and physical trainer.
http://images.apple.com/ipodshuffle/images/hero1_20100901.jpg
(marc)
Mar 19, 05:18 PM
It's just the last time I remember a UN action it was 98% US in Iraq.
Not UN backed. afaik, at least.
Not UN backed. afaik, at least.
SciFrog
Mar 23, 06:06 PM
Hopefully the bigadv will switch very soon to SMP2, they have much better restart rates. I also loose the unit almost everytime if I stop it or reboot...
lordonuthin
Mar 24, 05:05 PM
I will work on consolidation
I decided I don't need to right now so it's back to bigadv units now.
I decided I don't need to right now so it's back to bigadv units now.
polsons
Jan 11, 07:20 AM
As a fellow Australian imac_japan i'll support your enthusiasm, but as one who is old enough to have actually witnessed the history of Apple I think you are about to be enormously disappointed
If indeed a headless Mac does materialize, it will not be the first to have come from Apple. Apple have tried this concept many times before and all attempts have failed miserably. Maybe a dual G5 Cube for the price of an eMac might have some success, but a miserably under specified G4 (as is being claimed) is DEAD even before it hits the stores.
True the end may be near for Apple's hardware (5 or 10 years so to speak), but MacOS will be around for as long as computers continue to be manufactured. Even the most pessimistic analyst will concede that MacOS X and Apple's apps on x86 would see Microsoft as the world's second largest software developer. And who really cares about the hardware. The best PC hardware is every bit as good as Apple's hardware....it's just that the software stinks.
Let's be honest here. Do we really want Mac OS X to become MS Windows? Yes, Windows has thousands of apps not available on Mac, but most are developed by egotistical script kiddies with absolutely no idea of what they are doing, and then trying to pass it off as the greatest app ever written solely because they coded it. The best Windows apps always have been and probably always will be available on Mac. But they are long established mature apps developed by long established developers. If you can't afford them, then buy a PC and be content with using script kiddie crap.
And therein lies the unique and most appealing aspect of Apple hardware. MORONS can't afford it. As long as Apple keeps developing MacOS X and morons are forced to buy Windows PC's, I'll remain very happy with the current situation as it stands. No $499 headless Mac and no Mac in every home for me thank you. As far as I am concerned, the last thing I want to see is a user base swarming with dickheads. Windows has already reached that plateau, and sadly Linux is running not that far behind.
If indeed a headless Mac does materialize, it will not be the first to have come from Apple. Apple have tried this concept many times before and all attempts have failed miserably. Maybe a dual G5 Cube for the price of an eMac might have some success, but a miserably under specified G4 (as is being claimed) is DEAD even before it hits the stores.
True the end may be near for Apple's hardware (5 or 10 years so to speak), but MacOS will be around for as long as computers continue to be manufactured. Even the most pessimistic analyst will concede that MacOS X and Apple's apps on x86 would see Microsoft as the world's second largest software developer. And who really cares about the hardware. The best PC hardware is every bit as good as Apple's hardware....it's just that the software stinks.
Let's be honest here. Do we really want Mac OS X to become MS Windows? Yes, Windows has thousands of apps not available on Mac, but most are developed by egotistical script kiddies with absolutely no idea of what they are doing, and then trying to pass it off as the greatest app ever written solely because they coded it. The best Windows apps always have been and probably always will be available on Mac. But they are long established mature apps developed by long established developers. If you can't afford them, then buy a PC and be content with using script kiddie crap.
And therein lies the unique and most appealing aspect of Apple hardware. MORONS can't afford it. As long as Apple keeps developing MacOS X and morons are forced to buy Windows PC's, I'll remain very happy with the current situation as it stands. No $499 headless Mac and no Mac in every home for me thank you. As far as I am concerned, the last thing I want to see is a user base swarming with dickheads. Windows has already reached that plateau, and sadly Linux is running not that far behind.
pope
Jan 13, 09:28 AM
introducing...MacBook Error
mterlouw
Sep 6, 10:02 AM
i agree. i would never buy a computer that didn't have a dvd burner....and i'd never advise someone else to either
And neither would Steve Jobs, and so he wants you to spend $799 for the feature.
And neither would Steve Jobs, and so he wants you to spend $799 for the feature.
milo
Aug 29, 09:45 AM
My take on this is that it's a great update! The performance of the base-model is more than doubled when you really think about it! Bring on the updates!
It's not so bad on the low end, but that's a pretty piddly update for the pricier model, especially when you consider what the competition is using. The only way it would be forgivable would be if they had a pretty sizable price drop on the high end.
It's not so bad on the low end, but that's a pretty piddly update for the pricier model, especially when you consider what the competition is using. The only way it would be forgivable would be if they had a pretty sizable price drop on the high end.
peestandingup
Jul 15, 12:33 AM
I usually think Apple makes great decisions, but my guess is that Blu-Ray was a bad one. I think it will ultimately fail with consumers.
There is A LOT riding on this right now & given Sony's track record with this sorta stuff, im a little concerned. Their PSP (UMD) format is already on its way out & is being discontinued. Not to mention all the other failed Sony formats over the years.
Now, they announce the PS3 is gonna have that ridiculous price tag of $600, which could have been much cheaper if they didnt include Blu-Ray in every single machine. They should have made it an add-on & gave people a choice instead of shoving it in everyones face. Correct me if im wrong, but dont gamers just wanna play games? You're looking at upwards of $1,000 for the system, a couple games, add-ons, etc. If PS3 fails (which it very well might), then kiss Blu-Ray goodbye.
Sony is setting themselves up for a huge backlash & I could really care less about them. I just wish Apple wasnt supporting their format.
There is A LOT riding on this right now & given Sony's track record with this sorta stuff, im a little concerned. Their PSP (UMD) format is already on its way out & is being discontinued. Not to mention all the other failed Sony formats over the years.
Now, they announce the PS3 is gonna have that ridiculous price tag of $600, which could have been much cheaper if they didnt include Blu-Ray in every single machine. They should have made it an add-on & gave people a choice instead of shoving it in everyones face. Correct me if im wrong, but dont gamers just wanna play games? You're looking at upwards of $1,000 for the system, a couple games, add-ons, etc. If PS3 fails (which it very well might), then kiss Blu-Ray goodbye.
Sony is setting themselves up for a huge backlash & I could really care less about them. I just wish Apple wasnt supporting their format.
Evangelion
Aug 29, 12:36 PM
.You think my post is spam? :confused:
well, if you post the same thing in several threads (especially if it's unrelated to the subject of the discussion), then yes, i think it's spam
well, if you post the same thing in several threads (especially if it's unrelated to the subject of the discussion), then yes, i think it's spam
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".
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario