deadkennedy
Apr 28, 05:54 PM
Sad day for dem boys in Redmond
I think dem boys in Redmond are pretty happy with their salaries, statuses, and results considering how much creativity and effort they put in it. Not much. The one who's sad is probably Bill Gates seeing how others are running the company now.
I think dem boys in Redmond are pretty happy with their salaries, statuses, and results considering how much creativity and effort they put in it. Not much. The one who's sad is probably Bill Gates seeing how others are running the company now.
jpjandrade
Mar 22, 01:20 PM
Filled under "No ****, Sherlock"
Eraserhead
Apr 11, 02:05 AM
Not to mention that it completely ignores the differences in culture regarding transportation. America is set up with cars being the main type of transport. Most European countries don't have this set up.
To some extent, sure.
The big difference is that in the UK you can get cars which do 55 miles per US gallon, one that does that - the �17,345 1.6 Econetic Ford Focus does nearly 62 miles per US gallon.
And that car is made by a US company.
To some extent, sure.
The big difference is that in the UK you can get cars which do 55 miles per US gallon, one that does that - the �17,345 1.6 Econetic Ford Focus does nearly 62 miles per US gallon.
And that car is made by a US company.
aafuss1
Aug 31, 10:33 PM
I don't think we're getting the movie store or movie iPod just yet.
The sites that claim to have gotten an invite are French. (Not sure about Your Mac Life, though). Also, this event is being broadcat in London and Paris. This makes me think this announcement will be for downloadable European TV shows and not the iTunes Movie Store.
But - in the spirit of contradicting myself and being hopelessly optimistic, go check out the iPod refurb store. $100 off the 5G iPods instead of $50. That makes me think they're clearing inventory.
---------------
Also - In terms of branding - Quicktime Move Store perhaps?
---------------
I'm also guessing that we'll see speed bumps to the iMac and MacBook Pro (since they're the oldest) this Tuesday. The rest we may see during Apple Expo Paris.
Keep in mind that Steve doesn't do a keynote for speed bumps. Just tech advances.
Agreed-UK is next to get TV shows-perhaps BBC will offer its shows.
The sites that claim to have gotten an invite are French. (Not sure about Your Mac Life, though). Also, this event is being broadcat in London and Paris. This makes me think this announcement will be for downloadable European TV shows and not the iTunes Movie Store.
But - in the spirit of contradicting myself and being hopelessly optimistic, go check out the iPod refurb store. $100 off the 5G iPods instead of $50. That makes me think they're clearing inventory.
---------------
Also - In terms of branding - Quicktime Move Store perhaps?
---------------
I'm also guessing that we'll see speed bumps to the iMac and MacBook Pro (since they're the oldest) this Tuesday. The rest we may see during Apple Expo Paris.
Keep in mind that Steve doesn't do a keynote for speed bumps. Just tech advances.
Agreed-UK is next to get TV shows-perhaps BBC will offer its shows.
cmaier
Nov 14, 12:14 AM
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
Now you are just making things up. And are you even aware of the difference between law and equity, and the role of the chancellor in old English common law? There were no "arbitrators." What on earth are you even talking about?
I hate to rely on wikipedia, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law might be a good place for you to start. You'll note the section on the influence of Roman law. You'll also see quotes like this:
"Well into the 19th century, ancient maxims played a large role in common law adjudication. Many of these maxims had originated in Roman Law, migrated to England before the introduction of Christianity to the British Isles, and were typically stated in Latin even in English decisions."
You'll also note that "arbitrator" and "arbitration" doesn't appear anywhere in that article because these are not principles of English common law. The word "Christian" appears only in the above quote.
And I'm not a historian, but lawyers are actually taught about the history of common law, since we rely on precedent dating all the way back, and we still have distinctions and rules that come from the 1400's.
You are just making stuff up.
p.s.: and where in the bible does this come from:
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
Now you are just making things up. And are you even aware of the difference between law and equity, and the role of the chancellor in old English common law? There were no "arbitrators." What on earth are you even talking about?
I hate to rely on wikipedia, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law might be a good place for you to start. You'll note the section on the influence of Roman law. You'll also see quotes like this:
"Well into the 19th century, ancient maxims played a large role in common law adjudication. Many of these maxims had originated in Roman Law, migrated to England before the introduction of Christianity to the British Isles, and were typically stated in Latin even in English decisions."
You'll also note that "arbitrator" and "arbitration" doesn't appear anywhere in that article because these are not principles of English common law. The word "Christian" appears only in the above quote.
And I'm not a historian, but lawyers are actually taught about the history of common law, since we rely on precedent dating all the way back, and we still have distinctions and rules that come from the 1400's.
You are just making stuff up.
p.s.: and where in the bible does this come from:
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
Peace
Aug 31, 12:11 PM
If there were a special event like the one described iLounge would have received one.
Thats not to say there won't be any Apple event around the Paris Expo.I'm sure there will be.Just because Jobs isn't doing a keynote doesn't mean Apple won't announce something.
Thats not to say there won't be any Apple event around the Paris Expo.I'm sure there will be.Just because Jobs isn't doing a keynote doesn't mean Apple won't announce something.
mcrain
Apr 20, 08:54 AM
Always makes me lol to see someone attribute slavery to the "right". The mysteries of 7th grade history class, revealed for you:
"The Republican Presidential Candidate Abraham Lincoln thought no price was too great for the abolition of slavery and the creation of a society in which a man was not judged by the color of his skin."
"The Democratic Party Platform presented a plan of "Compromise with the South", which ... would be to agree to make permanent the institution of slavery in exchange for an end to the Civil War and restoration of the Union. In other words, the Democratic party was ready to "Sell Out" the enslaved, in order to stop further loss of white lives."
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/democratic-party-platform.htm
"an exclusively partisan Democratic organization in the South" ... "the southern Klan remained Democratic, closely allied with Democratic police, sheriffs, and other functionaries of local government. With continuing disfranchisement of most African Americans and many poor whites, the only political activity took place within the Democratic Party."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan#Political_influence
You are right, but there is a great big asterick. The republicans a long, long time ago were the party that opposed slavery, and the southern democrats were the party more representative of slave owners.
What might have changed since the days of Abe Lincoln? Considering his museum is about 200 steps from where I'm sitting right now, I'll offer an answer. The positions of the two parties shifted when the Republicans adopted the southern strategy.
I find it funny (LOL) whenever Republicans point to Honest Abe as a standard bearer for their party when they turned their backs on what he stood for. If he were alive today, he would be a Democrat, and he would be ashamed of the efforts of his party to divide the nation into those who have vs. those who do not.
Southern Strategy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy)
(edit) So, depending on how you look at it, both arguments are correct. Yesterday's Democrats were responsible for slavery, but todays "right" sounds an awful lot like yesterday's southern Democrats. In other words, the "right" by today's standards would have been yesterday's Democrats.
From a 5 second google search - a different view of the same issue...
I find it extrememely hard to believe that Abe Lincoln would be a Republican today since the Republican Party of the 1860s was a completeley different animal than today's conservative GOP. Even though he was a moderate, his party's base of support was in the Northeast/New England and was made up of former Whigs, Free Soilers, Radical Republicans and abolitionists (i.e., America's first "bleeding-heart liberals"). The Democratic Party was the party of "states rights", wealthy plantation owners and slave-holders, and rather arch-conservative elements.
Abe Lincoln first made a name of himself by speaking out against the Mexican-American War in the Illinois legistlature, as a war that was only meant to expand slavery westward (can you say "ANTI-WAR LIBERAL")
Abe Lincoln was also hated in the South (he didn't recieve a SINGLE VOTE in the South!), was even accused to being half-black, even though he was not as radical as some other Republicans.
"The Republican Presidential Candidate Abraham Lincoln thought no price was too great for the abolition of slavery and the creation of a society in which a man was not judged by the color of his skin."
"The Democratic Party Platform presented a plan of "Compromise with the South", which ... would be to agree to make permanent the institution of slavery in exchange for an end to the Civil War and restoration of the Union. In other words, the Democratic party was ready to "Sell Out" the enslaved, in order to stop further loss of white lives."
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/democratic-party-platform.htm
"an exclusively partisan Democratic organization in the South" ... "the southern Klan remained Democratic, closely allied with Democratic police, sheriffs, and other functionaries of local government. With continuing disfranchisement of most African Americans and many poor whites, the only political activity took place within the Democratic Party."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan#Political_influence
You are right, but there is a great big asterick. The republicans a long, long time ago were the party that opposed slavery, and the southern democrats were the party more representative of slave owners.
What might have changed since the days of Abe Lincoln? Considering his museum is about 200 steps from where I'm sitting right now, I'll offer an answer. The positions of the two parties shifted when the Republicans adopted the southern strategy.
I find it funny (LOL) whenever Republicans point to Honest Abe as a standard bearer for their party when they turned their backs on what he stood for. If he were alive today, he would be a Democrat, and he would be ashamed of the efforts of his party to divide the nation into those who have vs. those who do not.
Southern Strategy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy)
(edit) So, depending on how you look at it, both arguments are correct. Yesterday's Democrats were responsible for slavery, but todays "right" sounds an awful lot like yesterday's southern Democrats. In other words, the "right" by today's standards would have been yesterday's Democrats.
From a 5 second google search - a different view of the same issue...
I find it extrememely hard to believe that Abe Lincoln would be a Republican today since the Republican Party of the 1860s was a completeley different animal than today's conservative GOP. Even though he was a moderate, his party's base of support was in the Northeast/New England and was made up of former Whigs, Free Soilers, Radical Republicans and abolitionists (i.e., America's first "bleeding-heart liberals"). The Democratic Party was the party of "states rights", wealthy plantation owners and slave-holders, and rather arch-conservative elements.
Abe Lincoln first made a name of himself by speaking out against the Mexican-American War in the Illinois legistlature, as a war that was only meant to expand slavery westward (can you say "ANTI-WAR LIBERAL")
Abe Lincoln was also hated in the South (he didn't recieve a SINGLE VOTE in the South!), was even accused to being half-black, even though he was not as radical as some other Republicans.
calculus
Oct 12, 02:54 PM
Here's a challenge. How about everyone here who has an iPod gives $10 or equivalent to this charity?
Amazing Iceman
Apr 4, 12:10 PM
Why did they say "went bad"? As robberies go killing the robber is about as good as it gets.
It was either the guard or the robber, and if the robber wins, other innocent people may get shot too. You may not understand it, unless it happened to someone close to you.
If the robber had a gun, he planned to use it if necessary. He was not going to have any consideration for whoever he shoots, as long as he could get away with his crime.
It was either the guard or the robber, and if the robber wins, other innocent people may get shot too. You may not understand it, unless it happened to someone close to you.
If the robber had a gun, he planned to use it if necessary. He was not going to have any consideration for whoever he shoots, as long as he could get away with his crime.
BornAgainMac
Sep 9, 06:36 AM
It wouldn't have been worth it to wait for these unless you wanted the 24 inch display (and Firewire 800) with your iMac. The iMac really looks like a good switcher machine that gives Pro performance to the masses.
bitfactory
Oct 27, 09:45 AM
As I said, fewer and fewer spaces where public debate can take place. Shopping malls are the same - 'public spaces' that aren't. Soon streets that have been public for years will start to be be privatised to provide 'better value for taxpayers' and the takeover will continue.
Then where can free debate take place? Some postage-stamp size bit of turf you call home?
Huh? Here, this might help. (http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/12293)
... and who thought shopping malls were public places? WTH? Honestly.
Then where can free debate take place? Some postage-stamp size bit of turf you call home?
Huh? Here, this might help. (http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/12293)
... and who thought shopping malls were public places? WTH? Honestly.
itsmenyc
Mar 29, 03:07 PM
Just out of idle curiosity: is IDC ever right? Ever nearly right?
No, never. They should be IDK not IDC! :D
No, never. They should be IDK not IDC! :D
Gatorman
Sep 14, 09:32 AM
here we go again
apple are on fire at the moment.....bring it on
I was thinking the very same thing! :rolleyes:
apple are on fire at the moment.....bring it on
I was thinking the very same thing! :rolleyes:
fly75
Mar 29, 11:38 AM
So IDC is projecting that Nokia is crowding other WP7 vendors of the market, or it will be losing market share.
g7by08believeit
Oct 12, 05:10 PM
100% confirmed.
via Chicago Tribune:
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/5016/25865863uz2.jpg
It looks like a more "true" red to me!
Look at the upper left portion of the picture! MBP black anodized with C2D
W00t!
via Chicago Tribune:
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/5016/25865863uz2.jpg
It looks like a more "true" red to me!
Look at the upper left portion of the picture! MBP black anodized with C2D
W00t!
Sol
Sep 9, 01:57 AM
Did a certain platform jumping red-cap wearing Italian plumber write the headline?
Mama mia! iMac Core 2 Duo Benchamarks!
Mama mia! iMac Core 2 Duo Benchamarks!
Multimedia
Jul 20, 11:27 PM
You don't think Apple would get raked over the coals if they released towers that were slower than the last generation? Conroe is fast, but no way it beats a quad G5. And I don't think a promise of a quad machine later on helps public relations any.
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.Maybe I misunderstood your post, I thought you meant releasing conroe machines and not shipping quads until months later. If that were the case, people would inevitably compare the new towers to the G5 quads, regardless if they were intended to replace those models.
I think the reason they haven't announced woodcrest towers is because they want to wait for WWDC, and because the line will be split between woodcrest and conroe. It wouldn't make sense to announce half the tower lineup, people would assume that was it and react accordingly.I believe this is the correct analysis. I am in full agreement with Milo. Good job M. :)
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.Maybe I misunderstood your post, I thought you meant releasing conroe machines and not shipping quads until months later. If that were the case, people would inevitably compare the new towers to the G5 quads, regardless if they were intended to replace those models.
I think the reason they haven't announced woodcrest towers is because they want to wait for WWDC, and because the line will be split between woodcrest and conroe. It wouldn't make sense to announce half the tower lineup, people would assume that was it and react accordingly.I believe this is the correct analysis. I am in full agreement with Milo. Good job M. :)
Sean7512
Sep 12, 02:19 PM
Do the "older 5G" ipods support the new tv shows (640x480) and movies???? I don't care about the new search and such...Im just wondering about the movies and games.
Consultant
Apr 25, 02:49 AM
Doesn't sound like Dmac would really care. After all, the other guy is at fault because they didn't have the common courtesy to move the car.
Exactly. Some states have prominent signs that vehicles can only be in the left lane only for passing.
Exactly. Some states have prominent signs that vehicles can only be in the left lane only for passing.
Chundles
Oct 12, 01:20 PM
It's certainly better than an red, glossy 1G nano - hopefully it would have the proper matte, anodised finish of the current nanos rather than the glossy coating ColorWarePC use to do their custom iPods.
Not too bad though...
http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/7410/picture1pc9.png
Not too bad though...
http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/7410/picture1pc9.png
Mac Fly (film)
Sep 4, 08:06 PM
"Media Device" = Does it include an iPod Video?
This would somewhat explain why the Paris Expo was given the cold shoulder.
"Bonjour, mes amis! The iTunes Movie Store is finally here! (but only in the U.S.)"
This way, they announce the store but also get a chance to demo the product at the Expo.
-Squire
TV shows are US only, but I doubt Movies will be US only. That would be like music being US only? TV shows are a different animal.
This would somewhat explain why the Paris Expo was given the cold shoulder.
"Bonjour, mes amis! The iTunes Movie Store is finally here! (but only in the U.S.)"
This way, they announce the store but also get a chance to demo the product at the Expo.
-Squire
TV shows are US only, but I doubt Movies will be US only. That would be like music being US only? TV shows are a different animal.
Elrond39
Sep 26, 07:06 AM
Did you even read the link?
Speculation is that O2 will have the exclusive rights to the iPhone in Europe. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think O2 is somehow connected to Orange. So it looks like the iPhone will have a carrier in Europe and the UK.
Well, that settles it... I'm waiting however long it takes for this to come GSM carrier-unlocked. I refuse to give up my current provider (because I'm getting massive minutes at a nice low cost), and I'm never going to buy a phone that's locked to one carrier, because you end up paying crazy amounts per month. Sucks. Well, guess this here T610 of mine will have to last even longer still.
Speculation is that O2 will have the exclusive rights to the iPhone in Europe. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think O2 is somehow connected to Orange. So it looks like the iPhone will have a carrier in Europe and the UK.
Well, that settles it... I'm waiting however long it takes for this to come GSM carrier-unlocked. I refuse to give up my current provider (because I'm getting massive minutes at a nice low cost), and I'm never going to buy a phone that's locked to one carrier, because you end up paying crazy amounts per month. Sucks. Well, guess this here T610 of mine will have to last even longer still.
evilgEEk
Sep 19, 02:52 PM
What I don't understand is how Amazon was able to get all those studios on board, but not Apple.
Amazon is letting the studios set the pricing, that's why more jumped on board. But if this article (http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/18/technology/lewis_unbox.fortune/?postversion=2006091909) is any indication they won't be there for long. ;)
Amazon is letting the studios set the pricing, that's why more jumped on board. But if this article (http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/18/technology/lewis_unbox.fortune/?postversion=2006091909) is any indication they won't be there for long. ;)
dr Dunkel
Mar 23, 01:40 AM
Call me spoiled by all things thin, I think the iMac is looking pretty chunky these days. Not sure why it isn't significantly thinner than it is. The next time they do update the form factor it should essentially look like a giant first gen iPad.
I see no end in itself in the iMac getting thinner. Performance is much more important to me. I think the form factor is fine today, and no, today we can't have both. I want a real computer, not a giant iPad.
I see no end in itself in the iMac getting thinner. Performance is much more important to me. I think the form factor is fine today, and no, today we can't have both. I want a real computer, not a giant iPad.