acies909
Apr 27, 08:11 AM
This is a lie
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad: Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
At least our overlord will now, I hope, stop collecting location data when location services are turned off. It's a disgrace that it took a media storm to shame them into action.
The fact is that the iPhone is logging the location of the near by hot spot and cell tower. So if the cell tower is 50 miles away is some instances it is tracking that information not that the GPS location of your phone 50 miles from your phone. If you did the tracking thing on your computer and saw the map with your info, you would notice that some of the dots are places that you probably have never been. When I did and I went up to Northern Michigan it was tracking information approx 60 miles from the road I was on. This is why I never worried about this cause I knew it wasn't actually tracking my iPhones GPS location rather the nearest cell or Wifi location.
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad: Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
At least our overlord will now, I hope, stop collecting location data when location services are turned off. It's a disgrace that it took a media storm to shame them into action.
The fact is that the iPhone is logging the location of the near by hot spot and cell tower. So if the cell tower is 50 miles away is some instances it is tracking that information not that the GPS location of your phone 50 miles from your phone. If you did the tracking thing on your computer and saw the map with your info, you would notice that some of the dots are places that you probably have never been. When I did and I went up to Northern Michigan it was tracking information approx 60 miles from the road I was on. This is why I never worried about this cause I knew it wasn't actually tracking my iPhones GPS location rather the nearest cell or Wifi location.
Deefuzz
Nov 17, 09:00 AM
a rather dissapointing car list .. what gives with not a single newer model from VW than 2005 ? hardly any new alfas, no audi a1, a5, a7 ? no fiat 500 abarth ?
in general having old models instead of new ones at european car makers ? apart of lambo and ferrari few classic cars from european car makers added ?
so they neither added old cars and hardly any new european cars but instead mostly kept the car models from 1998-2004 period ... a big dissapointment
Actually I have to agree with this. There are somewhere around 1000 cars on the list, and some of the choices are confusing. No V series Cadillacs (only 1 Cadillac total actually) yet there are a crap ton of Nissan Skylines.
Hopefully they will fill in some of the roster with DLC, but then there's the issue of pumping more money into a game for content that should have been included from the start.
I still have it preordered and very much look forward to it, but the car list is a little confusing and disappointing.
in general having old models instead of new ones at european car makers ? apart of lambo and ferrari few classic cars from european car makers added ?
so they neither added old cars and hardly any new european cars but instead mostly kept the car models from 1998-2004 period ... a big dissapointment
Actually I have to agree with this. There are somewhere around 1000 cars on the list, and some of the choices are confusing. No V series Cadillacs (only 1 Cadillac total actually) yet there are a crap ton of Nissan Skylines.
Hopefully they will fill in some of the roster with DLC, but then there's the issue of pumping more money into a game for content that should have been included from the start.
I still have it preordered and very much look forward to it, but the car list is a little confusing and disappointing.
leekohler
Mar 3, 12:04 PM
I goofed. I misinterpreted what Lee said about sodomy. He said that not all homosexuals engage in sodomy. I thought he thought homosexual sex was not sodomy. Unfortunately, too often, when I'm impulsive, I misinterpret what others write.
I don't look down on anyone here. I didn't look down on anyone here. I'm sorry I gave the impression that I did that. I'm sorry I've written insultingly, too. I didn't mean to do that.
Sadly, I sometimes do react emotionally when I should react rationally instead. And I do need to try harder to comprehend what others say.
Fair enough. Now let's move along. ;)
I don't look down on anyone here. I didn't look down on anyone here. I'm sorry I gave the impression that I did that. I'm sorry I've written insultingly, too. I didn't mean to do that.
Sadly, I sometimes do react emotionally when I should react rationally instead. And I do need to try harder to comprehend what others say.
Fair enough. Now let's move along. ;)
carmenodie
Mar 31, 05:53 PM
Let me tell you the real deal behind this.
Google gave away the Android OS for free because they wanted Android on as many cell phones as possible so they could capitalize on that whole click an ad sh** that generates Google so much money in the phone space. And of curse the cell phone makers happily got on the bandwagon b/c they didn't have to spend millions making their own effing OS. As long as they followed the licensing agreement they were fine.
Now Google has pulled the rug from under them. Google knows that hundreds of millions have been spent by the cell makers in their commitment to Android devices. Advertising, new models etc. A whole lot of cash. Now Google wants tighter control as if they OWN these cell phone makers.And who ever doesn't want to play ball can go to hell as far as Google is concerned.
Right now HTC, LG, Sammy and Moto look like bi***!
Ha ha! But not Apple.
Ain't it awesome to row your own damn boat.
Google gave away the Android OS for free because they wanted Android on as many cell phones as possible so they could capitalize on that whole click an ad sh** that generates Google so much money in the phone space. And of curse the cell phone makers happily got on the bandwagon b/c they didn't have to spend millions making their own effing OS. As long as they followed the licensing agreement they were fine.
Now Google has pulled the rug from under them. Google knows that hundreds of millions have been spent by the cell makers in their commitment to Android devices. Advertising, new models etc. A whole lot of cash. Now Google wants tighter control as if they OWN these cell phone makers.And who ever doesn't want to play ball can go to hell as far as Google is concerned.
Right now HTC, LG, Sammy and Moto look like bi***!
Ha ha! But not Apple.
Ain't it awesome to row your own damn boat.
ugp
Jun 11, 09:23 AM
I'm on a conf call and just got word about the early openings. As soon as i get to work in a minute ill post all the info i have. :)
Please let me know ASAP! :D
Please let me know ASAP! :D
rayz
Aug 8, 03:08 AM
Well I for one was kind of disappointed. Leopard is sort of Apple's chance to prove they can out-Vista Vista, and I'm not really sure what we saw today does it. I've been following Vista somewhat closely, and it really does catch Windows up to OS X in terms of features and prettiness.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
Have to agree with you on just about everything. If MS tried to release something like this, as anything other than a service pack, their user base would (quite rightly) crucify them.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago, and everything else is an upgrade rather than anything really new. I was expecting more from the desktop switching, but I have a feeling that will look much different when it's actually released.
But since there is some other stuff planned, then it's best to wait and see what they come up with, before declaring it a dud.
Looks like a nice solid revision so far, but not much else.
.. and given the universal unpopularity of Microsoft's Flip3D interface, I was surprised to see it showing up in the UI for TimeMachine.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
Have to agree with you on just about everything. If MS tried to release something like this, as anything other than a service pack, their user base would (quite rightly) crucify them.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago, and everything else is an upgrade rather than anything really new. I was expecting more from the desktop switching, but I have a feeling that will look much different when it's actually released.
But since there is some other stuff planned, then it's best to wait and see what they come up with, before declaring it a dud.
Looks like a nice solid revision so far, but not much else.
.. and given the universal unpopularity of Microsoft's Flip3D interface, I was surprised to see it showing up in the UI for TimeMachine.
yadmonkey
Aug 11, 03:17 PM
Apple's reasons for being secretive about product releases don't apply to their potential phone because they don't have a current product which they want people to buy in the meantime. In fact, this time around, it'll be advantageous to Apple for people to know it's coming, as they may hold out for one instead of getting something else. Once there is an iPhone, then they will probably be secretive about the next version.
DeVizardofOZ
Aug 30, 06:14 AM
I don't believe Apple would (or should) license out Mac OS X to run on non-Apple hardware. This is because Apple is a hardware company that uses Mac OS X to sell hardware. I wouldn't want it to be licensed out anyway, because then we would have to deal with registration key nightmares. Right now, there's nothing but your conscience and a license agreement you probably threw away keeping you from installing one copy of Mac OS X on every Mac you can get your hands on. Not that I do that, but I sure like just popping in my disk and reinstalling whenever it strikes my fancy.
On to the support issue, I think since the beginning of technical support there have always been those who complain that quality has really gone down and back in the good ol' days, you never had any problems, ever! And now, by golly, it's a coin toss whether you get a machine that even turns on!
Right, gramps, and back in your day, you walked to school uphill both ways in the snow with no boots and you liked it.
And 25% of new machines being lemons? Last quarter, Apple reported they shipped 1,327,000 computers. If we call a quarter 90 days, and assume that 25% of them are dead, that's more than 3,600 computers sold defective every single day. Are you kidding me? You really think a major hardware company would sell 3,600 defective computers every single day and get away with it?
This is what's really happening: Apple is selling more machines than ever. Apple's customers have greater access to the internet than ever. Even if the rate of failure stays the same, you have more customers with more internet savvy to come whine and moan on bulletin boards.
Yes, you deserve a perfectly functioning computer and you have the right to complain when your computer is broken. So call Apple or go down to your local service provider and get your machine serviced under warranty. That's what it's there for. It's also the number 1 best way to help Apple get clued in to potential issues with their products. They're not going to issue a recall because a bunch of bulletin board users complain to each other over and over again until they convince each other that there isn't a single MacBook Pro in the world that functions properly.
_________________________________________________________________________
because, no matter what I hear around the board, all of you forgot to consider, that there must be a large number of faulty products WHICH DID NOT SLIP THROUGH THE SLOPPY CQ AT THE FACTORY. Therefore 20-25% lemons is indeed possible and much too high a percentage in any manufacturing process.
Best
On to the support issue, I think since the beginning of technical support there have always been those who complain that quality has really gone down and back in the good ol' days, you never had any problems, ever! And now, by golly, it's a coin toss whether you get a machine that even turns on!
Right, gramps, and back in your day, you walked to school uphill both ways in the snow with no boots and you liked it.
And 25% of new machines being lemons? Last quarter, Apple reported they shipped 1,327,000 computers. If we call a quarter 90 days, and assume that 25% of them are dead, that's more than 3,600 computers sold defective every single day. Are you kidding me? You really think a major hardware company would sell 3,600 defective computers every single day and get away with it?
This is what's really happening: Apple is selling more machines than ever. Apple's customers have greater access to the internet than ever. Even if the rate of failure stays the same, you have more customers with more internet savvy to come whine and moan on bulletin boards.
Yes, you deserve a perfectly functioning computer and you have the right to complain when your computer is broken. So call Apple or go down to your local service provider and get your machine serviced under warranty. That's what it's there for. It's also the number 1 best way to help Apple get clued in to potential issues with their products. They're not going to issue a recall because a bunch of bulletin board users complain to each other over and over again until they convince each other that there isn't a single MacBook Pro in the world that functions properly.
_________________________________________________________________________
because, no matter what I hear around the board, all of you forgot to consider, that there must be a large number of faulty products WHICH DID NOT SLIP THROUGH THE SLOPPY CQ AT THE FACTORY. Therefore 20-25% lemons is indeed possible and much too high a percentage in any manufacturing process.
Best
Sydde
Mar 23, 06:03 PM
Isn't that an ad feminam?
Well, I suppose it really should have been ad homines � the (proper) plural would I think mitigate the gender.
Well, I suppose it really should have been ad homines � the (proper) plural would I think mitigate the gender.
Thataboy
Jul 27, 07:59 PM
It absolutely will!!! Leopard is just going to be mostly beneficial for dual-core machines. Read this article:
http://macosrumors.com/20060710A1.php
Leopard sounds FAST!
You didn't really just link to MOSR, did you? :p
Anyway, I have the sneaking suspicion that we will see Core 2 Duo/Extreme-related computer announcements next week, and not at WWDC. WWDC will get major coverage anyway because of Leopard (which could easily take up the whole keynote). So why not spread the Apple press over 2 weeks?
Moreover, everyone announced new computers today. Apple might have wanted to avoid the first-day glut of releases, but they might not want to wait almost 2 full weeks to announce a Mac Pro.
My wild guess is Mac Daddy Extreme and/or iMaconroe on Tuesday with near-immediate availability, and announcement of MeromBook Pro at WWDC with early September availability.
http://macosrumors.com/20060710A1.php
Leopard sounds FAST!
You didn't really just link to MOSR, did you? :p
Anyway, I have the sneaking suspicion that we will see Core 2 Duo/Extreme-related computer announcements next week, and not at WWDC. WWDC will get major coverage anyway because of Leopard (which could easily take up the whole keynote). So why not spread the Apple press over 2 weeks?
Moreover, everyone announced new computers today. Apple might have wanted to avoid the first-day glut of releases, but they might not want to wait almost 2 full weeks to announce a Mac Pro.
My wild guess is Mac Daddy Extreme and/or iMaconroe on Tuesday with near-immediate availability, and announcement of MeromBook Pro at WWDC with early September availability.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 05:13 AM
Bill, I would love to hear your explanation for the position of the male prostate.
I don't understand the question. Whatever it means, I wouldn't assume that having, say, genitals, means that I'm always morally free to have sex. If everyone with genitals were always morally free to do that, homosexually abusive pedophile priests would have been morally free to molest their victims.
IYou might say, "Bill, if the sex was consensual, maybe there nothing morally wrong with it." But people can coerce others into consenting.
A quick side note: Sexual tension is most often the cause for anger, jealousy and frustration. So, if everyone had at least one good orgasm every day, the world would be a much more relaxed and peaceful place and we wouldn't have the need for silly discussions such as these.
Most often? How many are jealous of others because the others are right, because they drive fancy cars, etc.?
Some may feel relaxed about something because they've deadened their consciences that rightly warned them against it.. In that case, a discussion such as this one may be needed, even if the participants don't feel any sexual tension.
I don't understand the question. Whatever it means, I wouldn't assume that having, say, genitals, means that I'm always morally free to have sex. If everyone with genitals were always morally free to do that, homosexually abusive pedophile priests would have been morally free to molest their victims.
IYou might say, "Bill, if the sex was consensual, maybe there nothing morally wrong with it." But people can coerce others into consenting.
A quick side note: Sexual tension is most often the cause for anger, jealousy and frustration. So, if everyone had at least one good orgasm every day, the world would be a much more relaxed and peaceful place and we wouldn't have the need for silly discussions such as these.
Most often? How many are jealous of others because the others are right, because they drive fancy cars, etc.?
Some may feel relaxed about something because they've deadened their consciences that rightly warned them against it.. In that case, a discussion such as this one may be needed, even if the participants don't feel any sexual tension.
Thunderbird
Aug 7, 05:09 PM
Like the whole 3ghz thing?
Ok, except for that
Ok, except for that
blackpond
Apr 11, 04:37 PM
This is bunk. Apple will not miss Christmas. Period, end of discussion.
If the 5 launches a short while before Christmas, the supply constraints would be 10x worse than they are for the iPad right now.
The only thing this rumor proves is that bloggers, speculators, and analysts are getting irritated with the lack of solid info compared to this time last year.
Apple can create Christmas any day of the year.
If the 5 launches a short while before Christmas, the supply constraints would be 10x worse than they are for the iPad right now.
The only thing this rumor proves is that bloggers, speculators, and analysts are getting irritated with the lack of solid info compared to this time last year.
Apple can create Christmas any day of the year.
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 07:58 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
rjohnstone
Apr 25, 03:00 PM
ya.. not like it's on right on the "features" page of iphone's website, ( http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/ .) It isn't like they have a whole page about it, ( http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/maps-compass.html .)
Who would think the an electronic device such as an iPhone would know your exactly location? And why would any cache information locally when the same exactly information can be gotten over a slow, inconsistent connection?
Location services is not the same as storing every place you've ever been.
Why does the db never get cleared?
If location info is required for an app, why would I want to use info from possibly over a year ago that may no longer be accurate?
I won't put on a tinfoil hat just yet. For now I'll just chalk this issue up to sloppy programming. ;)
Same on the iPhone... this is not what we're talking about here. Application tracking has always been opt in or out.
This is just a database of cell tower pings. That's all. it's shared with NO ONE and goes nowhere except on your phone. It's like your web browser cache.
Apple still fails to answer the question of "why?"
Why do they need it if it is not used?
I know why a web browser has a cache. At least the web browser is smart enough to clean that up after a while.
Who would think the an electronic device such as an iPhone would know your exactly location? And why would any cache information locally when the same exactly information can be gotten over a slow, inconsistent connection?
Location services is not the same as storing every place you've ever been.
Why does the db never get cleared?
If location info is required for an app, why would I want to use info from possibly over a year ago that may no longer be accurate?
I won't put on a tinfoil hat just yet. For now I'll just chalk this issue up to sloppy programming. ;)
Same on the iPhone... this is not what we're talking about here. Application tracking has always been opt in or out.
This is just a database of cell tower pings. That's all. it's shared with NO ONE and goes nowhere except on your phone. It's like your web browser cache.
Apple still fails to answer the question of "why?"
Why do they need it if it is not used?
I know why a web browser has a cache. At least the web browser is smart enough to clean that up after a while.
bigandy
Aug 25, 03:10 PM
the vocal minority are always the ones who have problems :rolleyes:
Macaroony
Mar 7, 07:51 AM
I won't rejoin this discussion. But since neko girl may be waiting for my reply, I'll only suggest a source (http://www.tfp.org/images/books/Defending_A_Higher_Law.pdf).
Here's a tidbit from the pdf:
This book is dedicated to the
Holy Family, the sublime model for all
families, and our sure guide in the
reaction to the sexual revolution and
homosexual offensive.
May the Blessed Mother intercede
with Her Divine Son for all Americans
committed to defend the sacred
institutions of marriage and the family.
Interesting... wasn't Mary knocked up by an angel and was she really married to Joseph? :confused:
Whoever wrote this nonsense has no idea how the world really works and what the social and cultural consensus was in the 1700s, the Renaissance and all the way before. Any idealized tradition in family, culture and society the Christians of today are pining for would completely eradicate everything we've worked for to be free and live without fear to be who we are.
I just have one thing to say to all the righteous religious folk; it's over, end of the line, the jig is up. You've had your chance and you blew it. Join us in the 21st century where liberty, freedom and equality prevail - it's not perfect but it's the best we can do. So, rather than fighting it, join it and help it make better.
Here's a tidbit from the pdf:
This book is dedicated to the
Holy Family, the sublime model for all
families, and our sure guide in the
reaction to the sexual revolution and
homosexual offensive.
May the Blessed Mother intercede
with Her Divine Son for all Americans
committed to defend the sacred
institutions of marriage and the family.
Interesting... wasn't Mary knocked up by an angel and was she really married to Joseph? :confused:
Whoever wrote this nonsense has no idea how the world really works and what the social and cultural consensus was in the 1700s, the Renaissance and all the way before. Any idealized tradition in family, culture and society the Christians of today are pining for would completely eradicate everything we've worked for to be free and live without fear to be who we are.
I just have one thing to say to all the righteous religious folk; it's over, end of the line, the jig is up. You've had your chance and you blew it. Join us in the 21st century where liberty, freedom and equality prevail - it's not perfect but it's the best we can do. So, rather than fighting it, join it and help it make better.
realitymonkey
Apr 6, 09:52 AM
You must have pretty limited experience.
It's the only logistical way to deliver high-bitrate 1080p material to clients.
Really what sort of clients ?
It's the only logistical way to deliver high-bitrate 1080p material to clients.
Really what sort of clients ?
AidenShaw
Aug 27, 08:17 AM
I believe Intel has been having trouble getting the required chipsets out on time to the desktop market.
You can get the chips themselves without much trouble- the retail versions are available at Newegg for the 1.86, 2.13, 2.66, and 2.93 Extreme Core 2 Duo chips, with the sole out of stock chip being the 2.4GHz chip, with an estimated time of arrival being Sept. 1st at 2:30PM.
I was at a local DIY store Saturday, and they had stacks of Core 2 Duo (Conroe) chips in all speeds, and lots of mobos with 965 and 975 chipsets.
It would be unusual for that store to have all that kit if there's a supply problem.
http://www.centralcomputer.com/products.asp?pline=HCPUI
You can get the chips themselves without much trouble- the retail versions are available at Newegg for the 1.86, 2.13, 2.66, and 2.93 Extreme Core 2 Duo chips, with the sole out of stock chip being the 2.4GHz chip, with an estimated time of arrival being Sept. 1st at 2:30PM.
I was at a local DIY store Saturday, and they had stacks of Core 2 Duo (Conroe) chips in all speeds, and lots of mobos with 965 and 975 chipsets.
It would be unusual for that store to have all that kit if there's a supply problem.
http://www.centralcomputer.com/products.asp?pline=HCPUI
robbyx
Apr 25, 04:29 PM
Normally I would argue that the customer doesn't have a right to a lot of things. But in this case - if you bought a device and it is tracking you (I'm not saying it is or it isn't) - the customer does have a right to know.
This (sort of) reminds me of how now your are legally allowed to get a free credit report once a year to determine whether or not it's correct. Companies used to make a fortune charging for something that people, inherently had the right to know.
Where does these RIGHTS you speak of come from? Frankly, I don't know if it's a right or not, but I hear the word "right" used a lot these days by people who have no idea what it means.
Much ado about nothing.
This (sort of) reminds me of how now your are legally allowed to get a free credit report once a year to determine whether or not it's correct. Companies used to make a fortune charging for something that people, inherently had the right to know.
Where does these RIGHTS you speak of come from? Frankly, I don't know if it's a right or not, but I hear the word "right" used a lot these days by people who have no idea what it means.
Much ado about nothing.
mdavis
Mar 26, 08:23 PM
What? this seems hard to believe... Already done on development? :confused:
it's not a particularly large release
it's not a particularly large release
intlplby
Nov 28, 09:05 PM
the way i see it, MP3 players have been the single biggest factor in increasing sales of music (as well as song piracy) so in a way the ipod is driving the purchase of CDs, not CDs driving the purchase of iPods
both items feed each other
Music increases iPod sales and iPod sales increase music sales... it's a feedback loop
Universal owes Apple money on the same logic......
both items feed each other
Music increases iPod sales and iPod sales increase music sales... it's a feedback loop
Universal owes Apple money on the same logic......
Sydde
Mar 23, 06:03 PM
Isn't that an ad feminam?
Well, I suppose it really should have been ad homines � the (proper) plural would I think mitigate the gender.
Well, I suppose it really should have been ad homines � the (proper) plural would I think mitigate the gender.
NoSmokingBandit
Nov 30, 07:15 AM
I havent gotten to them yet, but i've heard they are just as awesome as GT3's endurance races.
No comments:
Post a Comment