Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 7, 10:24 PM
Please tell him.
me too! I wanna learn!
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
me too! I wanna learn!
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:05 AM
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
MacRumors
Apr 11, 11:22 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/11/iphone-5-to-start-production-in-september/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/04/223937-iphonekeynote.jpg
statue for liberty plaza
Statue of Liberty (Silkscreen
statue of liberty face close
statue of liberty crown
scale Statue of Liberty,
to Lady Liberty#39;s face.
left to face until the end
of the Statue of Liberty
Statue of Liberty - Face in
statue of liberty face. the Statue of Liberty and; the Statue of Liberty and. Popeye206. Apr 11, 02:17 PM
statue of liberty face.
the statue of liberty crown.
statue of liberty face
statue of liberty face
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/04/223937-iphonekeynote.jpg
Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:38 PM
So if the new iMacs are using 64-bit merom or conroe chips, what is the likelihood of them offering 4Mb of RAM?
And if they did, is the RAM likely to cost any more than it does for the current iMacs, due to the no of slots?I think you mean 4GB of RAM. The likelyhood of Apple offering it is ZERO. If they did, it would be offered for two to three times what you could buy it from a third party.
2GB sticks are still too expensive. See the G5 Quad prices for 2GB sticks:
Non ECC is $4700 for 8 sticks $587.50 each or $1175 per pair
ECC is $10,300 for 8 sticks or $1287.50 each or $2575 per pair
These prices are not in the class that an iMac buyer would want to consider paying.
And if they did, is the RAM likely to cost any more than it does for the current iMacs, due to the no of slots?I think you mean 4GB of RAM. The likelyhood of Apple offering it is ZERO. If they did, it would be offered for two to three times what you could buy it from a third party.
2GB sticks are still too expensive. See the G5 Quad prices for 2GB sticks:
Non ECC is $4700 for 8 sticks $587.50 each or $1175 per pair
ECC is $10,300 for 8 sticks or $1287.50 each or $2575 per pair
These prices are not in the class that an iMac buyer would want to consider paying.
DoFoT9
Nov 29, 03:28 PM
lots of negativity, but i was happy with GT3&4 for the pure racing side of things.
what i REALLY enjoyed from GT3, was the endurance events - how are they in GT5?
what i REALLY enjoyed from GT3, was the endurance events - how are they in GT5?
epitaphic
Sep 13, 07:59 AM
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
probably due to latency involved in distributing the load across the two processors. that's the same problem a single Clovertown would have. Only true quads wouldn't suffer from these problems (earliest seems to be Harpertown in don't know if there are any non-MCM Xeons scheduled before then)
probably due to latency involved in distributing the load across the two processors. that's the same problem a single Clovertown would have. Only true quads wouldn't suffer from these problems (earliest seems to be Harpertown in don't know if there are any non-MCM Xeons scheduled before then)
kansast
Nov 28, 09:43 PM
yea no thanks. i pay for my music anyway. got to support the "band" you know :)
Who's to say that if I buy an iPod that I would ever want to put any of Universal's music on it //
Who's to say that if I buy an iPod that I would ever want to put any of Universal's music on it //
slackpacker
Apr 10, 07:56 AM
Are you speculating or have you just disobeyed your NDA? ;-)
speculating from what the video showed and a little past history industry knowledge
speculating from what the video showed and a little past history industry knowledge
rezenclowd3
Nov 24, 09:36 PM
Oh I forgot. Still no qualifying/race weekends. LAME.
Why the F%^$ don't race games include the race weekend experience, especially if it's a sim? F1 2010 at least does, but that game, even post-patch is horrendous.
From racing RC cars, and AutoXing, qualifying/practice is so much of the experience. I hate always starting halfway or last in the field like I am forced to be a noob. It seems instead they force one to use a better car than the rest of the field to win, or severely inhibit the AIs ability.
Why the F%^$ don't race games include the race weekend experience, especially if it's a sim? F1 2010 at least does, but that game, even post-patch is horrendous.
From racing RC cars, and AutoXing, qualifying/practice is so much of the experience. I hate always starting halfway or last in the field like I am forced to be a noob. It seems instead they force one to use a better car than the rest of the field to win, or severely inhibit the AIs ability.
obeygiant
Apr 27, 10:33 PM
I lost it a long time ago. Trump is an asshat that should just shut the **** up and go back to diddling eastern european models and building casinos (is that christian right compliant I wonder?).
The truth is if Barack Obama was instead Piers Morgan or Simon Cowell and a republican candidate, there would have been an uproar if anyone had dared to ask if they were actually Americans by birth. Its racism, period. The right doesn't want a liberool n***** in the white house. That is it in the ****ing list. Anyone saying that's not what this is about is a ****ing liar.
**** the ****ing ****ers.
Obama's birth certificate's got a big ol butt.. das rite
Obama's birth certificate's got a big ol butt..
Holla!
The truth is if Barack Obama was instead Piers Morgan or Simon Cowell and a republican candidate, there would have been an uproar if anyone had dared to ask if they were actually Americans by birth. Its racism, period. The right doesn't want a liberool n***** in the white house. That is it in the ****ing list. Anyone saying that's not what this is about is a ****ing liar.
**** the ****ing ****ers.
Obama's birth certificate's got a big ol butt.. das rite
Obama's birth certificate's got a big ol butt..
Holla!
chrono1081
Apr 8, 03:46 AM
This is a victory for all the elitist fanboys who think that Apple products should only be sold in Apple Stores in upscale shopping areas.
You know that no one thinks that way right? I never understood all of these "fanboy" posts saying things that these mysterious "fanyboys" that I've never seen supposedly say.
You know that no one thinks that way right? I never understood all of these "fanboy" posts saying things that these mysterious "fanyboys" that I've never seen supposedly say.
Zadillo
Aug 27, 03:59 PM
Finally people who grasp it
It's not that people didn't understand the joke. It's that the joke ceased being funny after the first couple of hundreds of times it was told.
-Zadillo
It's not that people didn't understand the joke. It's that the joke ceased being funny after the first couple of hundreds of times it was told.
-Zadillo
Acerone
Apr 6, 10:50 AM
can we also expect, ?
-backlit keys
-brighter display, colors, and ips
-hd facetime
all would be greatly appreciated along with the sandy bridge
fingers crossed for no over-heating issues, you know how those turbo speeds can get and how they've treated the 13'' pros
+1
-backlit keys
-brighter display, colors, and ips
-hd facetime
all would be greatly appreciated along with the sandy bridge
fingers crossed for no over-heating issues, you know how those turbo speeds can get and how they've treated the 13'' pros
+1
Reach9
Apr 11, 04:11 PM
Perhaps solely in the phone part of the equation. Here's the newsflash: the "smart" part of "smartphone" encompasses much more than a voice-driven contact list and actual phone calls.
The iOS ecosystem completely destroys Android, no matter how many widgets you're able to install.
You're right, but here's where i think is the difference. Browsing the Internet, Calendar, Checking Mail, Listening to songs, Texting, Multitasking, Notifications, Cut-Copy-Paste, ability to open and use Office files, Navigation system, basic tools like Currency converters, To-Do lists etc. These are what i believe encompasses in a "smartphone", and here's the newsflash: Android OS meets them perfectly.
I'm not talking about widgets, customization, dynamic wallapers etc
The iPhone was late on MMS, Multitasking, Cut-Copy-Paste, and now it's going to be a notification system. Plus, browsing the internet, checking mail and practically everything is much better on a bigger screen.
I feel the App Store is just an added feature, and that's why i'd get an iPod Touch for.
Imagine your iPhone without the App store and all the apps you downloaded from it. Now imagine the HTC EVO without the Android app store. Which is the better smartphone? It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
Android OS already has the "smartphone" features down, and they're just working on the bonus features such as the Android App Store.
iOS on the other hand is catching up to these "smartphone" features. My old Nokia E63 had a better notification system than the iPhone, and that's pathetic.
The iOS ecosystem completely destroys Android, no matter how many widgets you're able to install.
You're right, but here's where i think is the difference. Browsing the Internet, Calendar, Checking Mail, Listening to songs, Texting, Multitasking, Notifications, Cut-Copy-Paste, ability to open and use Office files, Navigation system, basic tools like Currency converters, To-Do lists etc. These are what i believe encompasses in a "smartphone", and here's the newsflash: Android OS meets them perfectly.
I'm not talking about widgets, customization, dynamic wallapers etc
The iPhone was late on MMS, Multitasking, Cut-Copy-Paste, and now it's going to be a notification system. Plus, browsing the internet, checking mail and practically everything is much better on a bigger screen.
I feel the App Store is just an added feature, and that's why i'd get an iPod Touch for.
Imagine your iPhone without the App store and all the apps you downloaded from it. Now imagine the HTC EVO without the Android app store. Which is the better smartphone? It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
Android OS already has the "smartphone" features down, and they're just working on the bonus features such as the Android App Store.
iOS on the other hand is catching up to these "smartphone" features. My old Nokia E63 had a better notification system than the iPhone, and that's pathetic.
mumbo
Aug 26, 12:49 PM
I called this week to have the mighty mouse that came with my DC 2.3 G5 replaced. The guy was helpful and my new mouse came the next day, from California to Canada. I'm pretty impressed!
Count Blah
Apr 6, 02:24 PM
Apple are kicking arse without the competition. Do they need it at this point?
Yes, now more than ever.
Yes, now more than ever.
noire anqa
Mar 26, 07:22 AM
I use my computer as a "real computer" and I like virtually every change I've seen. I wish people wouldn't generalize so broadly and presume that because certain additions aren't something that they use that it has nothing to do with "real work."
the statue of liberty face.
statue of liberty face close
Tones2
Apr 11, 01:23 PM
The iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone in the market, so not surprising.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.
To me, it's much more likely that the iPhone 5 will have a 4"+ screen than it is to have 64GB or 4G, although given Apple's increasing tendancy to underwhelm us with new technology features (which are in fact old by the time of their introduction 1-2 years after everyone else), I doubt we get any of these three.
Tony
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.
To me, it's much more likely that the iPhone 5 will have a 4"+ screen than it is to have 64GB or 4G, although given Apple's increasing tendancy to underwhelm us with new technology features (which are in fact old by the time of their introduction 1-2 years after everyone else), I doubt we get any of these three.
Tony
mwswami
Jul 21, 01:31 PM
I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
Hey Multimedia, just curious, I wonder what's your current (something you want to use for the next 1-2 years) idea of the ultimate machine wrt number of Cores, Memory, Storage, etc. And, how much are you willing to pay for it?
Hey Multimedia, just curious, I wonder what's your current (something you want to use for the next 1-2 years) idea of the ultimate machine wrt number of Cores, Memory, Storage, etc. And, how much are you willing to pay for it?
Synapple
Apr 20, 02:00 PM
Let's not forget that big companies file lawsuits not only when they think they have a rock solid case.
Lawsuits are also filed to 1) deter competitors (not only the specific one that gets sued) and 2) raise a point in the media (in this case the point being Apple invents, competitors are copycats).
Of course, had the case been deemed totally unfounded by Apple Legal and their bunch of advisors, it wouldn't have been brought to court at all.
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
Conversely, solid lawsuits are not brought forward because of the bad impact sueing might have in the media.
In this case Apple might have sued not necessarily because they think they'll win, but also, and maybe most importantly, to reinstate their position in the market. Even though some might read this as a crazy action from Apple, it is also likely that people with no particular tech interest (and still potential customers) will hear about it and get the message that Apple is defending what they have invented against a copycat.
Lawsuits are also filed to 1) deter competitors (not only the specific one that gets sued) and 2) raise a point in the media (in this case the point being Apple invents, competitors are copycats).
Of course, had the case been deemed totally unfounded by Apple Legal and their bunch of advisors, it wouldn't have been brought to court at all.
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
Conversely, solid lawsuits are not brought forward because of the bad impact sueing might have in the media.
In this case Apple might have sued not necessarily because they think they'll win, but also, and maybe most importantly, to reinstate their position in the market. Even though some might read this as a crazy action from Apple, it is also likely that people with no particular tech interest (and still potential customers) will hear about it and get the message that Apple is defending what they have invented against a copycat.
Biolizard
Apr 27, 08:37 AM
Its not about being a criminal or paranoid. This data is for the sole purpose of marketers to sell us crap.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
It reminds me of a line from Futurama:
Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?"
Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Things don't just happen without money. People are increasingly adverse to paying for items like apps or news, or are only willing to pay so much (e.g. pay TV, sport etc.), such that marketing needs to subsidise the product.
That news story you read on the internet? It's because of that ad so intrusively shoved in your face that you didn't need to reach for your wallet to be able to read it.
There's no such thing as a free lunch.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
It reminds me of a line from Futurama:
Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?"
Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Things don't just happen without money. People are increasingly adverse to paying for items like apps or news, or are only willing to pay so much (e.g. pay TV, sport etc.), such that marketing needs to subsidise the product.
That news story you read on the internet? It's because of that ad so intrusively shoved in your face that you didn't need to reach for your wallet to be able to read it.
There's no such thing as a free lunch.
totoum
Apr 12, 12:49 PM
I almost never have to convert. All clients I work with require ProRes deliverables, and any tapeless material I get is ProRes. If I capture I use ProRes.
Good for you ;)
Used to be like that for me but on the projects I work on everybody's gone crazy over DSLRs so I'm stuck with converting.
Good for you ;)
Used to be like that for me but on the projects I work on everybody's gone crazy over DSLRs so I'm stuck with converting.
Zargot
Jul 20, 10:58 AM
I got it!
The Macintosh Quadra!
No, wait . . . .
;)
Pure Genius...
The Macintosh Quadra!
No, wait . . . .
;)
Pure Genius...
ten-oak-druid
Mar 22, 04:19 PM
Competition is good.
Make a case for your argument.
Make a case for your argument.
