snebes
Apr 7, 11:30 PM
Apple products are price-locked. No second hand retailer marks up on them, like Bose. Retailers are told what to sell at and they comply or they lose rights to sell the product. If these are overpriced, it is Apples doing.
You might want to look at Best Buy's pricing again.
All iPads, iPods and Macs are sold $.99 (at minimum) above Apple.
Time Capsule 1TB $334.99 at Best Buy, $299.00 at Apple
2TB $499.99, $499.00 at Apple
Airport Extreme - $189.99 at Best Buy $179.00 at Apple
Express, $109.99 at Best Buy, $99.00 at Apple
The small accessories are just as bad. And Apple isn't the only brand they mark over MSRP too. I wouldn't be surprised is Bose products were too.
You might want to look at Best Buy's pricing again.
All iPads, iPods and Macs are sold $.99 (at minimum) above Apple.
Time Capsule 1TB $334.99 at Best Buy, $299.00 at Apple
2TB $499.99, $499.00 at Apple
Airport Extreme - $189.99 at Best Buy $179.00 at Apple
Express, $109.99 at Best Buy, $99.00 at Apple
The small accessories are just as bad. And Apple isn't the only brand they mark over MSRP too. I wouldn't be surprised is Bose products were too.
manu chao
Apr 25, 02:10 PM
Clearly you don't understand the issue. Apple is not tracking you since they do not collect this data. Rather your phone is generating a local cache of nearby cell towers and wifi hotspots. This benefits you by making your phones GPS function faster, more accurately and with less battery.
The issue is that the cache is not properly protected and could be used to infer some generalized information about roughly where your phone has been. This data is only accessible by somebody with direct access to your phone, or you phones backup files.
Why do people like that the data on their phones is encrypted and can be remotely wiped? Because it all too likely that something on your phone should not fall into somebody else's hand.
Enabling encryption of the phone by default is just taking reasonable precautions. Creating this data log (by which I mean not deleting any but the most recent entries) is not taking what would be a very reasonable precaution.
I always wondered why the option to encrypt the iPhone backup was there. What data would be on my iPhone but not on my computer (e-mails, browsing history, all sorts of passwords are generally both on my iPhone and my computer). Now I know of one reason, that Apple (or a third-party app) might without my knowledge create databases relating to my phone usage that are more critical than the rest of the data on my computer.
The point is that I would have assumed that any app or part of the OS creating a database would be open and transparent about it.
The issue is that the cache is not properly protected and could be used to infer some generalized information about roughly where your phone has been. This data is only accessible by somebody with direct access to your phone, or you phones backup files.
Why do people like that the data on their phones is encrypted and can be remotely wiped? Because it all too likely that something on your phone should not fall into somebody else's hand.
Enabling encryption of the phone by default is just taking reasonable precautions. Creating this data log (by which I mean not deleting any but the most recent entries) is not taking what would be a very reasonable precaution.
I always wondered why the option to encrypt the iPhone backup was there. What data would be on my iPhone but not on my computer (e-mails, browsing history, all sorts of passwords are generally both on my iPhone and my computer). Now I know of one reason, that Apple (or a third-party app) might without my knowledge create databases relating to my phone usage that are more critical than the rest of the data on my computer.
The point is that I would have assumed that any app or part of the OS creating a database would be open and transparent about it.
CaoCao
Mar 1, 04:11 PM
You know how stupid that argument is? You are comparing physical defects to a different mental state. Physiologically, gay people are not any bit different from straight people. (IE one identical twin gay, one not cases...)
Here is a much closer analog to your view:
"I hate you for liking the color yellow. Your views are sick and your practice of having yellow things in your home is sick and wrong and immoral. A three thousand year old book written by some uneducated shepperds told me that people who like the color yellow are going to burn in Hell because someone hates them."
Do you see just how stupid this whole thing is?
Well my other options were paedophilia, incest, bestiality etc.
Your analogy does not make sense because I do not hate homosexuals.
I made it quite clearly. If you don't get it, I can't help you any further.
Good to hear. Can we now assume you support marriage rights for gay people?
You have made it quite clear you suffer from a dearth of cogency.
That is their problem, not yours.
You could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
Ah, let us define slavery, does: "slavery is the condition of involuntary servitude in which a human being is regarded as no more than the property of another, as being without basic human rights; in other words, as a thing rather than a person" work for you?
Why not? Whether gays are treated equally under the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with how you feel about them. Whether you grant them the human dignity of being treated equally has absolutely nothing to do with your Catholic dogma. You are making excuses.
Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
Homosexual friendship. Right.
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a man
@CoCo & Bill: Please, just stop arguing with bogus reasons. The Catholic Church has everything wrong and upside down and only to control its followers. You two are a perfect example thereof.
CoCo, heterosexuality is not the norm, at least not outside our social understanding. In ancient Greece and Rome, sexuality wasn't even up for discussion. You followed a certain social conduct and explored your sexuality as you saw fit and didn't question it or that of others. When Christianity started taking over the laws and moral standards, they made it so they could control everything people do. Your reasoning comes from the same source as those who wrote the medical journals that condemn homosexuality as a mental illness. They did so out of fear of the unknown - the very essence th the Catholic Church uses to control its followers.
And Bill, please go out and live a little. Get a nice girlfriend and explore your and her sexuality a little and see how much more relaxed your attitude about the world can be. There's more to life than waiting for God's instructions. He certainly wouldn't want you to waste your life on such trivial things like analyzing other people's sexuality.
You two need to expand your world view and accept that there are plenty of things that make you uncomfortable, but there is no reason to condemn them so exhaustingly. You cannot reverse progress and you certainly cannot control the lives of other people.
There are plenty of folks in Northern Africa that can vouch for that.
Nay, the Romans and Greeks failed, they are retrogress
Here is a much closer analog to your view:
"I hate you for liking the color yellow. Your views are sick and your practice of having yellow things in your home is sick and wrong and immoral. A three thousand year old book written by some uneducated shepperds told me that people who like the color yellow are going to burn in Hell because someone hates them."
Do you see just how stupid this whole thing is?
Well my other options were paedophilia, incest, bestiality etc.
Your analogy does not make sense because I do not hate homosexuals.
I made it quite clearly. If you don't get it, I can't help you any further.
Good to hear. Can we now assume you support marriage rights for gay people?
You have made it quite clear you suffer from a dearth of cogency.
That is their problem, not yours.
You could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
Ah, let us define slavery, does: "slavery is the condition of involuntary servitude in which a human being is regarded as no more than the property of another, as being without basic human rights; in other words, as a thing rather than a person" work for you?
Why not? Whether gays are treated equally under the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with how you feel about them. Whether you grant them the human dignity of being treated equally has absolutely nothing to do with your Catholic dogma. You are making excuses.
Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
Homosexual friendship. Right.
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a man
@CoCo & Bill: Please, just stop arguing with bogus reasons. The Catholic Church has everything wrong and upside down and only to control its followers. You two are a perfect example thereof.
CoCo, heterosexuality is not the norm, at least not outside our social understanding. In ancient Greece and Rome, sexuality wasn't even up for discussion. You followed a certain social conduct and explored your sexuality as you saw fit and didn't question it or that of others. When Christianity started taking over the laws and moral standards, they made it so they could control everything people do. Your reasoning comes from the same source as those who wrote the medical journals that condemn homosexuality as a mental illness. They did so out of fear of the unknown - the very essence th the Catholic Church uses to control its followers.
And Bill, please go out and live a little. Get a nice girlfriend and explore your and her sexuality a little and see how much more relaxed your attitude about the world can be. There's more to life than waiting for God's instructions. He certainly wouldn't want you to waste your life on such trivial things like analyzing other people's sexuality.
You two need to expand your world view and accept that there are plenty of things that make you uncomfortable, but there is no reason to condemn them so exhaustingly. You cannot reverse progress and you certainly cannot control the lives of other people.
There are plenty of folks in Northern Africa that can vouch for that.
Nay, the Romans and Greeks failed, they are retrogress
rotarydialz
Apr 27, 08:58 AM
correct. wasn't sure how long it would take for people in general to get up in arms about location privacy on the idevices... what did people think was going to happen??
such it is, our electronic tethers are really leashes.
It's not very accurate information apparently. I would like to know just how accurate this location tracking is before I get too excited.
such it is, our electronic tethers are really leashes.
It's not very accurate information apparently. I would like to know just how accurate this location tracking is before I get too excited.
-aggie-
Jun 11, 08:32 AM
With the Shack getting the iPhone, the iPhone may have finally jumped the shark.
wizard
Apr 6, 07:46 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Does anyone know if the IGP in these processors is underclocked compared to the variants used in the MacBook Pros?
That is a very good question!
It is likely that the GPU might be a bit slower. That simply because the rest of the chip is clocked slower. Frankly the GPU in Sandy Bridge is the only good reason to throw a little hate Intels way. That being said for many users a SB update to the AIRs will be huge and would make the platform viable for a wider range of users.
Does anyone know if the IGP in these processors is underclocked compared to the variants used in the MacBook Pros?
That is a very good question!
It is likely that the GPU might be a bit slower. That simply because the rest of the chip is clocked slower. Frankly the GPU in Sandy Bridge is the only good reason to throw a little hate Intels way. That being said for many users a SB update to the AIRs will be huge and would make the platform viable for a wider range of users.
gorgeousninja
Mar 22, 08:43 PM
This is just a preview of the future, Android based tablets will clean the iPads clock. Apple made the so-called iPad 2 as a 1.5. Low res camera, not enough RAM, and low res screen. It's going to be a verrrry long 2012 for Apple. Sure it's selling like hot cakes now, but when buyers see tablets that they don't have to stand inline for, that have better equipment and are cheaper ... Apples house of cards will come crashing down around them.
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
All hail the unicorn rider!
It's great that you're such a fan of imitators and snake-oil products cos a lot of manufacturers are counting on the fact some people are so gullible.
I know the strategy of throwing enough mud hoping some of it will stick, but you've called 'Fail' on Apple so often that it becomes just a jaded cliche...
maybe next time you could be positive about an Apple product.
Not only would the shock nearly kill us, it might put more people off buying it than the juvenile drama of proclaiming ' a world of hurt'.
ps Oh and you do realize in your post that you've admitted to the app store concept as being an Apple product do you?
That does contradict a lot of the usual haters, so you might want to confer with yourselves on how exactly Android was secretly ahead of Apple on that.
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
All hail the unicorn rider!
It's great that you're such a fan of imitators and snake-oil products cos a lot of manufacturers are counting on the fact some people are so gullible.
I know the strategy of throwing enough mud hoping some of it will stick, but you've called 'Fail' on Apple so often that it becomes just a jaded cliche...
maybe next time you could be positive about an Apple product.
Not only would the shock nearly kill us, it might put more people off buying it than the juvenile drama of proclaiming ' a world of hurt'.
ps Oh and you do realize in your post that you've admitted to the app store concept as being an Apple product do you?
That does contradict a lot of the usual haters, so you might want to confer with yourselves on how exactly Android was secretly ahead of Apple on that.
mactoday
Apr 6, 11:02 AM
I might not expect IPS, doesn’t it draw more power than TN LCDs?
I don't think you'll see IPS screens in MacBook Pro's or Air in the future.
Apple is working on the mass market now and mass market don't care about quality of the screens specially on the portables.
If you need colors and better screen then Apple will sale you "****ing glossy amazing" 27" display. :)
I don't think you'll see IPS screens in MacBook Pro's or Air in the future.
Apple is working on the mass market now and mass market don't care about quality of the screens specially on the portables.
If you need colors and better screen then Apple will sale you "****ing glossy amazing" 27" display. :)
fehhkk
Dec 7, 10:44 AM
Does GT5 support using the clutch pedal in a wheel such as the G25? I was disappointed with GT5:P that you can't use it...
playaj82
Aug 8, 07:38 AM
I know a lot of people are excited about Time Machine, but I was kind of worried last night when I showed it to one of my friends.
Unlike Expose, Fast User Switching, iTunes, Dashboard, etc... that have immediate impact and understanding as to why the features are so neat, Time Machine is actually rather complicated.
I explained and showed it to my friend, and she said, "so what, when I delete something it stays on the hard drive anyways"
All of us here obviously understand the significance of this program, but does anybody else think this will be difficult to market to the "average" user.
Unlike Expose, Fast User Switching, iTunes, Dashboard, etc... that have immediate impact and understanding as to why the features are so neat, Time Machine is actually rather complicated.
I explained and showed it to my friend, and she said, "so what, when I delete something it stays on the hard drive anyways"
All of us here obviously understand the significance of this program, but does anybody else think this will be difficult to market to the "average" user.
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.
Half Glass
Sep 13, 10:26 AM
Wow...a user upgradable Mac. Good stuff indeed.
I am anxiously awaiting better utilization of all the cores, but the ability to multitask without hiccups is still great for now!
--HG
I am anxiously awaiting better utilization of all the cores, but the ability to multitask without hiccups is still great for now!
--HG
LegendKillerUK
Apr 6, 10:54 AM
Of course we do. The integrated graphics card will perform just as poorly as every other Sandy Bridge processor because it's the same.
What do you intend to do on an Air that will require what little extra power the nvidia gfx offers over Intel. You sure as hell can't game with it.
What do you intend to do on an Air that will require what little extra power the nvidia gfx offers over Intel. You sure as hell can't game with it.
cait-sith
Aug 11, 12:44 PM
Doesn't Europe have many many carriers in each country? There's no carrier that spans the entire EU, is there?
Who wants to pay 400$ for a phone that will look like an antique 12 months from now? That's a lot of money to pay for the status of having a brand new phone.
Who wants to pay 400$ for a phone that will look like an antique 12 months from now? That's a lot of money to pay for the status of having a brand new phone.
tribulation
Nov 28, 08:12 PM
what if i have no artists distributed by universal? if this takes effect then the ipod price will just go up and we all will be paying for it. what makes them think that i am even listening to any of their artists on my ipod and why should they get a cut if i dont >> or even if i do. ridiculous and better not happen.
mcoyne
Apr 27, 08:40 AM
Poo. I'd rather have the option to keep backing up that cache file to iTunes. I like the ability to see a map of where I've been using the iPhoneTracker app. :(
Agreed! Stupid whiners. I hope they will add an option to let your iphone continue keeping a cache of all your locations.
Agreed! Stupid whiners. I hope they will add an option to let your iphone continue keeping a cache of all your locations.
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
WildCowboy
Aug 17, 01:43 AM
lol you mac folk and your photoshop :D
let's get some game benchmarks :rolleyes:
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
let's get some game benchmarks :rolleyes:
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
Pro31
Apr 11, 02:24 PM
This is good for me because I waited forever due to wanting a white iphone, and so I didn't upgrade until the fall time frame. Now I won't have to see how awesome the iphone 5 is while not being able to upgrade! :).
andiwm2003
Apr 11, 11:36 AM
i've been eligible for an upgrade since November and my contract ended in March I think.
But what really matters is that my 3GS shows low battery life and I don't know if it holds up till next year.
Delaying the release date would suck because many users feel they "need" to upgrade after their contract is up and the they feel they are "cheated" if they have to stay on a contract for more than 2 years without upgrading.
From a marketing perspective this would be a bad move.
But what really matters is that my 3GS shows low battery life and I don't know if it holds up till next year.
Delaying the release date would suck because many users feel they "need" to upgrade after their contract is up and the they feel they are "cheated" if they have to stay on a contract for more than 2 years without upgrading.
From a marketing perspective this would be a bad move.
ziwi
Nov 29, 09:32 AM
Just nuts - this would be a real bummer if it went through. It makes no sense whatsoever.
fastlane1588
Jul 28, 03:43 PM
Okay, I did some tinkering myself, just for kicks, and here's what I came up with. I thought that we were talking about a computer that was somewhere between a Mac Mini and a Mac Pro (Power Mac), so I thought, maybe the style should be a combination of the two. Let me know what you think.
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
thats pretty nice what did u use to make that?
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
thats pretty nice what did u use to make that?
blackburn
Mar 26, 05:45 AM
I still don't get it, why do we apple users have to pay for os updates? The hardware is already expensive as hell.
cloudnine
Jul 14, 04:08 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
I agree... my buddy got a macbook pro and it came standard with 512mb of ram. For the first 3 or 4 days, he thought he purchased a defective notebook, it ran so badly. Opening MS Office applications literally took minutes, and that was with nothing else open. He took it back into the Apple store and the rep told him that his problem was his ram, so he purchased another 1gb (1.5gb total), and now it runs perfectly. You'd think that with all of these intel machines being released and a huge selection of software not being Universal yet, that 1 gig of ram would be standard...
kinda a$$h0lish if you ask me. :mad:
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
I agree... my buddy got a macbook pro and it came standard with 512mb of ram. For the first 3 or 4 days, he thought he purchased a defective notebook, it ran so badly. Opening MS Office applications literally took minutes, and that was with nothing else open. He took it back into the Apple store and the rep told him that his problem was his ram, so he purchased another 1gb (1.5gb total), and now it runs perfectly. You'd think that with all of these intel machines being released and a huge selection of software not being Universal yet, that 1 gig of ram would be standard...
kinda a$$h0lish if you ask me. :mad: