Lord Blackadder
Nov 28, 09:49 PM
It would be a nice idea.
Nice. idea. For whom, you greedy scum? :mad:
**** them and their greed. I shall say no more.
Nice. idea. For whom, you greedy scum? :mad:
**** them and their greed. I shall say no more.
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 6, 10:27 AM
This is what I've been waiting for. Apple is about to get a chunk of my bank account lol. Upgrading from an early 2008 MBP
Mark Booth
Apr 25, 03:27 PM
As I pointed out in my earlier blog posting (LINK (http://markshangout.com/blog/2011/4/25/apple-gets-sued-yes-again.html)), until somebody proves that Apple is both collecting the data to their servers AND using the data in a manner that allows them to personally identify a specific user, this lawsuit is meritless and a waste of the court's time.
Mark
Mark
leekohler
Feb 28, 09:45 PM
Correct I have no idea what causes homosexuality, neither do scientists.
I wanted to know what he expected from me, he doesn't necessarily have to know the cause(s). I don't remember saying you could not live with the person you love. Also one can not infer what "that" means from your paragraph.
I seem to recall you agreeing with this post:
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
And by "living with" I mean having sex and having a family as well.
I wanted to know what he expected from me, he doesn't necessarily have to know the cause(s). I don't remember saying you could not live with the person you love. Also one can not infer what "that" means from your paragraph.
I seem to recall you agreeing with this post:
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
And by "living with" I mean having sex and having a family as well.
Bakey
Apr 5, 06:09 PM
A very ignorant post. Especially if you value quality. I hardly call providing the best quality video "sucking money out of home consumers"
Or are you one of those that want to insist that streaming "hd" video is just as good as blu-ray. Because if you are - you shouldn't have even weighed in here.
No need to school you on the difference here though unless you come back and tell me you still think there's no difference.
+1... Maybe I should've snipped the quote, but I couldn't agree more! :)
Or are you one of those that want to insist that streaming "hd" video is just as good as blu-ray. Because if you are - you shouldn't have even weighed in here.
No need to school you on the difference here though unless you come back and tell me you still think there's no difference.
+1... Maybe I should've snipped the quote, but I couldn't agree more! :)
nonameowns
Apr 6, 02:59 PM
ahem
the people want a ipad, not a tablet.
same when they want a ipod, not a mp3 player.
Basic marketing there folks.
the people want a ipad, not a tablet.
same when they want a ipod, not a mp3 player.
Basic marketing there folks.
Pressure
Sep 19, 08:57 AM
So this was a bad time to order a 15.4" MacBook Pro 2.16Ghz, 100GB harddrive, 1GB ram with 256MB VRAM? :p
hayesk
Mar 23, 10:08 AM
Sorry, completely forgot about that.
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
iOS doesn't suck in terms of true multitasking because it doesn't use "true" multitasking. iOS excels at using a form of multitasking that is appropriate for the hardware it is running on.
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
iOS doesn't suck in terms of true multitasking because it doesn't use "true" multitasking. iOS excels at using a form of multitasking that is appropriate for the hardware it is running on.
Benjy91
Apr 27, 09:06 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
A lot of people are upset over this. But, no one seems to care that the US Government can snoop on any electronic communication it wants for well over 10 years now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
Of course, anyone who doesnt like this idea, is a communist who hates America and Freedom.
A lot of people are upset over this. But, no one seems to care that the US Government can snoop on any electronic communication it wants for well over 10 years now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
Of course, anyone who doesnt like this idea, is a communist who hates America and Freedom.
severe
Jun 22, 01:00 AM
Yeah I thought about that... But I'd rather not go through the hassle of craigs list and eBay...
Just a suggestion. Don't blame ya. eBay is a disaster. And Craigs wasn't far off, with all the inquiries and little follow through. I let it go for less than I would have liked, just to be done with it.
Still glad I did.
Just a suggestion. Don't blame ya. eBay is a disaster. And Craigs wasn't far off, with all the inquiries and little follow through. I let it go for less than I would have liked, just to be done with it.
Still glad I did.
TripHop
Jun 9, 08:53 PM
Okay.. well I guess I wont be taking my chances at RadioShack. If they let me preorder, would I be good to go on launch day? Or could i still encounter problemsLooks like it will be no problem to lock in an iP4 for launch morning as long as we pre-order next Tuesday morning. It's sort of like 2 launch days - pre order next Tuesday the 15th for a $50 advance (in the form of a gift card) and receive the 24th. The Shack is much handier than any other launch store for me. :)
mlrproducts
Nov 29, 10:34 AM
I think it is a Great idea!!!
Apple will give Universal $1 from every iPod sold, since the iPod is used to store stolen Universal tracks.
In turn, Universal will give Apple $5 from every overpriced CD sold because they're only buying that CD so they can rip it into iTunes/iPod ecosystem.
Apple will give Universal $1 from every iPod sold, since the iPod is used to store stolen Universal tracks.
In turn, Universal will give Apple $5 from every overpriced CD sold because they're only buying that CD so they can rip it into iTunes/iPod ecosystem.
dukebound85
Dec 7, 05:07 PM
would those that have played this game reccomend getting it? or are there too many cons (standard cars, multiple versions of one car, bad AI in racing, bad physics in damage esp with standard, etc) that would lead to buyers remorse?
Keep in mind, I have played quite abit of Forza, but now have a PS3 and want agood racing sim but just keep hearing bad things about this game (largely being an incomplete game)
Keep in mind, I have played quite abit of Forza, but now have a PS3 and want agood racing sim but just keep hearing bad things about this game (largely being an incomplete game)
cjoy
Apr 25, 02:47 PM
Maybe I'm missing something, but so what if they can tell what cell phone tower you're by??? Are you really so important/ secrative that someone knowing your location is that big of a deal?
it looks like a different world from today,
but really it's less than 70 years ago that we had the NAZI regime here in germany. it's less than 25 years ago that we had an repressive surveillance society in east germany. if there is no apparent good in tracking personal data, one should object to it.
you shouldn't have to reason against collecting and storing personal data if it isnt a real necessity.
there's enough data stored about you, me and anyone in todays digitalized world as is.
it looks like a different world from today,
but really it's less than 70 years ago that we had the NAZI regime here in germany. it's less than 25 years ago that we had an repressive surveillance society in east germany. if there is no apparent good in tracking personal data, one should object to it.
you shouldn't have to reason against collecting and storing personal data if it isnt a real necessity.
there's enough data stored about you, me and anyone in todays digitalized world as is.
leekohler
Mar 3, 10:30 AM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Oh please. Can the condescension. If you know what I meant, there no reason for you to give me a dictionary link. And gee- could you be a little more insulting assuming that I don't know what sodomy is? Wow. Hey Bill, newsflash- I'm an adult- 43 years old. I went to college. I know what words mean, but I guess I should have been more clear and said "anal sex". Next time I will. I also know that people express themselves with words in different ways and that words can have several meanings due to their context. Apparently you do too. And by the way, I did mean "feel", not "believe". Your zeal on this subject is indicative of that.
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
That's an awfully big "if" Bill- and certainly not one I'm willing to bet my life on. BTW- man made God and the Bible. You guys made your own rules.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
But you want to make sure Big Brother keeps us from being able to marry. You absolutely do. It's about control for you, Bill. Admit it.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
They're called condoms, Bill. Sensible people use them to protect against the very things you describe. Because ya know, we DO know about such things. Oh wait- that's against your Catholic teaching. So much so, that your religion tells people in Africa not to use them, making the AIDS epidemic even worse. Thanks for that.
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
Bill- if you were sincere about this, you would support the gay rights movement and support equal marriage rights for gay people. Your examples are silly. Everyone has the right to speak out against opinions they oppose. In none of the examples you used is anyone trying to legally deny anyone anything. People are entitled to their opinions. people are NOT entitled to deny others legal rights simply because they disagree with them. No one is trying to pass a law against Glenn Beck or you. You guys ARE trying to pass laws against us.
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Oh please. Can the condescension. If you know what I meant, there no reason for you to give me a dictionary link. And gee- could you be a little more insulting assuming that I don't know what sodomy is? Wow. Hey Bill, newsflash- I'm an adult- 43 years old. I went to college. I know what words mean, but I guess I should have been more clear and said "anal sex". Next time I will. I also know that people express themselves with words in different ways and that words can have several meanings due to their context. Apparently you do too. And by the way, I did mean "feel", not "believe". Your zeal on this subject is indicative of that.
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
That's an awfully big "if" Bill- and certainly not one I'm willing to bet my life on. BTW- man made God and the Bible. You guys made your own rules.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
But you want to make sure Big Brother keeps us from being able to marry. You absolutely do. It's about control for you, Bill. Admit it.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
They're called condoms, Bill. Sensible people use them to protect against the very things you describe. Because ya know, we DO know about such things. Oh wait- that's against your Catholic teaching. So much so, that your religion tells people in Africa not to use them, making the AIDS epidemic even worse. Thanks for that.
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
Bill- if you were sincere about this, you would support the gay rights movement and support equal marriage rights for gay people. Your examples are silly. Everyone has the right to speak out against opinions they oppose. In none of the examples you used is anyone trying to legally deny anyone anything. People are entitled to their opinions. people are NOT entitled to deny others legal rights simply because they disagree with them. No one is trying to pass a law against Glenn Beck or you. You guys ARE trying to pass laws against us.
Huntn
Mar 18, 08:59 PM
Back in Ron Paul warned us about Barack Obama and the fact that his foreign policy would almost certainly essentially mirror that of the Democrats and Neo-Cons for the past 60 years.
I am very unhappy that Obama did not get us out of a state of War. Which pacifist do you plan on voting for this next time around?
I am very unhappy that Obama did not get us out of a state of War. Which pacifist do you plan on voting for this next time around?
Bosunsfate
Aug 8, 12:46 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...
I have seen plenty of beta Vista versions and they have nothing like Spaces or Time Machine....or frankly anything I saw today.
Why don't you point out something specific rather blather on with such nonsense.
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...
I have seen plenty of beta Vista versions and they have nothing like Spaces or Time Machine....or frankly anything I saw today.
Why don't you point out something specific rather blather on with such nonsense.
shawnce
Aug 6, 02:28 PM
So, you're comparing a mature product (Tiger) to one that's still in beta and which by all accounts has plenty of outstanding issues before it's ever released (Vista)? Ok soon lets compare Leopard and Vista.
The fact of the matter is that Vista has to be functionally complete now (or else they are going to miss shipping dates by a large margin)... so the functionality you see is basically what you are going to get. Put aside the crashes, performance issues, bugs and you can get a good sense for how it will operate when it is released.
Really MS has taken the transparency and visual effect so far that they are distracting and degrade usability (thank fully you can adjust them to some extent)... they are doing just like Apple did in Mac OS X 10.0 (transparent window title bars when in background, overly transparent menus, etc.) but thankfully Apple has been refining it for the last few years for looks and usability.
Also the new user security mode is going to be a big nightmare for folks until 3rd party software catches up with it... currently in my average usage it is always bouncing to out the full screen overlay with security confirmation dialog... I am at the point I don't read them any more since the disrupt what I am trying to do. (We have several developers in house struggling to keep up with changes and bugs in the beta, making it hard to get ready for Vista).
In the end Vista will be a good OS but it is going to be a little painful for the Windows world for the next year or so (into 2008).
The fact of the matter is that Vista has to be functionally complete now (or else they are going to miss shipping dates by a large margin)... so the functionality you see is basically what you are going to get. Put aside the crashes, performance issues, bugs and you can get a good sense for how it will operate when it is released.
Really MS has taken the transparency and visual effect so far that they are distracting and degrade usability (thank fully you can adjust them to some extent)... they are doing just like Apple did in Mac OS X 10.0 (transparent window title bars when in background, overly transparent menus, etc.) but thankfully Apple has been refining it for the last few years for looks and usability.
Also the new user security mode is going to be a big nightmare for folks until 3rd party software catches up with it... currently in my average usage it is always bouncing to out the full screen overlay with security confirmation dialog... I am at the point I don't read them any more since the disrupt what I am trying to do. (We have several developers in house struggling to keep up with changes and bugs in the beta, making it hard to get ready for Vista).
In the end Vista will be a good OS but it is going to be a little painful for the Windows world for the next year or so (into 2008).
Chupa Chupa
Apr 5, 05:49 PM
I wonder if this new version will be back end changes, front end or both. I wouldn't even mention front end, but I never thought they would have done such a radical make over of iMovie either until they did. I'm not a huge fan if the new iMovie but the FCP front end it quite crusty -- what a decade or so old.
Stella
Aug 7, 04:43 PM
Is Leopard going to take advantage of the 64 bit Dual G5?
Whats the point? Its history.
My guess is, that its how Tiger is now.
Whats the point? Its history.
My guess is, that its how Tiger is now.
ergle2
Sep 14, 11:29 PM
It is a shame, but sadly those are the real cheap chips right now. The good news is that they'll change those over soon enough with more Allendales, then millville and so on and so on taking on more segments of the market.
I think as they transition to 45nm we'll see more and more Core chips, simply because they'll want as much manufacturing to be on the new process as possible, and they don't need to scale the D's etc. down to it.
Indeed. The Netburst chicken has been decapitated, it just hasn't yet stopped running around the marketplace...
I think Intel wants the transition to go as quickly as possible, given the aggressive pricing of Core 2 - not as cheap as Pentium D, but a much better bang for the buck, so to speak. Of course, that's also connected to trying to beat back the AMD surge of recent years...
I think as they transition to 45nm we'll see more and more Core chips, simply because they'll want as much manufacturing to be on the new process as possible, and they don't need to scale the D's etc. down to it.
Indeed. The Netburst chicken has been decapitated, it just hasn't yet stopped running around the marketplace...
I think Intel wants the transition to go as quickly as possible, given the aggressive pricing of Core 2 - not as cheap as Pentium D, but a much better bang for the buck, so to speak. Of course, that's also connected to trying to beat back the AMD surge of recent years...
afrowq
Apr 6, 08:50 PM
If your sector of the business has decided to move to Premier because it works for them, awesome- but don't paint it as an industry trent. Cause I've seen zero migration from FCP to PP in Toronto post houses. Pro editing is still a two horse race: AVID and FCP.
And I can't help but think how ironic it will be if the new FCS will be built on AV Foundation, which was pioneered on your hated "itoys".
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
Never said it was an industry-wide trent (sic). I said "a lot of professionals" have made the switch.
Thanks.
And I can't help but think how ironic it will be if the new FCS will be built on AV Foundation, which was pioneered on your hated "itoys".
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
Never said it was an industry-wide trent (sic). I said "a lot of professionals" have made the switch.
Thanks.
Lucky736
Apr 7, 10:30 PM
Screwing around is how they lost Macs in the first place. They wanted to only sell certain iMac Colors and Apple said you can sell what we send or not at all, that's why Apple left them in the first place years ago. Then they cam back with the "store in a store" concept.
CrackedButter
Aug 26, 02:42 AM
I've owned 4 macs.
First a G3 iBook, then a G4 AluBook, then an eMac and now I'm on a G4 iBook.
NEVER had a problem with any of the machines. They have been great. Just to let you know it isn't all bad. I also pay for .mac and have done for 2 years now. I'm happy with it and yes I get spam but the filter is very good and its hardly an issue for me.
First a G3 iBook, then a G4 AluBook, then an eMac and now I'm on a G4 iBook.
NEVER had a problem with any of the machines. They have been great. Just to let you know it isn't all bad. I also pay for .mac and have done for 2 years now. I'm happy with it and yes I get spam but the filter is very good and its hardly an issue for me.