rowlands
Oct 24, 11:17 PM
If I recall correctly they did formally apologize. I do genuinely like the guys at Gizmodo and I enjoying their blog, its a personal thing. Some of friends can't stand it and prefer Engadget.
I personally hope that they're given a chance to prove that they can make tech journalism fun without going over the top. If they blow it this time, I fully support punishment.
I personally hope that they're given a chance to prove that they can make tech journalism fun without going over the top. If they blow it this time, I fully support punishment.
Rocketman
Oct 28, 04:48 PM
It's not necessarily illegal to run Darwin on non-Apple hardware, which is much of the goals of the OSx86 project. The source as it comes from Apple will only run on Apple hardware mainly due to EFI and some other stuff. The GUI is what seems to be so tied to the TPM circuitry, which is what OSx86 is NOT touching and why they say it's still legal.
Maybe, but they explicitly mention TPM is available as a pirated item from bit torrent, and, the first high bandwidth mirror they added was located in CHINA, piracy central.
It seems to me the point of the exercise from the point of view of the authors is to make a great hack. We can safely say they have accomplished that. They are now famous to a degree as well, even though they cannot spell worth a sh|t. At least they are stoned and insane :)
The point of USERS of this, is to combine the legal hack with illegal TPM cracks, and combine them onto commodity hardware to run a MacOS environment without paying a dime to Apple whatsoever.
Plenty of Apple high end software has been "cracked" so one can get it and use it for free if one is so inclined, or in the case of the Chinese, insulated from recourse by a sympathetic government.
In the final analysis there is a vast number of people working hard to get past copyright and avoid paying the author for their work. That is illegal to some degree in every country, or at minimum, by treaty with the USA.
I am not sure what tangible benefits have flowed to Apple by having the OS code as open source. It may be as simple as window dressing to attract developers who actually use Xcode anyway in the real world. But if there are any tangible benefits they have escaped my notice.
Leopard will tightly couple TPM and do other tricks to further harden it, but somebody will crack it. If by no other means than by making a pirated ROM chip for hack motherboards.
Meanwhile CPU sales are up 30%.
Rocketman
Maybe, but they explicitly mention TPM is available as a pirated item from bit torrent, and, the first high bandwidth mirror they added was located in CHINA, piracy central.
It seems to me the point of the exercise from the point of view of the authors is to make a great hack. We can safely say they have accomplished that. They are now famous to a degree as well, even though they cannot spell worth a sh|t. At least they are stoned and insane :)
The point of USERS of this, is to combine the legal hack with illegal TPM cracks, and combine them onto commodity hardware to run a MacOS environment without paying a dime to Apple whatsoever.
Plenty of Apple high end software has been "cracked" so one can get it and use it for free if one is so inclined, or in the case of the Chinese, insulated from recourse by a sympathetic government.
In the final analysis there is a vast number of people working hard to get past copyright and avoid paying the author for their work. That is illegal to some degree in every country, or at minimum, by treaty with the USA.
I am not sure what tangible benefits have flowed to Apple by having the OS code as open source. It may be as simple as window dressing to attract developers who actually use Xcode anyway in the real world. But if there are any tangible benefits they have escaped my notice.
Leopard will tightly couple TPM and do other tricks to further harden it, but somebody will crack it. If by no other means than by making a pirated ROM chip for hack motherboards.
Meanwhile CPU sales are up 30%.
Rocketman
rjohnstone
Oct 6, 02:23 PM
Are you amongst tall buildings when you experience these dropped calls on Verizon? Maybe Verizon drops these calls because of the same reason AT&T does....
Don't get me wrong. I won't get an iPhone until I can get it on Verizon. I live in AZ and there are only two small spots where I ever lose a call and most of the time when I am in these areas, the calls do not drop.
Verizon...Get the iPhone.
You must not live in north Phoenix.
Verizon blows up here. Even the company I work for, who had a Verizon contract for years, dropped them and went to AT&T. We got tired of missing calls and text alerts when a system went down.
And no, we don't use iPhones either. Only Nokia, Samsung or Blackberry phones.
Don't get me wrong. I won't get an iPhone until I can get it on Verizon. I live in AZ and there are only two small spots where I ever lose a call and most of the time when I am in these areas, the calls do not drop.
Verizon...Get the iPhone.
You must not live in north Phoenix.
Verizon blows up here. Even the company I work for, who had a Verizon contract for years, dropped them and went to AT&T. We got tired of missing calls and text alerts when a system went down.
And no, we don't use iPhones either. Only Nokia, Samsung or Blackberry phones.
TallGuy1970
May 3, 02:17 PM
Exactly why do we care about the Android app market on macrumors.com?! :mad:
theelysium
Dec 13, 01:13 PM
Apple is not going to waste their time making a 4G phone for a network that is literally 35 grains of sand tossed out on to the US map.
There is way too much hardware development, patent fees, marketing costs and other things to consider. Apple would not go through all those costs just for a measly 4G LTE network.
This news is bogus.
Take a look for yourself: http://www.droid-life.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/verizon-lte-markets.jpg
There is way too much hardware development, patent fees, marketing costs and other things to consider. Apple would not go through all those costs just for a measly 4G LTE network.
This news is bogus.
Take a look for yourself: http://www.droid-life.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/verizon-lte-markets.jpg
maclaptop
Apr 16, 06:26 AM
Let us not compare Apples to turds.
ob hairstyles photos
Bob Hairstyles 2009
Cute ob haircut for women
ob hairstyles 2009. cool
Bob Hairstyles. glocke12
Bob Hairstyles 2009.
long ob hairstyles 2009
length ob hairstyle,
2009 stylish ob hairstyle
Blond Bob Medium Length
ob hairstyles in 2009
Paris Hilton ob haircuts
Popular haircuts 2009 for
lordonuthin
Jul 14, 08:21 PM
it's cable internet. the company is mediacom. it's the only cable company out here. but i guess i might have to go dsl if they don't fix it
I have Mediacom too, I'm supposed to have really fast service, it's ok most of the time but here is what cnet's speed test (http://reviews.cnet.com/internet-speed-test/) gave me.
:mad:
I have Mediacom too, I'm supposed to have really fast service, it's ok most of the time but here is what cnet's speed test (http://reviews.cnet.com/internet-speed-test/) gave me.
:mad:
Anonymous Freak
Oct 12, 11:56 AM
Nice try, SavMan. But I'm not buying your interesting yet psuedoscientific explanation for why 5G iPods only 'appear' to scratch more easily.
White 5G iPods are just as easily scratched as the black ones, as any disappointed owner will tell you. I've had a 4G iPod for 2 years, carrying it back and forth to work in my pocket. I take it out of a Belkin case to recharge it, then put it back in for transport. The thing still looks practically new. I know someone else who purchased a new white 5G iPod. Within moments of gentle handling, the thing is covered with light scratches.
It seems to me that a softer grade of acrylic is being used on these latest iPods. I'm not the only one who's noticed this problem. I don't believe that it's the result of some optical coincidence. Everyone knows that there are hundreds (if not thousands) of complaints to be found on the net.
Whatever the reason is, a manufacturer who doesn't care what their customers have to say about their expensive products will soon find those customers flocking to other companies' products. Hellooooo Zune!
And no amount of fanboy cheerleading will stop it.
If you have a black nano or 5G iPod, try putting black electrical tape on the sides, covering the 'face' of acrylic. The scratches will seem significantly less obvious. I can attest that my 3G iPod (rounded corners) has just as many scratches as my white nano, and my 3G iPod was very well taken care of (always in its included case,) whereas my nano was usually just thrown in my pocket.
SavMan's explanation seems to be a very good explanation. Not fanboyness. (If I did more than just listen to music on my nano, I'd probably be angry about the more obviousness of the scratches on it. But since I almost never look at the screen, it just doesn't bother me. Just like the scratches on the 3G's screen don't bother me.)
White 5G iPods are just as easily scratched as the black ones, as any disappointed owner will tell you. I've had a 4G iPod for 2 years, carrying it back and forth to work in my pocket. I take it out of a Belkin case to recharge it, then put it back in for transport. The thing still looks practically new. I know someone else who purchased a new white 5G iPod. Within moments of gentle handling, the thing is covered with light scratches.
It seems to me that a softer grade of acrylic is being used on these latest iPods. I'm not the only one who's noticed this problem. I don't believe that it's the result of some optical coincidence. Everyone knows that there are hundreds (if not thousands) of complaints to be found on the net.
Whatever the reason is, a manufacturer who doesn't care what their customers have to say about their expensive products will soon find those customers flocking to other companies' products. Hellooooo Zune!
And no amount of fanboy cheerleading will stop it.
If you have a black nano or 5G iPod, try putting black electrical tape on the sides, covering the 'face' of acrylic. The scratches will seem significantly less obvious. I can attest that my 3G iPod (rounded corners) has just as many scratches as my white nano, and my 3G iPod was very well taken care of (always in its included case,) whereas my nano was usually just thrown in my pocket.
SavMan's explanation seems to be a very good explanation. Not fanboyness. (If I did more than just listen to music on my nano, I'd probably be angry about the more obviousness of the scratches on it. But since I almost never look at the screen, it just doesn't bother me. Just like the scratches on the 3G's screen don't bother me.)
UTclassof89
Jul 21, 12:07 PM
Umm, that's still less than 1%. That's pretty good. That would be out of 100 million calls. 99 million calls were fine.
You seem to have missed the "... MORE than iPhone 3gs" part.
A better antenna should drop FEWER calls (unless there's a flaw)
You seem to have missed the "... MORE than iPhone 3gs" part.
A better antenna should drop FEWER calls (unless there's a flaw)
ozzy817284
Apr 9, 12:54 PM
Not that it helps all that much now, but what about this
http://protect.gadgettheft.com/
a program that you load into your device and if its lost or stolen will give you the location of said item. Its like 12 bucks a year for 5 devices, how about some payback for theives.
http://protect.gadgettheft.com/
a program that you load into your device and if its lost or stolen will give you the location of said item. Its like 12 bucks a year for 5 devices, how about some payback for theives.
drsmithy
Nov 17, 12:53 AM
2. AMD is far superior. Right now Intel is in the lead, but it's not a true lead. For the longest time, AMD had the better architecture.
"For the longest time" ? x86 CPUs did exist before the year 2000, you know.
Intel had to do something, so they went back to the P3, tweaked it a little, and added some huge caches, and gave us a CPU modeled after a 6 year old (guessing here) CPU that ran at around the same GHZ speeds, but was faster.
The P3 (which begat the Pentium M, which begat Core, which begat Core 2) was basically just a souped-up P2. A P2 was basically just a Pentium Pro with MMX and an off-die L2 cache (what Apple would later call a "backside cache").
The Pentium Pro (Intel's first totally new x86 chip design since the 386) came out in 1995. So all your fancy new x86 Macs have a direct lineage to an Intel CPU over a decade old.
Personally I think it's a credit to Intel that the PPro has scaled from a massive, hot, "slow" 150Mhz server CPU all the way through low-power dual-core laptop chips up to a top-end quad-core CPU. AMD has been through three new CPU designs in the same timeframe and only been unquestionably faster for maybe 50% of it.
"For the longest time" ? x86 CPUs did exist before the year 2000, you know.
Intel had to do something, so they went back to the P3, tweaked it a little, and added some huge caches, and gave us a CPU modeled after a 6 year old (guessing here) CPU that ran at around the same GHZ speeds, but was faster.
The P3 (which begat the Pentium M, which begat Core, which begat Core 2) was basically just a souped-up P2. A P2 was basically just a Pentium Pro with MMX and an off-die L2 cache (what Apple would later call a "backside cache").
The Pentium Pro (Intel's first totally new x86 chip design since the 386) came out in 1995. So all your fancy new x86 Macs have a direct lineage to an Intel CPU over a decade old.
Personally I think it's a credit to Intel that the PPro has scaled from a massive, hot, "slow" 150Mhz server CPU all the way through low-power dual-core laptop chips up to a top-end quad-core CPU. AMD has been through three new CPU designs in the same timeframe and only been unquestionably faster for maybe 50% of it.
maflynn
Apr 12, 06:04 PM
What particular features is Mac OS X missing that Windows 7 has?
The Windows task bar is now by far much better with the addition of aero peek
Networking, its easier, faster and generally better then dealing with OSX
In general though I think apple needs to add features to catch up because MS has caught up and surpassed apple with windows 7.
I guess the bottom line for me is this: I see Microsoft working hard and adding features, to improve the OS. I see apple working hard at making OSX act more like an iPad. I also think given that they really didn't provide the consumer features in 10.6 that they should have done that in 10.7. Its not like they didn't have time, given that SL was released in 2009
The Windows task bar is now by far much better with the addition of aero peek
Networking, its easier, faster and generally better then dealing with OSX
In general though I think apple needs to add features to catch up because MS has caught up and surpassed apple with windows 7.
I guess the bottom line for me is this: I see Microsoft working hard and adding features, to improve the OS. I see apple working hard at making OSX act more like an iPad. I also think given that they really didn't provide the consumer features in 10.6 that they should have done that in 10.7. Its not like they didn't have time, given that SL was released in 2009
Music_Producer
Jan 12, 04:18 AM
The iPhone looks pretty cool, but it's a logical progression - certainly not a revolution. If it was so revolutionary there wouldn't have been so many predictions about it. Instead, a lot of the predictions were actually aiming too high.
And it really is this fan-boy attitude of 'Steve is our hero, everything he does is wonderful' that keeps apple products so expensive. If you were all a little more critical they'd have to work a little harder to earn your money.
600 bucks for a phone (with contract) with only 8gigs of ram for my music? It's not 3G. It's got WiFi but doesn't do VOIP? I think I'll pass on this one.
Um, it's an ipod first.. and then a phone. *Only* 8 gigs for music? I would love to see you walk around with a Seagate 400 gb hard drive stuck to your ear.
Why don't you check out the Sony Ericsson W850i? Its got 4 gigs.. no camera, no wifi, no Safari, hell.. no OS X .. no phone has the photo management features of the iphone.. and it retails for $699.
And you think the iphone is expensive for what it has.. complain, complain. If you can't afford it, and you don't need it.. don't complain. It's absolutely stupid to compare pricing to other ridiculous phones when they don't even come close.
And it really is this fan-boy attitude of 'Steve is our hero, everything he does is wonderful' that keeps apple products so expensive. If you were all a little more critical they'd have to work a little harder to earn your money.
600 bucks for a phone (with contract) with only 8gigs of ram for my music? It's not 3G. It's got WiFi but doesn't do VOIP? I think I'll pass on this one.
Um, it's an ipod first.. and then a phone. *Only* 8 gigs for music? I would love to see you walk around with a Seagate 400 gb hard drive stuck to your ear.
Why don't you check out the Sony Ericsson W850i? Its got 4 gigs.. no camera, no wifi, no Safari, hell.. no OS X .. no phone has the photo management features of the iphone.. and it retails for $699.
And you think the iphone is expensive for what it has.. complain, complain. If you can't afford it, and you don't need it.. don't complain. It's absolutely stupid to compare pricing to other ridiculous phones when they don't even come close.
skinned66
Apr 16, 02:56 AM
And by that what do you mean. iPhones had little impact on phones like the BB Curve
Let us not compare Apples to turds.
Let us not compare Apples to turds.
brepublican
Sep 12, 08:17 AM
why would a female friend postpone?
Yeah, this kinda sounds fishy to me :confused:
Did someone get dumped??
"Honey lets go see the new Steve Carrell movie"
"Yeah, about that, there's a HUGE Apple product announcement tonight... and I'd like to be next to my new MacPro so that I dont miss a thing... can we go some other time?"
*girl storms out of house*
:D :D
Yeah, this kinda sounds fishy to me :confused:
Did someone get dumped??
"Honey lets go see the new Steve Carrell movie"
"Yeah, about that, there's a HUGE Apple product announcement tonight... and I'd like to be next to my new MacPro so that I dont miss a thing... can we go some other time?"
*girl storms out of house*
:D :D
EricNau
Oct 3, 05:46 PM
I'm expecting more Leopard features, more movie studios for iTunes, iLife '07, iWork '07, the release of "iTV," and perhaps Core 2 Duo in the MacBook Pros, (if not sooner); I believe the MacBooks will keep Core Duo.
I seriously doubt we'll see the iPhone or "True" Video iPod.
I seriously doubt we'll see the iPhone or "True" Video iPod.
FriarNurgle
Apr 8, 01:24 PM
Bet they are lowering the price and want to avoid refunding money to so many people.
GaresTaylan
Mar 17, 07:38 PM
Not bashing android by any means... But my work had deployed me a droid x. I had it for about six months. On average I would say I needed to pull the battery for lock ups every couple days. I had Verizon send me a replacement under warranty and the new one did the same thing.
There's def pros and cons to each platform. I enjoyed the notification system a lot more on the droid. Since then I've switched to an iPhone 4 at work. I have a personal 3GS and have fallen in love with the cosmetic design of the iPhone 4 and the retina display.
There's def pros and cons to each platform. I enjoyed the notification system a lot more on the droid. Since then I've switched to an iPhone 4 at work. I have a personal 3GS and have fallen in love with the cosmetic design of the iPhone 4 and the retina display.
Luis
Jan 11, 10:17 PM
I still like Engadget better. And after this, It'll probably be only Engadget that I continue to read.
NoSmokingBandit
Nov 14, 09:47 PM
MW2's plot wasn't too ludicrous. You infiltrate a Russian terrorist cell, you're commanding officer betrays you, starts a war between the US and Russia. The only ludicrous part that I can remember is a nuke blowing apart the ISS.
There are many things wrong with MW2's plot. Instead of typing them all out i'll just copypasta them.
�As the mission opens, we�re treated to General Shepherd reciting a litany of Makarov�s excesses over a montage of shocking headlines. Makarov is an internationally known figure of menace, then, with a Russian military record. So when he confidently machineguns his way through the airport without even bothering to put on a mask, are we to believe that the Russian authorities weren�t able to identify him from security camera footage?
Instead, Russia blames a nobody CIA agent found dead at the scene who was killed by a point-blank pistol shot to the head. That doesn�t raise any red flags at all? The obvious conclusion is that the whole thing was an American plot, and that a full-scale invasion of the continental US is the appropriate response. The transition to the Takedown favela mission begets more confusion, such as: how did Shepherd tie the shell casings to Rojas? Meticulous analysis of the cutscene indicates that he actually re-created a 3D model of a shell casing from security camera footage, which was sufficiently hi-rez to make a match against a big bullet database. So the Russians, who had the actual shell casings to analyze, couldn�t figure that out? The security footage was crisp enough to recreate minute detail on a spent shell casing, but not of sufficient quality to identify Makarov�s face. Conclusion: Makarov�s face is smaller than a bullet.
�When the warriors of 141 get to South America, they make short work of tracking down their man. Unfortunately, HQ won�t send a helicopter to extract them from the favela so Soap rings up his old pal Nikolai on a payphone. Luckily, the Russian informant just so happens to be tooling around Rio in a chopper and pops right over to pick them up. The mission itself, dashing weaponless across rooftops and frantically leaping to safety, was brilliant fun in the heat of the moment. But upon reflection, we must concede that nothing about the scenario makes a bit of sense. But look, it�s Nikolai!!
�With his newfound freedom, Price�s first order of business is to launch a nuclear warhead at the east coast of the United States, with the goal of snuffing out the Russian invasion. Of course, he wasn�t planning to nuke America outright. When a nuclear explosion occurs in space, the only effect is an EMP blast that destroys all unshielded electronics in its line of sight.
While it made for an intensely dramatic scene as the burst rippled across America and demolished the ISS, there�s no way Price could have launched a missile from a Russian nuclear sub by himself. Did he just ring up Nikolai on a payphone to get the launch codes? How did he singlehandedly defeat the physical safety measures? You don�t just push the glowy red button with the mean face on it. There are elaborate control systems in place to prevent just such unauthorized launches.
http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb/GamesRadar/us/Games/M/Modern%20Warfare%202/Everything%20else/plot%20holes/Finished/112009_modernwarfare2_obs06--article_image.jpg
Above: Two people have to turn launch keys simultaneously to fire a real nuclear missile
One more thing: how did Price get it to detonate in space, anyhow? We�re pretty sure that wasn�t part of the missile�s original instructions. Regardless, if the Russians were serious about their �kill America� plan from the get-go, they probably would have launched HEMP and nuclear strikes of their own as a precursor to the invasion.
�Once the Russians have been successfully repelled, Shepherd and Task Force 141 get down to the business of mopping up Makarov. Shepherd calls out two potential hiding places, the �last safe havens on earth for Makarov and his men.� Incidentally, no one stopped to wonder how Shepherd suddenly uncovered these safe havens or, if he knew about them all along, why they weren�t investigated after the airport massacre. But wait! Intel gathered at one of the safehouses links Makarov to Shepherd: cue the shocking murder of Ghost and Roach at Shepherd�s hands.
Devastated, Price and Soap moan about how they�re all alone in the world with no one to turn to. Umm, guys? Aren�t you technically still officers in the British Armed Forces? Sure Shepherd was calling the duo �terrorists,� but America�s credibility on the world stage was shot to hell after the airport incident. Someone over at SAS would remember the heroes who gunned down Zakhaev and send help. No? OK, better just grab Nikolai and go after the bad guy yourselves.
Theres more you can read on your own, but these are the biggest imo.
http://www.gamesradar.com/f/modern-warfare-2s-glaring-plot-holes-exposed/a-20091120123332495077/p-1
There are many things wrong with MW2's plot. Instead of typing them all out i'll just copypasta them.
�As the mission opens, we�re treated to General Shepherd reciting a litany of Makarov�s excesses over a montage of shocking headlines. Makarov is an internationally known figure of menace, then, with a Russian military record. So when he confidently machineguns his way through the airport without even bothering to put on a mask, are we to believe that the Russian authorities weren�t able to identify him from security camera footage?
Instead, Russia blames a nobody CIA agent found dead at the scene who was killed by a point-blank pistol shot to the head. That doesn�t raise any red flags at all? The obvious conclusion is that the whole thing was an American plot, and that a full-scale invasion of the continental US is the appropriate response. The transition to the Takedown favela mission begets more confusion, such as: how did Shepherd tie the shell casings to Rojas? Meticulous analysis of the cutscene indicates that he actually re-created a 3D model of a shell casing from security camera footage, which was sufficiently hi-rez to make a match against a big bullet database. So the Russians, who had the actual shell casings to analyze, couldn�t figure that out? The security footage was crisp enough to recreate minute detail on a spent shell casing, but not of sufficient quality to identify Makarov�s face. Conclusion: Makarov�s face is smaller than a bullet.
�When the warriors of 141 get to South America, they make short work of tracking down their man. Unfortunately, HQ won�t send a helicopter to extract them from the favela so Soap rings up his old pal Nikolai on a payphone. Luckily, the Russian informant just so happens to be tooling around Rio in a chopper and pops right over to pick them up. The mission itself, dashing weaponless across rooftops and frantically leaping to safety, was brilliant fun in the heat of the moment. But upon reflection, we must concede that nothing about the scenario makes a bit of sense. But look, it�s Nikolai!!
�With his newfound freedom, Price�s first order of business is to launch a nuclear warhead at the east coast of the United States, with the goal of snuffing out the Russian invasion. Of course, he wasn�t planning to nuke America outright. When a nuclear explosion occurs in space, the only effect is an EMP blast that destroys all unshielded electronics in its line of sight.
While it made for an intensely dramatic scene as the burst rippled across America and demolished the ISS, there�s no way Price could have launched a missile from a Russian nuclear sub by himself. Did he just ring up Nikolai on a payphone to get the launch codes? How did he singlehandedly defeat the physical safety measures? You don�t just push the glowy red button with the mean face on it. There are elaborate control systems in place to prevent just such unauthorized launches.
http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb/GamesRadar/us/Games/M/Modern%20Warfare%202/Everything%20else/plot%20holes/Finished/112009_modernwarfare2_obs06--article_image.jpg
Above: Two people have to turn launch keys simultaneously to fire a real nuclear missile
One more thing: how did Price get it to detonate in space, anyhow? We�re pretty sure that wasn�t part of the missile�s original instructions. Regardless, if the Russians were serious about their �kill America� plan from the get-go, they probably would have launched HEMP and nuclear strikes of their own as a precursor to the invasion.
�Once the Russians have been successfully repelled, Shepherd and Task Force 141 get down to the business of mopping up Makarov. Shepherd calls out two potential hiding places, the �last safe havens on earth for Makarov and his men.� Incidentally, no one stopped to wonder how Shepherd suddenly uncovered these safe havens or, if he knew about them all along, why they weren�t investigated after the airport massacre. But wait! Intel gathered at one of the safehouses links Makarov to Shepherd: cue the shocking murder of Ghost and Roach at Shepherd�s hands.
Devastated, Price and Soap moan about how they�re all alone in the world with no one to turn to. Umm, guys? Aren�t you technically still officers in the British Armed Forces? Sure Shepherd was calling the duo �terrorists,� but America�s credibility on the world stage was shot to hell after the airport incident. Someone over at SAS would remember the heroes who gunned down Zakhaev and send help. No? OK, better just grab Nikolai and go after the bad guy yourselves.
Theres more you can read on your own, but these are the biggest imo.
http://www.gamesradar.com/f/modern-warfare-2s-glaring-plot-holes-exposed/a-20091120123332495077/p-1
ChrisTX
Apr 25, 07:30 PM
Bigger sensor requires bigger lens and bigger lens requires bigger housing. With Apple, you are not going to get this. If you look for bigger sensor -check Nokia or Sony phones.
While I agree to an extent, Engadget put the iPhone 4 against a majority of the major smartphone's and the only one to even come close in camera quality was the Nokia N8.
While I agree to an extent, Engadget put the iPhone 4 against a majority of the major smartphone's and the only one to even come close in camera quality was the Nokia N8.
R.R.Mac
Jan 13, 05:12 AM
i am going to get an iphone and i think Jobs has done a great job of apple. I believe that the iPhone is going to be a great hit and as someone said will once again steal some (or most) of the market for phones. Apple have used their brains once more and will be a success. All they need to do now is get some game designers and design a PSP like game machine. IF apple can make this game machine and make the computers sync and stuff like that apple will have it in the bag!
fivepoint
Mar 3, 09:45 PM
I heard somewhere that federal employees are not able to collectively bargain for their benefits package. If this is true, why are recent states' attempts to restrict unionized bargaining seen as being so draconian, and why isn't there an outcry to give federal employees the same "rights"?
That's true regarding federal employees. It's being labeled as draconian because that's how union thugs get their message across. They need to scare people in order to get their way. Scare or intimidate... and thankfully they aren't powerful enough to intimidate all of us at this point. Not that they aren't trying:
https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/188078_139173095668_4256766_n.jpg
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable." -Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States, and Progressive/Liberal Hero
That's true regarding federal employees. It's being labeled as draconian because that's how union thugs get their message across. They need to scare people in order to get their way. Scare or intimidate... and thankfully they aren't powerful enough to intimidate all of us at this point. Not that they aren't trying:
https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/188078_139173095668_4256766_n.jpg
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable." -Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States, and Progressive/Liberal Hero
juannacho
Apr 26, 04:36 AM
The iPhone 4 also has edge-to-edge glass, that isn't new!
Anyway, I think that the bigger the screen within the current iPhone frame (without making the actual device any bigger), the better!
This will also be easier to adopt for developers, as "old resolution" apps can run with a small black border at the top and on the sides, while new apps can take advantage of a few extra pixels, if the pixel count changes.
If the pixel count doesn't change, but rather stays the same and the pixels get bigger, then the "retina-ness" of the display will get somewhat diluted, but maybe that would even be noticeable at this small scale.
I don't think it would be noticeable.
The size change to the screen that is being suggested is about 8% which on the 326 dpi current screen would see a drop to pretty much bang on 300dpi.
Coincidentally the exact resolution of pretty much all magazine print.
It's not as though people look at magazines thinking "Euuurgh! Look at all those hideous dots!"
And yes, even if you held a magazine the same distance from your face as an iPhone :p
I think a physical size change would attract bad press "Apple makes all iPhone 4 peripherals redundant!!!11" and likewise a resolution change would seriously piss off the development community that is the main breadwinner for Apple in the AppStore.
The double pixel bump from 3 to 4 avoided this because it was a straight doubling of rez so apps could be elegantly(ish) upscaled. Adding a few extra pixels would achieve very little and be extremely annoying for the app devs.
The fact that the 'Retina Display' is established in the public's mind means that they aren't going to notice (or care) about an extremely marginal drop in resolution.
In fact, the only people who will even mention it will be Android owners:D
Anyway, I think that the bigger the screen within the current iPhone frame (without making the actual device any bigger), the better!
This will also be easier to adopt for developers, as "old resolution" apps can run with a small black border at the top and on the sides, while new apps can take advantage of a few extra pixels, if the pixel count changes.
If the pixel count doesn't change, but rather stays the same and the pixels get bigger, then the "retina-ness" of the display will get somewhat diluted, but maybe that would even be noticeable at this small scale.
I don't think it would be noticeable.
The size change to the screen that is being suggested is about 8% which on the 326 dpi current screen would see a drop to pretty much bang on 300dpi.
Coincidentally the exact resolution of pretty much all magazine print.
It's not as though people look at magazines thinking "Euuurgh! Look at all those hideous dots!"
And yes, even if you held a magazine the same distance from your face as an iPhone :p
I think a physical size change would attract bad press "Apple makes all iPhone 4 peripherals redundant!!!11" and likewise a resolution change would seriously piss off the development community that is the main breadwinner for Apple in the AppStore.
The double pixel bump from 3 to 4 avoided this because it was a straight doubling of rez so apps could be elegantly(ish) upscaled. Adding a few extra pixels would achieve very little and be extremely annoying for the app devs.
The fact that the 'Retina Display' is established in the public's mind means that they aren't going to notice (or care) about an extremely marginal drop in resolution.
In fact, the only people who will even mention it will be Android owners:D
No comments:
Post a Comment