DeSnousa
May 16, 08:23 PM
nice! did you get your passkey?
Sure did, all 5 of my rigs have a passkey now.
Sure did, all 5 of my rigs have a passkey now.
Willis
Oct 17, 10:43 AM
so it's kind of a mixture here.
1. more capacity -> blu-ray
2. lower price -> hd-dvd
3. porn industry choses the cheapest format -> hd-dvd
Actually, the porn industry has gone with Blu-Ray.
1. more capacity -> blu-ray
2. lower price -> hd-dvd
3. porn industry choses the cheapest format -> hd-dvd
Actually, the porn industry has gone with Blu-Ray.
Aeolius
Oct 9, 05:55 PM
For comparison, my house has 7 bedrooms and 5.5 bathrooms. Granted, one of those bedrooms was supposed to be a home office and another was supposed to be a craft room.
Upstairs 2 of my sons share a room, 2 of my daughters share a room, my 16-year old daughter stays in what was the scrapbook room and my father-in-law has a bedroom.
On the main floor is the master bedroom, my 16-year old son's room (same size as the master, to accommodate his wheelchair), and my 2 youngest daughters' bedroom (wired to the hilt with plugs as it was to be an office).
It may be a larger house, but it definitely gets used. ;)
Upstairs 2 of my sons share a room, 2 of my daughters share a room, my 16-year old daughter stays in what was the scrapbook room and my father-in-law has a bedroom.
On the main floor is the master bedroom, my 16-year old son's room (same size as the master, to accommodate his wheelchair), and my 2 youngest daughters' bedroom (wired to the hilt with plugs as it was to be an office).
It may be a larger house, but it definitely gets used. ;)
Cagle
Apr 5, 03:22 PM
Am I the only one not finding this on the App Store?
no, but you're the only one looking...
no, but you're the only one looking...
scu
Nov 24, 08:47 AM
Why do people upgrade .mac on thanksgiving.
Isn't the price on amazon cheaper(or at least as cheap as), and no tax?!
It is actually cheaper than the Apple Store. The only reason I went to Apple was because Call of Duty. It was the same price as Amazon in total, but I would rather give Apple the business since I own lots of stock.:D
Isn't the price on amazon cheaper(or at least as cheap as), and no tax?!
It is actually cheaper than the Apple Store. The only reason I went to Apple was because Call of Duty. It was the same price as Amazon in total, but I would rather give Apple the business since I own lots of stock.:D
VideoFreek
May 4, 02:57 PM
The bill and its proposed draconian penalties is just ridiculous.
On the other hand, Dr. Choi should tend to the physical and mental well-being of his patients, and stop trying to play safety nanny. Sorry, but I find his arguments unconvincing, and if a busybody doctor starting quizzing me about safety practices around my home, I'd tell him to F off.
On the other hand, Dr. Choi should tend to the physical and mental well-being of his patients, and stop trying to play safety nanny. Sorry, but I find his arguments unconvincing, and if a busybody doctor starting quizzing me about safety practices around my home, I'd tell him to F off.
Illuminated
Apr 6, 05:46 PM
I can't not eat a Ben & Jerry's in one sitting...
it's impossible, cause as you eat it, it gets softer...then if you put it back into the freezer, its rock hard!!
it's impossible, cause as you eat it, it gets softer...then if you put it back into the freezer, its rock hard!!
marcelo002
Sep 12, 08:47 AM
I have actually rented a movie from the Unbox store and despite a crappy UI, problems starting the download, and having to use an S-video cable to connect my laptop to the TV, I found the experience better than expected.
Just how bad were you expecting Unbox to be?
That's like saying despite my flight being delayed, the airline losing my luggage, and my hotel burning down, my vacation wasnt too bad...
Just how bad were you expecting Unbox to be?
That's like saying despite my flight being delayed, the airline losing my luggage, and my hotel burning down, my vacation wasnt too bad...
SeaFox
Oct 28, 11:23 PM
A) It's not the OSS community that's trying to crack Apple's DRM. Lets get that straight. These people have nothing to do with that community. These guys are just pirates using the source that is out there.
That's true. But they are the ones who are going bellyache continually about Apple not having the software available anymore. "Why can't I get the Darwin source code?" "This is unfair, they used BSD stuff and now they aren't sharing!" "Why haven't they released 10.4.9?" (when it comes out)
They aren't going to look at it from Apple's perspective. They aren't going to say. "Well, gee thanks Apple for trying to share the software with us. We're sorry you're getting screwed over by Wintel hackers who are too cheap to just buy a Mac." They're going too say. Well, we're sorry that's happening but you have to just put up with it as part of having your stuff available. They'll make Apple out to be evil when this is all a reactionary measure. Apple wants to release Darwin as open source, otherwise they could have just released the first version and then closed the source after that (they can legally do that, just because it was open source and you released it once doesn't mean you have to keep doing it). Apple would never be able to use any newer BSD components after that, they would begin maintaining their software as a fork pretty much. They only pulled it because someone keeps hacking to run it on plain beige box Wintels. And the OSS people aren't going to look at those hackers as the ones responsible for the source being pulled.
Many OSS people are the free as in speech types, but I feel most are a combination of the free as in speech and as in beer types. They wants software to be free for use and they don't think it should have a pricetag attached. These are the ones always saying Apple should have to release Aqua too just because the Darwin part of OSX is released.
Edit:
Oh ****! Thanks Apple! Now, how am I supposed to get Mac OS X to run on my old Linux box?
See? There they are now. "Oh, ****! Thanks Apple!" Who's fault is it the source was pulled again?
That's true. But they are the ones who are going bellyache continually about Apple not having the software available anymore. "Why can't I get the Darwin source code?" "This is unfair, they used BSD stuff and now they aren't sharing!" "Why haven't they released 10.4.9?" (when it comes out)
They aren't going to look at it from Apple's perspective. They aren't going to say. "Well, gee thanks Apple for trying to share the software with us. We're sorry you're getting screwed over by Wintel hackers who are too cheap to just buy a Mac." They're going too say. Well, we're sorry that's happening but you have to just put up with it as part of having your stuff available. They'll make Apple out to be evil when this is all a reactionary measure. Apple wants to release Darwin as open source, otherwise they could have just released the first version and then closed the source after that (they can legally do that, just because it was open source and you released it once doesn't mean you have to keep doing it). Apple would never be able to use any newer BSD components after that, they would begin maintaining their software as a fork pretty much. They only pulled it because someone keeps hacking to run it on plain beige box Wintels. And the OSS people aren't going to look at those hackers as the ones responsible for the source being pulled.
Many OSS people are the free as in speech types, but I feel most are a combination of the free as in speech and as in beer types. They wants software to be free for use and they don't think it should have a pricetag attached. These are the ones always saying Apple should have to release Aqua too just because the Darwin part of OSX is released.
Edit:
Oh ****! Thanks Apple! Now, how am I supposed to get Mac OS X to run on my old Linux box?
See? There they are now. "Oh, ****! Thanks Apple!" Who's fault is it the source was pulled again?
Doctor Q
Jan 5, 08:35 PM
Although the data transferred may be the same or more with on-demand streams, when it's live there will be much higher simultaneous usage. With high-end hosting in general, simultaneous usage is the killer and not really total bandwidth usage. With the popularity of Apple these days the number of simultaneous streams could be extremely high (I mean, if MacRumors gets 100,000 visitors simultaneously think what Apple would get themselves).If they tried to offer a live audio stream, would that produce the same simultaneous usage problem, even though the bandwidth would be reduced?
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 21, 10:29 PM
I think this would be a better way to do it. Perhaps it could be called the "Thank you" or "Helpful" button.
I agree. And there should be some kind of count of "thanks" for each member. And it can give us different "levels" based on our thankfulness. Kind of like how we achieve different statices based on our post count.
I agree. And there should be some kind of count of "thanks" for each member. And it can give us different "levels" based on our thankfulness. Kind of like how we achieve different statices based on our post count.
ZipZap
May 4, 04:50 AM
I don't give a damn. If I pay for a chunk of data, it isn't up to the provider to dictate how I use my data. If I want to syphon fuel out of my vehicle for use in another, that is my decision not Exxon's.
Wrong.
So much emotional reasoning that leave out facts.
Your data is meant for use by your iphone. Your T&C prohibits tethering. So you cannot use your data for tethering in ANY form.
Those that use the analogy of their home internet connection not restricting use...well...that's just it... your T&C there does not restrict devices and use. Not the same thing. As for you gas analogy, again not the same thing. You have no contract with Exxon on how you use your gas. If Exxon made a contract with you to use the gas only in the car that purchased it..it would be the same. You could then decide to buy it or find another source (carrier).
To sum it up. You are tethering only by virtue of the fact that you have jailbroken your phone...and you want the carriers to agree that this is a normal usage of the phone and therefore that tethering is ok?
Are you serious?
You are free to do what you want but dont fault the carrier when then finally catch up to you and force you to stop or pay.
There is just no other way to view this...
Wrong.
So much emotional reasoning that leave out facts.
Your data is meant for use by your iphone. Your T&C prohibits tethering. So you cannot use your data for tethering in ANY form.
Those that use the analogy of their home internet connection not restricting use...well...that's just it... your T&C there does not restrict devices and use. Not the same thing. As for you gas analogy, again not the same thing. You have no contract with Exxon on how you use your gas. If Exxon made a contract with you to use the gas only in the car that purchased it..it would be the same. You could then decide to buy it or find another source (carrier).
To sum it up. You are tethering only by virtue of the fact that you have jailbroken your phone...and you want the carriers to agree that this is a normal usage of the phone and therefore that tethering is ok?
Are you serious?
You are free to do what you want but dont fault the carrier when then finally catch up to you and force you to stop or pay.
There is just no other way to view this...
ChazUK
Apr 16, 04:13 AM
Next up, Google gives away songs for free. Inserts targeted ads every 30 seconds of music. Fandroids flood the Web to tell us all how awesome Android and "free" Google music are and what a greedy jerk Steve Jobs is for selling songs.
You know it's coming.
What are you basing this on, the current ststus of Android OS for being FOSS? There are no advertising components built into Android OS, unlike iOS with iAds. What's made you insinuate this "free" thing as being a negative anyway?
I bet there are plenty of people who use ad supported music serivces like we7.com and spotify free, and god forbid those tight arses who listten to free music on the radio. Are these people inferior to you for doing so?
You know it's coming.
What are you basing this on, the current ststus of Android OS for being FOSS? There are no advertising components built into Android OS, unlike iOS with iAds. What's made you insinuate this "free" thing as being a negative anyway?
I bet there are plenty of people who use ad supported music serivces like we7.com and spotify free, and god forbid those tight arses who listten to free music on the radio. Are these people inferior to you for doing so?
miketcool
Oct 19, 10:05 AM
1.5% woo hoo!! Thats quite a climb!
wrxguy
Sep 8, 09:20 AM
kanye west can kiss my ass.....hes a whinny little bitch....
wpotere
Apr 13, 11:26 AM
No, my point was to scale it back to what it was before 9/11 and maintain both domestic and international security at the pre 9/11 level of international security.
Before 9/11 I could walk right to my gate in several major airports.
Before 9/11 I could walk right to my gate in several major airports.
The Phazer
May 3, 03:02 PM
Users can of course work around carrier restrictions with methods known as "sideloading" that allow users to install apps through unapproved sources, but most casual users are undoubtedly sticking to mainstream, authorized marketplaces such as the Android Market for their needs.
Hmm, I find this highly doubtful to be honest. Aside from anyone who's bought a locked down Android phone that doesn't allow sideloading, I would expect that nearly everyone uses it.
Phazer
Hmm, I find this highly doubtful to be honest. Aside from anyone who's bought a locked down Android phone that doesn't allow sideloading, I would expect that nearly everyone uses it.
Phazer
eXoticon
Apr 15, 06:08 PM
i think it's ugly. i would not want my iphone to look like that.
0815
May 3, 02:34 PM
Why is it that Google always touts how open is so good, then they realize that, oh, guess we should tighten things up a bit, maybe being too open is not such a good thing.
Problem is that it is mostly open for the carriers to do whatever they want - less open for the user thanks to carrier modifications to the OS.
Shocking that carriers would take steps to stop people from stealing service from them.
Too many people think they are entitled to get everything for free. No matter if it is a new service for $20 a year or if it is tethering they didn't pay for ... Don't know where people get it from that they should get everything for free (or cheap). If you want tethering, pay for it. The cell phone planes (without tethering) are calculated on a typical single (mobile) device usage - using it for more devices is stealing (you know, you signed the contract with the rules - if you don't like it you shouldn't have signed up)
Problem is that it is mostly open for the carriers to do whatever they want - less open for the user thanks to carrier modifications to the OS.
Shocking that carriers would take steps to stop people from stealing service from them.
Too many people think they are entitled to get everything for free. No matter if it is a new service for $20 a year or if it is tethering they didn't pay for ... Don't know where people get it from that they should get everything for free (or cheap). If you want tethering, pay for it. The cell phone planes (without tethering) are calculated on a typical single (mobile) device usage - using it for more devices is stealing (you know, you signed the contract with the rules - if you don't like it you shouldn't have signed up)
Patdt13
Apr 13, 05:40 PM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/417Enp3t-4L._AA300_.jpg
Surprisingly good.
Surprisingly good.
atakordie
Sep 7, 09:15 PM
Yeah, the audience he was performing to was not what I would consider his primary listenership. Plus, it isn't music and it sucks. (I know... just an opinion.) And thanks for the PG-13ness.
bommai
Oct 17, 09:41 AM
That comment about not including the burner is interesting, and I'm at least trying to give it some more thoughtful consideration. Who really needs to burn 30 - 50 GB of data? For backup solutions, wouldn't just getting a huge external hard drive be more practical? Portability might be a factor there, but external drives aren't that cumbersome I don't think. I'm thinking that the majority use of those HD media burners would be to copy movies with illicit applications. Could Apple put in place some protection framework that attempted to only allow creative-works-originating software to burn HD discs, (ie, iMovie, iDVD, FinalCut and other pro apps that use full quality, large size files) therefore denying use of a program that takes a quick and dirty imported disc image and burn it to disc, so that you'd have to work around some long and annoying solution to make an illegal copy (ala burning audio CDs in iTunes and reimporting them to strip the DRM) that would deter any easy mass pirating?
More simply, I'm curious of who out there needs to burn 30 to 50 GB chunks of data, too large for a dual layer DVD to hold, and why.
If Apple wants to sell a lot of movies online and if the movies eventually become 720p or 1080p, users will need big discs like these to backup their movies. Right now I cannot even backup my iPhoto library into one DVD because it is about 11 GB.
More simply, I'm curious of who out there needs to burn 30 to 50 GB chunks of data, too large for a dual layer DVD to hold, and why.
If Apple wants to sell a lot of movies online and if the movies eventually become 720p or 1080p, users will need big discs like these to backup their movies. Right now I cannot even backup my iPhoto library into one DVD because it is about 11 GB.
Eidorian
Nov 23, 11:55 PM
Oh nicee. The online Apple Store just went down right when I was refreshing. :DThat's a good sign. I want my sleep! *sob*
spazzcat
Mar 28, 06:54 PM
Before it was sooo.... hard. My wrist still hurts from dragging one single file to the Applications folder. Oh, and I just love having to pay sales tax on the apps. :rolleyes:
I don't hate the Mac App store, I just don't think it should be a factor in the award. With that said, its Apples award and they can do as they please with it, including making acceptance of onerous terms a prerequisite to compete.
So they shouldn't be able to make the rules for their awards on their platform???
I don't hate the Mac App store, I just don't think it should be a factor in the award. With that said, its Apples award and they can do as they please with it, including making acceptance of onerous terms a prerequisite to compete.
So they shouldn't be able to make the rules for their awards on their platform???
No comments:
Post a Comment