neko girl
Mar 3, 11:17 PM
no one is preventing you from living with the person you love or having sex with him
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
aloshka
Apr 25, 03:03 PM
"a perfect storm", "overreaction", "typical for the us to sue.."
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
... apple deserves to get a beating for this.
they're known for focussing on the user in terms of design and UI of theirdevices... they should also make the step to focus on their users best interest in terms of privacy and freedom, rather than their own greed.
You obviously missed the point that they do not track anything. It's just a log file on your iphone, it stays with your iphone. I GOT even more news!! I FOUND a file on the iphone that stores text messages. YES PEOPLE text messages. I can read your text messages from this file if I have your phone!! Oh ya, I know you can launch the SMS app, but WHY WOULD APPLE NEED TO STORE TEXT MESSAGES ON MY DEVICE?!?! I'm suing!!
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
... apple deserves to get a beating for this.
they're known for focussing on the user in terms of design and UI of theirdevices... they should also make the step to focus on their users best interest in terms of privacy and freedom, rather than their own greed.
You obviously missed the point that they do not track anything. It's just a log file on your iphone, it stays with your iphone. I GOT even more news!! I FOUND a file on the iphone that stores text messages. YES PEOPLE text messages. I can read your text messages from this file if I have your phone!! Oh ya, I know you can launch the SMS app, but WHY WOULD APPLE NEED TO STORE TEXT MESSAGES ON MY DEVICE?!?! I'm suing!!
skunk
Feb 28, 06:04 PM
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.No, it's called "living a human lifestyle".
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.Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage.You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
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.You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
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.So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
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.Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage.You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
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.You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
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.So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
skunk
Mar 3, 04:44 AM
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.If it were about truths and falsehoods, surely everybody would agree? But it isn't, is it? It's about how you feel about it.
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.You are simply avoiding responsibility for your own prejudice by an appeal to a spurious authority.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe.Or, to put it another way, what you feel.
Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?What does your own condition hint at in terms of "natural teleology"? What does the homosexuality exhibited by hundreds of other species tell you about "natural teleology"?
License causes chaos.This statement indicates that you are an authoritarian with a very dim view of human nature.
I don't see any point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the same sex, since I think homosexuality is a psychological problem caused by nurture, not by nature.Well, in that you are quite simply wrong. There are plenty of studies of identical twins which prove otherwise. You should lay the blame for this "aberrant" behaviour squarely at the feet of your aberrant "god"/nature, rather than seek to persuade people that their nature is "wrong".
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.You are simply avoiding responsibility for your own prejudice by an appeal to a spurious authority.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe.Or, to put it another way, what you feel.
Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?What does your own condition hint at in terms of "natural teleology"? What does the homosexuality exhibited by hundreds of other species tell you about "natural teleology"?
License causes chaos.This statement indicates that you are an authoritarian with a very dim view of human nature.
I don't see any point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the same sex, since I think homosexuality is a psychological problem caused by nurture, not by nature.Well, in that you are quite simply wrong. There are plenty of studies of identical twins which prove otherwise. You should lay the blame for this "aberrant" behaviour squarely at the feet of your aberrant "god"/nature, rather than seek to persuade people that their nature is "wrong".
mdelvecchio
Mar 31, 03:22 PM
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
not really. he hails them when they do good, he faults them when they dont. google it.
and this -- is the definition of hypocrisy. will Rubin tweet that his first-ever-tweet is now broken and untrue?
not really. he hails them when they do good, he faults them when they dont. google it.
and this -- is the definition of hypocrisy. will Rubin tweet that his first-ever-tweet is now broken and untrue?
logandzwon
Apr 19, 02:36 PM
Couldn't Samsung just claim that the Galaxy S line is an evolution of the Samsung F700? Pretty strong argument for samsung.
They could. Except, "Jobs unveiled the iPhone to the public on January 9, 2007 at Macworld 2007" according to Wikipedia. F700 after that; http://www.google.com/search?q=samsung+F700+announced
They could. Except, "Jobs unveiled the iPhone to the public on January 9, 2007 at Macworld 2007" according to Wikipedia. F700 after that; http://www.google.com/search?q=samsung+F700+announced
justaregularjoe
Mar 1, 12:01 AM
Yes, I did agree with that post. What is your point?
Heterosexuality is by definition normal (conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected). What percentage of the population is homosexual, what percentage is heterosexual?
Humans by default have four fingers and a thumb on each hand. Am I being mean to people with more or fewer fingers? No, just stating a fact.
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?
Heterosexuality is by definition normal (conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected). What percentage of the population is homosexual, what percentage is heterosexual?
Humans by default have four fingers and a thumb on each hand. Am I being mean to people with more or fewer fingers? No, just stating a fact.
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?
JAT
Mar 22, 06:40 PM
i believe samsung manufactures a lot of their own hardware.. from the display panels to the chips. don't they provide apple with parts for the ipad too? i think this is how samsung is able to price match apple here
That doesn't change the accounting. Cost is still the same, and they are pricing theirs very low. The first Tab came out at what, $800, and then dropped immediately on entrance to Costco and other retailers. Last I saw it was $400, I haven't been paying close attention, though.
That doesn't change the accounting. Cost is still the same, and they are pricing theirs very low. The first Tab came out at what, $800, and then dropped immediately on entrance to Costco and other retailers. Last I saw it was $400, I haven't been paying close attention, though.
Andy-V
Apr 25, 01:56 PM
I think this IS a privacy issue. That data could end up in the wrong hands. Does anyone store a text document on their iPhone with a list of their bank details and passwords? No, because it could end up in the wrong hands. So could this data that's being collected.
This data shouldn't be recorded without permission, no matter what's being done with it.
This data shouldn't be recorded without permission, no matter what's being done with it.
nealibob
Mar 31, 03:00 PM
John Gruber's take:
Can't say I disagree.
The real Android bait-and-switch is calling the platform "open" to consumers. Sure, there are a few "Google Experience" devices that have not been mutilated by handset makers, but even those often have closed hardware. The way I see it, Google uses this ruse of openness to get geek support. Geeks then advocate their platform, which is a great form of marketing.
The reality is that any Android handset with a locked bootloader or no root access from the factory is just about as closed as any iOS device (or BlackBerry, WebOS, Windows, etc. device). The open vs. closed = Android vs. iOS argument is ridiculous, because it focuses on the part of the platform (underlying source code) that matters the least to almost all users.
Can't say I disagree.
The real Android bait-and-switch is calling the platform "open" to consumers. Sure, there are a few "Google Experience" devices that have not been mutilated by handset makers, but even those often have closed hardware. The way I see it, Google uses this ruse of openness to get geek support. Geeks then advocate their platform, which is a great form of marketing.
The reality is that any Android handset with a locked bootloader or no root access from the factory is just about as closed as any iOS device (or BlackBerry, WebOS, Windows, etc. device). The open vs. closed = Android vs. iOS argument is ridiculous, because it focuses on the part of the platform (underlying source code) that matters the least to almost all users.
skunk
Mar 23, 05:34 PM
I keep seeing these pointless ad hominems popping up in your posts. It really is getting tiresome.Isn't that an ad feminam?
dgree03
Apr 6, 02:43 PM
That's what I've gone for, Wifi only. With the wireless hotspot feature of the Nexus S, a 3G version seemed pointless for me.
I thought the same thing, until i bought my 3g Xoom. Then i felt finally freedom! I have a rooted EVO and with my ipad 1 I would tether all the time. Take my phone out, start wireless tether, put my phone back, kill my phone battery.. rinse and repeat.
Now I dont have to kill my phone battery tethering, nor do I have to deal with the hassle of enabling tether on my phone all the time.
I thought the same thing, until i bought my 3g Xoom. Then i felt finally freedom! I have a rooted EVO and with my ipad 1 I would tether all the time. Take my phone out, start wireless tether, put my phone back, kill my phone battery.. rinse and repeat.
Now I dont have to kill my phone battery tethering, nor do I have to deal with the hassle of enabling tether on my phone all the time.
RebootD
Mar 31, 04:44 PM
Ironically, most of the people on this forum said iPhone on Verizon would be game over for Android.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
Ah linux trolls are my favorite :rolleyes: I lost count how many times I've answered a question and/or posted on something to have the random linux guy show up and spout "Or just toss out your mac/pc and install linux on a new machine". Of course no one asked about linux.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
Ah linux trolls are my favorite :rolleyes: I lost count how many times I've answered a question and/or posted on something to have the random linux guy show up and spout "Or just toss out your mac/pc and install linux on a new machine". Of course no one asked about linux.
notjustjay
Sep 19, 01:04 PM
It's more along the lines of "We see all these other laptop manufacturers releasing new CPU's in their products. We see that Apple has already recieved these chips. We feel that it is extremely likely that Apple's laptop lines will be updated with these CPU's, and soon. Finally, We don't want to buy a product that will be outdated in just a month or two.
...
As for "needing it yesterday", that is a product of the hype; but I think, for the most part, we feel that the laptops could have been ready earlier - and certainly would have liked Apple to have come out and said "MBP updates soonish" (of course that makes no business sense for clearing inventory though).
Absolutely. I don't disagree with you one bit. i'm waiting patiently too, as I'm one of those that could stand for a new machine -- my 1 GHz Powerbook G4 is starting to feel sluggish for dealing with the volumes of photos and video I throw at it. It is, however, still doing the same job as it did 3 years ago when I bought it, so my desire for a new machine is tempered by the fact that I don't realistically NEED a new machine in the immediate future.
There are those who post in these threads who, without having any kind of photo as a reference, I imagine are sitting at their keyboards frothing at the mouth! These are the folks who exclaim that they NEED 64-bit computing RIGHT NOW, 32-bit is CRAP and they just can't stand it any longer, Yonah SUCKS now that Merom is out, and Apple BY GOLLY had better deliver or they're buying a Dell tomorrow. You'd think that all the previous-generation machines suddenly stopped working or slowed down when Merom was announced.
...
As for "needing it yesterday", that is a product of the hype; but I think, for the most part, we feel that the laptops could have been ready earlier - and certainly would have liked Apple to have come out and said "MBP updates soonish" (of course that makes no business sense for clearing inventory though).
Absolutely. I don't disagree with you one bit. i'm waiting patiently too, as I'm one of those that could stand for a new machine -- my 1 GHz Powerbook G4 is starting to feel sluggish for dealing with the volumes of photos and video I throw at it. It is, however, still doing the same job as it did 3 years ago when I bought it, so my desire for a new machine is tempered by the fact that I don't realistically NEED a new machine in the immediate future.
There are those who post in these threads who, without having any kind of photo as a reference, I imagine are sitting at their keyboards frothing at the mouth! These are the folks who exclaim that they NEED 64-bit computing RIGHT NOW, 32-bit is CRAP and they just can't stand it any longer, Yonah SUCKS now that Merom is out, and Apple BY GOLLY had better deliver or they're buying a Dell tomorrow. You'd think that all the previous-generation machines suddenly stopped working or slowed down when Merom was announced.
Scottsdale
Apr 6, 11:31 AM
I'm pretty sure you are aware that Apple would use LV CPU in 13", not ULV. That bumps us to 2.3GHz plus Turbo. You have said this yourself too and I already covered the reason in my other post.
This is just a MR article and surprisingly, they don't have much idea about the TDPs. Hopefully they will correct their article so people won't live in confusion.
That isn't what this story reads, and I don't think anyone but you and I have even read the actual facts supposed here.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in the graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It
definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I
could assume things all day, but that isn't the story written.
This is just a MR article and surprisingly, they don't have much idea about the TDPs. Hopefully they will correct their article so people won't live in confusion.
That isn't what this story reads, and I don't think anyone but you and I have even read the actual facts supposed here.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in the graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It
definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I
could assume things all day, but that isn't the story written.
deconai
Aug 11, 12:16 PM
I really don't put too much stock in what ThinkSecret has been saying. They've really missed the mark a lot lately as far as the redesigned Mac Pro casing and other things too numerous to mention. It's almost as if they'll just publish anything that even vaguely refers to Apple. The only thing ThinkSecret is good for is keeping up with Apple lawsuit against them.
MacAddict1978
Mar 26, 02:41 PM
Ridiculous. Mac OS X and iOS can never merge because their UI paradigms are completely different. Why don't people understand this?
And on what computers would iOS apps be developed on of Apple were to can the Mac? iOS may be much more popular, but the Mac is more popular now than it ever has been and still makes then plenty of money.
You're too lost in a programing manual to see the point people are making. Blending is taking 2 things and mixing them together, or parts of things. Merging would be taking 2 things to make 1 new thing. Don't be so literal.
A more unified experience is definitley in Apple's plans for the future of both OS-es. Not my opinion. They've said so. That does not say, however, having one OS to rule them all. Lion takes a lot of cues from IOS (have you looked at it? Watched the Back To The Mac keynote and listened to Steve Jobs talk about this strategy?) The Mac OS will get more IOS like over time. And that might not be a bad thing. Jobs claims they don't want a touch screen Macintosh, yet they've patented the hell out of them and have bought components and things (obviously they've got something in the labs). When that day does come, and it most likely will be sooner than later... a blending of the two OS-es makes a lot of sense. The way people want to interact with technology is changing. Your operating system has to change too. To something more exciting that what we've had since the 1980's. Apple holds a patent on a sensor that works something like the Kinect does. This is where things are going. In a few years you'll swipe i the air without the need to a track pad. A mix of touch, sight, and gestures and perhaps voice. All this tech is here and has been for awhile. Time for the software to hit puberty, and this is the right track to go.
Personally, I'm bored with IOS and Mac OSX on an aesthetic level. I don't want the ugly IOS folders for my Apps anywhere, but I don't want the same old finder either.
And on what computers would iOS apps be developed on of Apple were to can the Mac? iOS may be much more popular, but the Mac is more popular now than it ever has been and still makes then plenty of money.
You're too lost in a programing manual to see the point people are making. Blending is taking 2 things and mixing them together, or parts of things. Merging would be taking 2 things to make 1 new thing. Don't be so literal.
A more unified experience is definitley in Apple's plans for the future of both OS-es. Not my opinion. They've said so. That does not say, however, having one OS to rule them all. Lion takes a lot of cues from IOS (have you looked at it? Watched the Back To The Mac keynote and listened to Steve Jobs talk about this strategy?) The Mac OS will get more IOS like over time. And that might not be a bad thing. Jobs claims they don't want a touch screen Macintosh, yet they've patented the hell out of them and have bought components and things (obviously they've got something in the labs). When that day does come, and it most likely will be sooner than later... a blending of the two OS-es makes a lot of sense. The way people want to interact with technology is changing. Your operating system has to change too. To something more exciting that what we've had since the 1980's. Apple holds a patent on a sensor that works something like the Kinect does. This is where things are going. In a few years you'll swipe i the air without the need to a track pad. A mix of touch, sight, and gestures and perhaps voice. All this tech is here and has been for awhile. Time for the software to hit puberty, and this is the right track to go.
Personally, I'm bored with IOS and Mac OSX on an aesthetic level. I don't want the ugly IOS folders for my Apps anywhere, but I don't want the same old finder either.
leekohler
Feb 28, 09:12 PM
I'm pretty sure I figured it out.
I watched Wonder Woman too much as a kid! :eek:
Well then, they have to explain me. I liked GI Joe, Captain America, Batman and played sports. It just gets more ridiculous the more they try with their junk science.
I watched Wonder Woman too much as a kid! :eek:
Well then, they have to explain me. I liked GI Joe, Captain America, Batman and played sports. It just gets more ridiculous the more they try with their junk science.
brianus
Sep 20, 04:07 PM
So - are you inferring that Windows 2000 or Windows XP never blue screen? Because (if you are) that's a load of crap. I've seen blue screens in both OS's. Granted it's usually tied to hardware only, but it still happens. I've had an external USB drive blue screen in XP every time I turned it on, tried on 3 XP computers. Hardware fault, no doubt. Lately my HP Laptop dvd drive has been causing XP Pro to blue screen every other time I insert a dvd-r. Again - hardware fault.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
Huh? When did I say they never, ever experience any crashes whatsoever? Good god, I have never seen such a collection of mind-bendingly literal-minded people in one thread. Yikes. No idiot would ever say they never ever crash. As was painfully obvious, I was comparing Mac users' perceptions of older Windows OS's to the more recent ones and saying their impressions were inaccurate. I've been dealing with OS X kernel panics and CarbonLib issues all day, but I would never suggest things are as bad as in the OS 8 days when you'd get that little "bomb" at the system would shut down.
It's already happened, just not in as a melodramatic way as you suggest (back to 1GHz? geez). AMD took a small step back, Hz wise when they introduced dual core, though it still advanced their "+" processor ratings I suppose that few noticed the actual clock reduction. Intel took a major step back Hz wise between Netburst and Core 2. The 5000 and 5100 series Xeon CPUs demonstrate this, you can get a Dell precision 690 with 3.73GHz Netburst based chips or the same 690 with 3.0GHz Core2 based chips.
One thing I've noticed is that store ads no longer quote GHz like they used to, but rather processor model numbers. Makes sense: most people will not bother to investigate further, but if they did see the GHz numbers of Pentiums on the same sale ad as those of Core 2's, they might not be so hot on the latter. And please, everyone for the love of god, do not treat me to 5 replies in which you remonstrate me for not getting that the Core 2's are actually faster - I GET IT.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
Huh? When did I say they never, ever experience any crashes whatsoever? Good god, I have never seen such a collection of mind-bendingly literal-minded people in one thread. Yikes. No idiot would ever say they never ever crash. As was painfully obvious, I was comparing Mac users' perceptions of older Windows OS's to the more recent ones and saying their impressions were inaccurate. I've been dealing with OS X kernel panics and CarbonLib issues all day, but I would never suggest things are as bad as in the OS 8 days when you'd get that little "bomb" at the system would shut down.
It's already happened, just not in as a melodramatic way as you suggest (back to 1GHz? geez). AMD took a small step back, Hz wise when they introduced dual core, though it still advanced their "+" processor ratings I suppose that few noticed the actual clock reduction. Intel took a major step back Hz wise between Netburst and Core 2. The 5000 and 5100 series Xeon CPUs demonstrate this, you can get a Dell precision 690 with 3.73GHz Netburst based chips or the same 690 with 3.0GHz Core2 based chips.
One thing I've noticed is that store ads no longer quote GHz like they used to, but rather processor model numbers. Makes sense: most people will not bother to investigate further, but if they did see the GHz numbers of Pentiums on the same sale ad as those of Core 2's, they might not be so hot on the latter. And please, everyone for the love of god, do not treat me to 5 replies in which you remonstrate me for not getting that the Core 2's are actually faster - I GET IT.
dmunz
Apr 8, 07:46 AM
Have you ever seen an RZ coupon that didn't say "excludes Apple products" along with Bose and a number of other carveouts. Financing may be a different issue.
B
That is a good point, but it never seems to stop them from taking the coupon. Maybe I've just been lucky there,
FWIW
DLM
B
That is a good point, but it never seems to stop them from taking the coupon. Maybe I've just been lucky there,
FWIW
DLM
Macnoviz
Jul 21, 02:23 AM
I think that the surprise will be next month when Steve J is talking about Leopard. He'll mention something like, "You might have read a bit about a new chip from Intel called Kentsfield. You might like to know that Leopard is designed to take full advantage of Kentsfield when it's released." He really doesn't need to say anything else - that alone will drive MS nuts.
Maybe they will want to implement it pushing the release back to december:D
Maybe they will want to implement it pushing the release back to december:D
princealfie
Nov 29, 11:11 AM
I prefer my Count Basie off the Pablo label not Decca (Universal argmmm)... so there.
guffman
Aug 6, 01:43 PM
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Um, http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=odbjam.2.2
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Um, http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=odbjam.2.2
tortoise
Aug 7, 09:14 PM
Lots of ways it COULD be implemented. Looks at Suns new file system ZFS. It is basically "Copy on Write". With a file system you can do things even fancier then with a DBMS. For example a "block" (i-node) exists physicaly on the disk only once but it could be maped into any numbr of files. If a file in only an orderd set of block numbers then to copy a copy all you need to copy is the set of numbers which is on the order of 1000 times shorter then the data itself.
Ahem, a modern relational database system can do everything a file system can. In fact, they are both databases, but optimized for different tasks and slightly different semantics. The same behaviors can be achieved with both; it is a matter of design bias, not capability. File systems like ZFS actually converge on normal MVCC database behavior, which durably journals all writes but with more flexibility with respect to atomicity and version cleanup than a file system. File system semantics, even versioning ones, are more primitive and less capable than database ones, but with substantially increased performance over what would be possible from an MVCC database for the same task.
Same theory, different optimizations. The balancing act has always been between the power fully ACID-compliant MVCC semantics and the basic speed of simple file system semantics. Apple and Sun are burning some excess performance capacity to deliver features that are closer to the database ideal.
Ahem, a modern relational database system can do everything a file system can. In fact, they are both databases, but optimized for different tasks and slightly different semantics. The same behaviors can be achieved with both; it is a matter of design bias, not capability. File systems like ZFS actually converge on normal MVCC database behavior, which durably journals all writes but with more flexibility with respect to atomicity and version cleanup than a file system. File system semantics, even versioning ones, are more primitive and less capable than database ones, but with substantially increased performance over what would be possible from an MVCC database for the same task.
Same theory, different optimizations. The balancing act has always been between the power fully ACID-compliant MVCC semantics and the basic speed of simple file system semantics. Apple and Sun are burning some excess performance capacity to deliver features that are closer to the database ideal.