thworple
Oct 19, 09:49 AM
I would love to know what the worldwide figure is for Apple market percentage. I know it says here that its not in the top 5, hence no available data, but it would be interesting to see, particularly here in the UK, as the amount of people I know who have switched in the last year has been huge!!
xVeinx
Nov 16, 03:01 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86#Manufacturers
Hopefully Apple will stick with the best for now. (Intel) I've seen the promises AMD has but it's leaning toward 4x4 to compete with Intel. What's on the lower end for the average user when a Core 2 beats the pants off of what AMD has out.
And one more thing....
Introducing the Macbook mini AMD edition!
AMD 4x4 processors at 2.6ghz
Nvidia 4x4 compatible chipset
AMD x1950 graphics w/ 512 memory
12in sxga screen
Superdrive
2 gigs memory standard
Liquid Nitrogen not included...
:p
Hopefully Apple will stick with the best for now. (Intel) I've seen the promises AMD has but it's leaning toward 4x4 to compete with Intel. What's on the lower end for the average user when a Core 2 beats the pants off of what AMD has out.
And one more thing....
Introducing the Macbook mini AMD edition!
AMD 4x4 processors at 2.6ghz
Nvidia 4x4 compatible chipset
AMD x1950 graphics w/ 512 memory
12in sxga screen
Superdrive
2 gigs memory standard
Liquid Nitrogen not included...
:p
nosen
Sep 25, 11:25 AM
That is good to know, because 1.1.2 runs like crap on a Quad with a 6800GT and 8GB of RAM. Unacceptable, really.
I think something might be wrong with your install. I run Aperture on my MBP and it runs really well. It's definitely an easier workflow than my previous, which was iView --> ACR --> Photoshop.
I think something might be wrong with your install. I run Aperture on my MBP and it runs really well. It's definitely an easier workflow than my previous, which was iView --> ACR --> Photoshop.
wlh99
Apr 28, 09:13 AM
Your minutes and seconds are thus never reset, so your "timer" is never reset (this is completely a seperate issue from NSTimer, hence why I say you probably don't understand the scope of NSTimer. It has no knowledge of these variables and thus doesn't reset them when you invalidate myTimer or newTimer).
That has been pointed out. The OP is stuck thinking the timer is broken, when it works exactly as it should. I think the OP thinks that those variables are part of the timer. He also first thought "self" was the timer. I asked if/where he was resetting the seconds, and if he wanted a reset function or not. For all we know, he wants a start stop timer that doesn't reset. That would be a normal implementation.
Also, could you please post a screenshot of your Interface Builder associations ? (under File's Owner, the tab in Inspector with all the Outlets and Actions), because I can't quite figure out what buttons are tied to what actions.
That would be very helpful. Also, explain how you want the program to act as the user uses it.
You also still have 2 timers. Why do you believe you need both ? Have you tried simplifying the code to using only 1 ?
He was told elsewhere that he could not reuse a timer. I think he is still stuck on the concept (not necessarily the definition) of a pointer, and of the life-cycle of an object. I'm not sure he grasps that in the posted samples, the NSTimer was not being reused.
None of these are trick questions, It's me trying to understand what you think this code should do vs what it's actually doing. Now, if you don't answer my questions, I can't really help you here short of writing the code for you, which does not help you learn (I have a good idea how to make the code I wrote last night do what you want to do very quickly, but I doubt you can afford me as a consultant at my exorbitant rates!).
I have some code to post to help the OP. But for not, I'm about to get a parking ticket, so I have to leave. But I will post it today.
That has been pointed out. The OP is stuck thinking the timer is broken, when it works exactly as it should. I think the OP thinks that those variables are part of the timer. He also first thought "self" was the timer. I asked if/where he was resetting the seconds, and if he wanted a reset function or not. For all we know, he wants a start stop timer that doesn't reset. That would be a normal implementation.
Also, could you please post a screenshot of your Interface Builder associations ? (under File's Owner, the tab in Inspector with all the Outlets and Actions), because I can't quite figure out what buttons are tied to what actions.
That would be very helpful. Also, explain how you want the program to act as the user uses it.
You also still have 2 timers. Why do you believe you need both ? Have you tried simplifying the code to using only 1 ?
He was told elsewhere that he could not reuse a timer. I think he is still stuck on the concept (not necessarily the definition) of a pointer, and of the life-cycle of an object. I'm not sure he grasps that in the posted samples, the NSTimer was not being reused.
None of these are trick questions, It's me trying to understand what you think this code should do vs what it's actually doing. Now, if you don't answer my questions, I can't really help you here short of writing the code for you, which does not help you learn (I have a good idea how to make the code I wrote last night do what you want to do very quickly, but I doubt you can afford me as a consultant at my exorbitant rates!).
I have some code to post to help the OP. But for not, I'm about to get a parking ticket, so I have to leave. But I will post it today.
DoFoT9
Jul 11, 02:39 PM
^^ yeh i agree! would be nice to get a new bunch of people on having a crack.
Santabean2000
Oct 4, 07:08 AM
This is the Mac mini of houses at best.
Wow. Some of you really are hooked on the bigger is better buzz.
Seriously, get out and see some of the world. Perspective people. The world is NOT just the US.
Anyone tootin' on these forums (including myself) can consider themselves truly blessed.
A Mac mini house..? Hardly. It's a mansion by any worldly measure.
Wow. Some of you really are hooked on the bigger is better buzz.
Seriously, get out and see some of the world. Perspective people. The world is NOT just the US.
Anyone tootin' on these forums (including myself) can consider themselves truly blessed.
A Mac mini house..? Hardly. It's a mansion by any worldly measure.
Cassie
Oct 10, 07:55 PM
The 6g? I don't know. Maybe it'll be like a PDA, with iPhone capibilites,and CompactMac OS 1.0 :D
Actually, that would be pretty neat. An iPod/iPhone/PDA? C'mon, you've gotta admit that would be cool!
I really don't care about any video features and such. Hell, add an Intel Core Duo 2 processor, for all I care! Just as long as it still plays music, I'm happy.:)
Actually, that would be pretty neat. An iPod/iPhone/PDA? C'mon, you've gotta admit that would be cool!
I really don't care about any video features and such. Hell, add an Intel Core Duo 2 processor, for all I care! Just as long as it still plays music, I'm happy.:)
twoodcc
Apr 4, 09:41 PM
That's too bad, yeah heat is bad.
Yeah. I guess it's heat. I have two gtx 260's going and an i7 over clocked to 3.5 ghz. But it was working great 2 months ago
Yeah. I guess it's heat. I have two gtx 260's going and an i7 over clocked to 3.5 ghz. But it was working great 2 months ago
leekohler
May 5, 09:27 PM
Dude. I haven't once suggested banning guns.
These days I'd be satisfied with a hint of awareness.
I was under the impression you had. Here you gave me that impression:
It's impossible to enforce a gun ban when all you have to do is drive to the next town to buy them.
If we were to implement restrictions it would have to be nation-wide, or else it would be too easily thwarted.
Fair enough. It took your statement as referring to bans.
Frankly awareness, or more specifically education, is the only solution. Gun owners need more education, particularly those who arm themselves for home defense or concealed carry. If citizens are expected to demonstrate proficiency in driving a car before being allowed on the road - and further proficiency for special kinds of driving (such as racing licenses, commercial licenses, limousine drivers, police driving training etc etc), then gun owners should get considerably more training in self-defense with firearms. Most hunters agree that mandatory hunter-safety classes are a good idea. If that is the case, self-defense training is even more necessary.
Furthermore, the public at large needs to be more educated about laws, regulations and firearms themselves. Fear of firearms can be healthy. Willfull ignorance towards them, not so much.
Exactly. I have never understood why my more liberal friends want to ban anything. Education is the key to solving the vast majority of our problems, not ignorance or fear. I grew up around guns all my life and had fun with them. I also loved archery.
After starting to play hockey and having skydived for three years, the one thing I've finally learned that is the most helpful thing in life is this- do things that scare you. Learn about them. You'll be better off, and you'll grow immensely as a person. Those things will also bring incredible people into your life.
Go to a firing range and learn about guns, citizenzen- even if it scares and repulses you. Trust me, you'll be all the better for it, and you might learn something about yourself you never knew was there. After all, knowledge is power.
These days I'd be satisfied with a hint of awareness.
I was under the impression you had. Here you gave me that impression:
It's impossible to enforce a gun ban when all you have to do is drive to the next town to buy them.
If we were to implement restrictions it would have to be nation-wide, or else it would be too easily thwarted.
Fair enough. It took your statement as referring to bans.
Frankly awareness, or more specifically education, is the only solution. Gun owners need more education, particularly those who arm themselves for home defense or concealed carry. If citizens are expected to demonstrate proficiency in driving a car before being allowed on the road - and further proficiency for special kinds of driving (such as racing licenses, commercial licenses, limousine drivers, police driving training etc etc), then gun owners should get considerably more training in self-defense with firearms. Most hunters agree that mandatory hunter-safety classes are a good idea. If that is the case, self-defense training is even more necessary.
Furthermore, the public at large needs to be more educated about laws, regulations and firearms themselves. Fear of firearms can be healthy. Willfull ignorance towards them, not so much.
Exactly. I have never understood why my more liberal friends want to ban anything. Education is the key to solving the vast majority of our problems, not ignorance or fear. I grew up around guns all my life and had fun with them. I also loved archery.
After starting to play hockey and having skydived for three years, the one thing I've finally learned that is the most helpful thing in life is this- do things that scare you. Learn about them. You'll be better off, and you'll grow immensely as a person. Those things will also bring incredible people into your life.
Go to a firing range and learn about guns, citizenzen- even if it scares and repulses you. Trust me, you'll be all the better for it, and you might learn something about yourself you never knew was there. After all, knowledge is power.
dalvin200
Jan 12, 03:53 AM
Damn... that pretty much sucked for the Moto presentation..
made the company look like a fool.. :eek:
wonder what the outcome of this will be....
and such a small apology on the giz article...
as for banning from macworld - well, the guy who actually pulled the trigger on the tv remote thingy should get banned for real!
made the company look like a fool.. :eek:
wonder what the outcome of this will be....
and such a small apology on the giz article...
as for banning from macworld - well, the guy who actually pulled the trigger on the tv remote thingy should get banned for real!
cmwade77
May 4, 10:55 AM
You know, you can always manually install the App on Android or use the Amazon App Store, Easy Tether (it's only USB though) is still there. Competition is always a good thing, as the Amazon App Store shows.
spicyapple
Aug 7, 04:21 PM
Remember, the original 22" Cinema Display sold for $3999. And at the time, buying one in Canada with an exchange rate of 1.5 meant the lcd sold for nearly $6,000 CDN. :eek:
$2000 for 30" LCD... haha that's cheap! :D
$2000 for 30" LCD... haha that's cheap! :D
Simgar988
Mar 17, 01:33 AM
You're actually breaking the law by knowingly paying less. Especially breaking the law by acknowledging it online.
Smart.... And honest... Congrats
Smart.... And honest... Congrats
Kwill
May 4, 04:04 PM
If you asked a parent, they might call it intuitive. If you asked a musician, they might call it inspiring. To a doctor, it's groundbreaking. To a CEO, it's powerful. To a teacher, it's the future. If you asked a child, she might call it magic. And if you asked us, we'd say it's just getting started.
To a user in a bright environment, it's a glare.
To a user in a bright environment, it's a glare.
Lord Blackadder
Aug 3, 11:20 AM
While that part is true that we would burn more fuel at power planets one advantage you are forgetting about is the power planets are by far much more efficient at producing power than the internal combustion engine on your car. On top of that it is much easier to capture and clean the pollution the power planet produces over what the cars produce. On top of that we can easily most our power over to other renewable choices.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
cadillaccactus
Sep 25, 01:42 PM
I'm running Aperture with 17k+ images on an iMac 24" 2.1ghz G5
a 24" iMac G5, eh? is this a homebrew?
a 24" iMac G5, eh? is this a homebrew?
tigress666
Apr 25, 12:07 PM
Resizing only means having to rewrite apps if the screen resolution changes -- especially if it changes by something other than a whole-number multiple (e.g. 1.5x versus 2x). All rumors indicate a 3.7-inch screen iPhone would have the same Retina-Display resolution (still maintaining over 300dpi).
Technically their "Retina-Display" stuff is based also on typical viewing distance as well -- so a "Retina Display" iPad, iMac, or MacBook (assuming those are in the works) may not go as high as 300dpi. However, a Retina-Display iPad would like require the same pixel-doubling (2x) that was done for apps not optimized for the Retina Display until updates came that included higher-resolution graphics.
Well, in that case, I'd be for it. It won't make me jealous of the 5 (I have a 4 and my contract doesn't run out til next year so no plans on a new phone til then), but I certainly wouldn't be complaining (where as I might if they made the phone bigger or messed up the form in some way to make it less usable or really ugly).
It will be a nice extra when I get my "6" next year (that better have bigger storage by then, that and a faster processor is really all I really want/require out of my next iphone. Not that I would complain about extras other than those two things long as they didn't ruin the phone for what I like it for).
Technically their "Retina-Display" stuff is based also on typical viewing distance as well -- so a "Retina Display" iPad, iMac, or MacBook (assuming those are in the works) may not go as high as 300dpi. However, a Retina-Display iPad would like require the same pixel-doubling (2x) that was done for apps not optimized for the Retina Display until updates came that included higher-resolution graphics.
Well, in that case, I'd be for it. It won't make me jealous of the 5 (I have a 4 and my contract doesn't run out til next year so no plans on a new phone til then), but I certainly wouldn't be complaining (where as I might if they made the phone bigger or messed up the form in some way to make it less usable or really ugly).
It will be a nice extra when I get my "6" next year (that better have bigger storage by then, that and a faster processor is really all I really want/require out of my next iphone. Not that I would complain about extras other than those two things long as they didn't ruin the phone for what I like it for).
i-unit123
Nov 24, 06:58 PM
apple's canada store is also down...
scottlinux
Nov 16, 08:14 PM
It's quite simple. AMD bought ATI. If Apple wants to use ATI GPUs in their computer, then I guess they have to talk to AMD now (at least for pricing, orders, etc).
Yes. And AMD/ATI is currently working on new laptop CPU/GPU chipsets. Their first intensive collaboration. Apple and ATI have a strong link. Why not have AMD systems?
Intel's GPU solutions are pretty bad.
As someone mentioned, the x86 version of OS X works fine on AMD cpus. It's a hack, but it runs fine.
Yes. And AMD/ATI is currently working on new laptop CPU/GPU chipsets. Their first intensive collaboration. Apple and ATI have a strong link. Why not have AMD systems?
Intel's GPU solutions are pretty bad.
As someone mentioned, the x86 version of OS X works fine on AMD cpus. It's a hack, but it runs fine.
craiglud
Nov 23, 10:58 PM
so guys,
does anyone think that the discounts will be able to be used in conjunction with educational discounts? if so that'd be great...if not...then i guess you still save an additional 50 bucks? that'd be ok!
tell me what you think about hte question?
I am able to purchase through their Corporate Employee Purchase program which is usually about the same discount as the student discount. Apple sent an email to announce the sale and it says "Additional EPP savings on select sales items". I believe you will be able to use the two together. Anyway we will see.
does anyone think that the discounts will be able to be used in conjunction with educational discounts? if so that'd be great...if not...then i guess you still save an additional 50 bucks? that'd be ok!
tell me what you think about hte question?
I am able to purchase through their Corporate Employee Purchase program which is usually about the same discount as the student discount. Apple sent an email to announce the sale and it says "Additional EPP savings on select sales items". I believe you will be able to use the two together. Anyway we will see.
Surf Monkey
Mar 17, 05:01 PM
If you read his first post it says, the cashier counted the $230 looked dumb founded and printed the receipt and then asked " are we cool"...
Sorry but the cashier KNEW he hadn't collected all the money... He's the last person in line to make sure the product goes out the door and is paid in full..
Sorry it all on the cashier on this one..
James
I guess you're not clear on the difference between fact and assumption? Nothing in the first post says that the cashier knew that he hadn't charged enough. If anything it shows the moment the mistake was made and the moment in which the OP should have said "No, we're not cool. You didn't run my card yet."
Sorry but the cashier KNEW he hadn't collected all the money... He's the last person in line to make sure the product goes out the door and is paid in full..
Sorry it all on the cashier on this one..
James
I guess you're not clear on the difference between fact and assumption? Nothing in the first post says that the cashier knew that he hadn't charged enough. If anything it shows the moment the mistake was made and the moment in which the OP should have said "No, we're not cool. You didn't run my card yet."
Corndog5595
Nov 15, 07:25 PM
I would be perfectly okay if Infinity Ward spent 10 months on nothing but multiplayer.
Campaigns are great and all, but the development time they take is not worth the amount of gameplay you get compared to multiplayer.
Campaigns are great and all, but the development time they take is not worth the amount of gameplay you get compared to multiplayer.
Mac.World
Apr 17, 03:16 AM
And please explain, with evidence, how people learning about the struggles of gay people throughout history psychologically damages anyone. Your assertions get more ridiculous with every post.
More to the point, where do you draw the line? Should every school curiculum include the struggles of Jews, Blacks, Native Americans, Chinese, Muslims, Hispanics, Christians, Women, etc... gonna be kinda tough to fit all that in. Or does your plan draw the line somewhere? I mean are gay people more important than Native Americans? In terms of history, whom do you believe got screwed over more and whose struggles should be taught in school?
If you were to walk onto the street and ask 100 people which group of people were persecuted the most out of blacks, Native Americans, Jews, women or gays, I'm pretty sure the majority of people would place gays last, out of those groups. Now a liberal state like New York, Hawaii or California may add gay history to their school programs, but don't expect to see it in the majority of the US States. It's simply not important to single out a persons sexuality to highlight their importance in history. Was Oppenheimer's religion put before his contributions to the bomb? I mean is there a little star next to his name with an annotation listing his religion?
Maybe its just me. But I simply don't care if someone was black, blue, brown, Jewish, the Egyptian god Ra, whatever... its the persons contributions, not their ethnicity, sexual pref or religious affiliation that define(d) them. Treat people equally, not with preference.
More to the point, where do you draw the line? Should every school curiculum include the struggles of Jews, Blacks, Native Americans, Chinese, Muslims, Hispanics, Christians, Women, etc... gonna be kinda tough to fit all that in. Or does your plan draw the line somewhere? I mean are gay people more important than Native Americans? In terms of history, whom do you believe got screwed over more and whose struggles should be taught in school?
If you were to walk onto the street and ask 100 people which group of people were persecuted the most out of blacks, Native Americans, Jews, women or gays, I'm pretty sure the majority of people would place gays last, out of those groups. Now a liberal state like New York, Hawaii or California may add gay history to their school programs, but don't expect to see it in the majority of the US States. It's simply not important to single out a persons sexuality to highlight their importance in history. Was Oppenheimer's religion put before his contributions to the bomb? I mean is there a little star next to his name with an annotation listing his religion?
Maybe its just me. But I simply don't care if someone was black, blue, brown, Jewish, the Egyptian god Ra, whatever... its the persons contributions, not their ethnicity, sexual pref or religious affiliation that define(d) them. Treat people equally, not with preference.
Stella
Mar 28, 03:02 PM
Good. I'm all in favor of Apple adding more incentives for devs to embrace the Mac App store. As a consumer I really like the idea of an App Store that makes buying and installing as easy as one click as well as fostering competition between comparable apps.
The Mac AppStore is SJ's wet dream - the closest that he'll get to controlling the platform - just like iOS.
Realistically, OSX cannot become totally closed.
Unfortunately, due to Apple's rules people will never know of the gems that are out there that cannot be included on the Mac AppStore... because they'll be brainwashed into thinking MacAppstore is the only way to get apps - outside of various retail stores.
The MacApp store would be more useful if Apple were to dropped its dracion rules. Some of its rules are wrthwhile having, but others... ugh.
It's a hell of a lot easier updating your apps and re-installing applications through the Mac App Store than any previous method. You don't have to check every single app on your machine to see if it's updated, nor do you have to go to the developers website if they don't have an automatic updater or even a manual updater.
I, like many people, had a hard time getting XCode 4.00 to be upgraded to XCode 4.01. AppStore simply wouldn't recognize that I had previously purchased XCode 4 (yes, I had the XCode installer in /applications ). Downloading outside of the appstore would have been vastly easier...
The Mac AppStore is SJ's wet dream - the closest that he'll get to controlling the platform - just like iOS.
Realistically, OSX cannot become totally closed.
Unfortunately, due to Apple's rules people will never know of the gems that are out there that cannot be included on the Mac AppStore... because they'll be brainwashed into thinking MacAppstore is the only way to get apps - outside of various retail stores.
The MacApp store would be more useful if Apple were to dropped its dracion rules. Some of its rules are wrthwhile having, but others... ugh.
It's a hell of a lot easier updating your apps and re-installing applications through the Mac App Store than any previous method. You don't have to check every single app on your machine to see if it's updated, nor do you have to go to the developers website if they don't have an automatic updater or even a manual updater.
I, like many people, had a hard time getting XCode 4.00 to be upgraded to XCode 4.01. AppStore simply wouldn't recognize that I had previously purchased XCode 4 (yes, I had the XCode installer in /applications ). Downloading outside of the appstore would have been vastly easier...
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario