acearchie
Apr 5, 04:51 PM
Now this sounds exciting!
AmbitiousLemon
Nov 28, 07:43 PM
This reminds me of this article from BBspot: http://www.bbspot.com/News/2006/11/home-theater-regulations.html
MPAA Lobbying for Home Theater Regulations
By Scott Small
Los Angeles , CA - The MPAA is lobbying congress to push through a new bill that would make unauthorized home theaters illegal. The group feels that all theaters should be sanctioned, whether they be commercial settings or at home.
MPAA head Dan Glickman says this needs to be regulated before things start getting too far out of control, "We didn't act early enough with the online sharing of our copyrighted content. This time we're not making the same mistake. We have a right to know what's showing in a theater."
The bill would require that any hardware manufactured in the future contain technology that tells the MPAA directly of what is being shown and specific details on the audience. The data would be gathered using various motion sensors and biometric technology.
The MPAA defines a home theater as any home with a television larger than 29" with stereo sound and at least two comfortable chairs, couch, or futon. Anyone with a home theater would need to pay a $50 registration fee with the MPAA or face fines up to $500,000 per movie shown.
Related News
"Just because you buy a DVD to watch at home doesn't give you the right to invite friends over to watch it too. That's a violation of copyright and denies us the revenue that would be generated from DVD sales to your friends," said Glickman. "Ideally we expect each viewer to have their own copy of the DVD, but we realize that isn't always feasible. The registration fee is a fair compromise.
The bill also stipulates that any existing home theaters be retrofitted with the technology or else the owner is responsible for directly informing the MPAA and receiving approval before each viewing.
Unfortunately the BBspot article is a joke, and Reuters story isn't.
MPAA Lobbying for Home Theater Regulations
By Scott Small
Los Angeles , CA - The MPAA is lobbying congress to push through a new bill that would make unauthorized home theaters illegal. The group feels that all theaters should be sanctioned, whether they be commercial settings or at home.
MPAA head Dan Glickman says this needs to be regulated before things start getting too far out of control, "We didn't act early enough with the online sharing of our copyrighted content. This time we're not making the same mistake. We have a right to know what's showing in a theater."
The bill would require that any hardware manufactured in the future contain technology that tells the MPAA directly of what is being shown and specific details on the audience. The data would be gathered using various motion sensors and biometric technology.
The MPAA defines a home theater as any home with a television larger than 29" with stereo sound and at least two comfortable chairs, couch, or futon. Anyone with a home theater would need to pay a $50 registration fee with the MPAA or face fines up to $500,000 per movie shown.
Related News
"Just because you buy a DVD to watch at home doesn't give you the right to invite friends over to watch it too. That's a violation of copyright and denies us the revenue that would be generated from DVD sales to your friends," said Glickman. "Ideally we expect each viewer to have their own copy of the DVD, but we realize that isn't always feasible. The registration fee is a fair compromise.
The bill also stipulates that any existing home theaters be retrofitted with the technology or else the owner is responsible for directly informing the MPAA and receiving approval before each viewing.
Unfortunately the BBspot article is a joke, and Reuters story isn't.
Multimedia
Aug 17, 11:43 AM
My main interest is in FCP the FCP results.
On a fixed budget, does anyone know the advantage/disadvantage of going for the 2.0Ghz with 1900XT over 2.6Ghz with the std video card?The 2GHz Mac Pro is 25% slower while the price is only 8.75% lower when you also lower the order $90 by making the HD a 160 instead of the 250 stock. 300GB SATA/300 drives are only $80 now. So I think it isn't really worth ordering the 2GHz model for that much less power for that little less money. For most of Final Cut Pro work you will not need the fancy video card. Motion is tne only thing that ATI card will help with. If you won't be using Motion a lot, the stock Mac Pro card will be fine.
The 3GHz model is just the opposite - 12.78% more power for 33% more money. Time is money has to be the reason for ordering the 3GHz model.
On a fixed budget, does anyone know the advantage/disadvantage of going for the 2.0Ghz with 1900XT over 2.6Ghz with the std video card?The 2GHz Mac Pro is 25% slower while the price is only 8.75% lower when you also lower the order $90 by making the HD a 160 instead of the 250 stock. 300GB SATA/300 drives are only $80 now. So I think it isn't really worth ordering the 2GHz model for that much less power for that little less money. For most of Final Cut Pro work you will not need the fancy video card. Motion is tne only thing that ATI card will help with. If you won't be using Motion a lot, the stock Mac Pro card will be fine.
The 3GHz model is just the opposite - 12.78% more power for 33% more money. Time is money has to be the reason for ordering the 3GHz model.
bad03xtreme
Apr 19, 01:42 PM
I love to being my night with a good beer.
regandarcy
Apr 5, 05:48 PM
New iMacs would be great. Let's not forget new MacBook airs. They need sandy bridge and thunderbolt too! :-)
Doubt it will be MacBook airs. But updating the iMacs along with the new final cut pro does make sense.
Doubt it will be MacBook airs. But updating the iMacs along with the new final cut pro does make sense.
bibbz
Jun 15, 11:39 AM
My RS store would not let me leave information.
They are waiting till 1pm EST.
Meanwhile, people are twittering their stores
are issuing pin numbers to them.
What gives?
We cant issue pins before 12cst, but we can take down your info and punch it in at 12, then call you and give you the pin.
They are waiting till 1pm EST.
Meanwhile, people are twittering their stores
are issuing pin numbers to them.
What gives?
We cant issue pins before 12cst, but we can take down your info and punch it in at 12, then call you and give you the pin.
Beaverman3001
Apr 6, 01:17 PM
Won't purchase any Mac with intel graphics.
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
AtHomeBoy_2000
Aug 7, 03:26 PM
I dont think the "Top Secret" stuff is really top secret. I think Apple needs some more time to develope a few things before releasing them out into the public. No reason to release buggy apps.
Remember, WWDC was pushed back this year. THey aren't done with Leopard just yet.
Remember, WWDC was pushed back this year. THey aren't done with Leopard just yet.
mac1984user
Apr 27, 08:33 AM
Apple's solution is fine by me. They wouldn't have done anything if there wasn't so much press about it, but I guess that's a good reason (one of the only ones) for the press to exist. Still, they all managed to get it a bit wrong, though. I noticed (like so many others out there), that the map wasn't recording my EXACT location, but just cell towers and wifi spots I may have accessed. The info didn't really bother me. It wasn't like it had me pegged at my local pub - or did it?!?! =)
kavika411
Mar 24, 01:13 PM
The vast majority of conservatives are WASP-ish
And the vast majority of WASPs are racists? Got it.
and almost all of the people who question Obama's religion/nationality are self-described conservatives.
And some people say the cucumber tastes better pickled. But the last time I checked, this thread, and my comment, dealt with Obama and military action. But feel free to teach me more about birthers, Charlie Sheen, and String Theory if we are going off topic.
Furthermore, conservatives as a group refuse to admit that this is the case. Got that?
Actually, I don't. I guess you can give me the the link - the one that says the vast number of conservatives are racist WASPS who who question Obama's religion and nationality and refuse to admit that this is the case. Thanks.
That's not what I said at all but feel free to parse things as you see fit.
Not what you said "at all"?
Perhaps you can tell us what you said "at all."
And the vast majority of WASPs are racists? Got it.
and almost all of the people who question Obama's religion/nationality are self-described conservatives.
And some people say the cucumber tastes better pickled. But the last time I checked, this thread, and my comment, dealt with Obama and military action. But feel free to teach me more about birthers, Charlie Sheen, and String Theory if we are going off topic.
Furthermore, conservatives as a group refuse to admit that this is the case. Got that?
Actually, I don't. I guess you can give me the the link - the one that says the vast number of conservatives are racist WASPS who who question Obama's religion and nationality and refuse to admit that this is the case. Thanks.
That's not what I said at all but feel free to parse things as you see fit.
Not what you said "at all"?
Perhaps you can tell us what you said "at all."
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 06:44 PM
Which launched 6 months after the original iPhone...and was displayed in February of 2007 with an entirely different interface.
The point is no one will ever confuse this with Apple's iPhone... But what Samsung is doing now is another story.
If you look at each item that Apple takes exception with individually it seems silly, but when you put them all together in a single device it's a twin to the iPhone... An iClone.:rolleyes:
The point is no one will ever confuse this with Apple's iPhone... But what Samsung is doing now is another story.
If you look at each item that Apple takes exception with individually it seems silly, but when you put them all together in a single device it's a twin to the iPhone... An iClone.:rolleyes:
iawait
Apr 11, 10:01 PM
I just don't think I can wait and that is SO irritating I may have to jump ship!
Newton memories :mad:
Newton memories :mad:
aafuss1
Aug 6, 05:10 PM
Safari in Leopard-drag and drop tabs to reorganise, as with FireFox, and a My tabs features where you can save a set of tabs for easy recall later-like eg. IE7 on PC's.
Built in games-Chess, Puzzle on the Dashboard, new-a soltaire game similar to the iPos, Parachutes and mahjogg game. Classic Mac users may remember some Macs had a Eric's Solitare Sampler
Built in games-Chess, Puzzle on the Dashboard, new-a soltaire game similar to the iPos, Parachutes and mahjogg game. Classic Mac users may remember some Macs had a Eric's Solitare Sampler
Chupa Chupa
Aug 25, 08:51 PM
Ask me, phone support has been pretty lousy for years (at least since 1996 or whenever they instituted the stupid 90-day support rule that doesn't mirror the 1 year warranty.) Call up about an issue outside the 90-days and if AppleCare shoots you down (usually they will) they charge your CC. Crazy since lesser makers, HP and Dell, treat customers better. Meanwhile, you can take the same troubled machine to the Apple Store and usually the Geniuses will get your Mac fixed with little hassle.
A few years ago (I think it was the G4 Quicksilver) a phone support tech told me my (self-installed) ATA/100 hard drive wasn't working on the secondary ATA/66 hard drive bus because it was too fast! I told her that no one has made an ATA/66 hard drive for years. She told me that I shouldn't use a drive on that bus then...even those it was designed specifically for extra hard drives. 2nd Level techs wouldn't help me either. I ended up having to schlep the machine to the Apple Store where the Genius, after a few tests, confirmed I needed a new logic board.
Maybe it's just me, but phone support always wants to dismiss my issue and push me off the phone. When my MBP was whining they told me my hearing was too sensitive! Only months later did they admit a problem. Maybe THAT is why there is a growing dissatisfaction. Personally, I've loathed calling for years.
A few years ago (I think it was the G4 Quicksilver) a phone support tech told me my (self-installed) ATA/100 hard drive wasn't working on the secondary ATA/66 hard drive bus because it was too fast! I told her that no one has made an ATA/66 hard drive for years. She told me that I shouldn't use a drive on that bus then...even those it was designed specifically for extra hard drives. 2nd Level techs wouldn't help me either. I ended up having to schlep the machine to the Apple Store where the Genius, after a few tests, confirmed I needed a new logic board.
Maybe it's just me, but phone support always wants to dismiss my issue and push me off the phone. When my MBP was whining they told me my hearing was too sensitive! Only months later did they admit a problem. Maybe THAT is why there is a growing dissatisfaction. Personally, I've loathed calling for years.
Unspeaked
Aug 7, 09:39 AM
Hey Guys.
When do you think they'll update their website with the new "Mac Pro's"?
Regards,
George
Assuming they're released, they'd probably bring the Apple Store back online around 2:00pm.
(They traditionally take it down during a keynote...)
When do you think they'll update their website with the new "Mac Pro's"?
Regards,
George
Assuming they're released, they'd probably bring the Apple Store back online around 2:00pm.
(They traditionally take it down during a keynote...)
Simiber
Apr 25, 01:54 PM
I'm not from the US so if someone with some legal background over there could point out to me how this would work..? Where I'm from you have to have suffered damages in order to sue someone, otherwise a government regulator would just impose a fine on the company or require them to stop what they are doing..? How have these people (who are suing apple) suffered losses as a result of this apparent spying technology..?
Agilus
Aug 7, 05:06 PM
As far as I know he can't, that's the difference. IT has to restore the file for you.
Still, nothing fundamentally new, and definitely not Vista 2.0... ;)
I don't think people are understanding the power of this tool. Sure, it backs stuff up, but what I like about it is that it's basically an automatic versioning (or configuration management) system built into the OS, tailored for a single user, with an intuitive way to search, view, and retrieve old versions. As far as I know, this hasn't been done before.
I do my own personal writing and coding, and it's something I've wanted for a long time. I even considered setting up CVS on my computer so I could do it myself, but never got around to it.
One thing that makes this better/different than other versioning systems, is that it is tailored for a single user. You don't get all the extra stuff that comes along with other version control software that deals with multiple users and file locking, etc. You just get the goodness of having all of your changes. Hopefully it can perform diffs (highlighting the differences between different versions), too!
Still, nothing fundamentally new, and definitely not Vista 2.0... ;)
I don't think people are understanding the power of this tool. Sure, it backs stuff up, but what I like about it is that it's basically an automatic versioning (or configuration management) system built into the OS, tailored for a single user, with an intuitive way to search, view, and retrieve old versions. As far as I know, this hasn't been done before.
I do my own personal writing and coding, and it's something I've wanted for a long time. I even considered setting up CVS on my computer so I could do it myself, but never got around to it.
One thing that makes this better/different than other versioning systems, is that it is tailored for a single user. You don't get all the extra stuff that comes along with other version control software that deals with multiple users and file locking, etc. You just get the goodness of having all of your changes. Hopefully it can perform diffs (highlighting the differences between different versions), too!
KPOM
Apr 6, 02:25 PM
I am shocked that anyone finds this as a positive.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Uh, megahertz myth, anyone? Based on the 2.3Ghz Core i5 in the MacBook Pro, I'd expect the 1.4GHz Core i5 with hyperthreading to be significantly faster than the 1.86 or 2.13GHz Core 2 Duo. Plus, it can turbo boost to 2.3GHz.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
That is a legitimate concern. That said, if you aren't a gamer, the CPU may more than make up for it. Plus, we all know Apple can't use the Core 2 Duo forever, and is taking some heat for still using it now.
capabilities!
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Uh, megahertz myth, anyone? Based on the 2.3Ghz Core i5 in the MacBook Pro, I'd expect the 1.4GHz Core i5 with hyperthreading to be significantly faster than the 1.86 or 2.13GHz Core 2 Duo. Plus, it can turbo boost to 2.3GHz.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
That is a legitimate concern. That said, if you aren't a gamer, the CPU may more than make up for it. Plus, we all know Apple can't use the Core 2 Duo forever, and is taking some heat for still using it now.
capabilities!
AFPoster
Mar 22, 01:25 PM
Who is this "you" that you speak of? I didn't vote for Obama. :rolleyes:
I didn't vote for Obama either...
I didn't vote for Obama either...
bedifferent
Apr 27, 10:03 AM
I find your statement back to him a bit hypocritical and quite judgmental. Why are his panties in a twist but not yours?
Your initial reply to him was harsh to begin with and he replied logically. Agree to disagree. Leave it at that.
He commented to my post, not the other way around.
My comment, #75 (again, no mention of him):
There's a nuclear disaster in Japan and treacherous weather throughout, people are jobless and homeless and the dollar's in the sh***er and our Supreme Court ruled that companies can give unlimited financial aid to any politician putting business interests in our government and people are worried about Apple possibly tracking them on their iDevice?
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
His comment to me:
None of which are affecting my day to day life. However, since you say I can't go on living my life until all other worldly issues are resolved, I will be waiting for a e-mail letting me know when I can resume going about my daily routine.
Until then, I will stay fixed in front of my computer screen. :rolleyes:
This argument that we shouldn't worry about anything because bigger things are going on has got to stop. It's the most disingenuous comment you can make.
So this comment was logical and not insulting and personal?
I made no mention of or to him in my initial post, so this means your comment should be addressed to him, not me… and how does this involve you?
I made a comment, directed to no one, that many agreed with, but one person made personal slams at me and why are we discussing this?
/end of discussion, this is juvenile
Your initial reply to him was harsh to begin with and he replied logically. Agree to disagree. Leave it at that.
He commented to my post, not the other way around.
My comment, #75 (again, no mention of him):
There's a nuclear disaster in Japan and treacherous weather throughout, people are jobless and homeless and the dollar's in the sh***er and our Supreme Court ruled that companies can give unlimited financial aid to any politician putting business interests in our government and people are worried about Apple possibly tracking them on their iDevice?
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
His comment to me:
None of which are affecting my day to day life. However, since you say I can't go on living my life until all other worldly issues are resolved, I will be waiting for a e-mail letting me know when I can resume going about my daily routine.
Until then, I will stay fixed in front of my computer screen. :rolleyes:
This argument that we shouldn't worry about anything because bigger things are going on has got to stop. It's the most disingenuous comment you can make.
So this comment was logical and not insulting and personal?
I made no mention of or to him in my initial post, so this means your comment should be addressed to him, not me… and how does this involve you?
I made a comment, directed to no one, that many agreed with, but one person made personal slams at me and why are we discussing this?
/end of discussion, this is juvenile
AhmedFaisal
Apr 27, 10:29 PM
I'm seriously beginning to lose my patience with idiots. Is anyone else completely sick of these fools?
I lost it a long time ago. Trump is an asshat that should just shut the **** up and go back to diddling eastern european models and building casinos (is that christian right compliant I wonder?).
The truth is if Barack Obama was instead Piers Morgan or Simon Cowell and a republican candidate, there would have been an uproar if anyone had dared to ask if they were actually Americans by birth. Its racism, period. The right doesn't want a liberool n***** in the white house. That is it in the ****ing list. Anyone saying that's not what this is about is a ****ing liar.
I lost it a long time ago. Trump is an asshat that should just shut the **** up and go back to diddling eastern european models and building casinos (is that christian right compliant I wonder?).
The truth is if Barack Obama was instead Piers Morgan or Simon Cowell and a republican candidate, there would have been an uproar if anyone had dared to ask if they were actually Americans by birth. Its racism, period. The right doesn't want a liberool n***** in the white house. That is it in the ****ing list. Anyone saying that's not what this is about is a ****ing liar.
Al Coholic
Mar 26, 06:03 PM
Maybe not the worst, but definitely the most useless.
Spotlight does a so much better job.
Agreed. I keep my dock pretty sparse so if the app ain't there it's only a few keystrokes away.
The new Launcher is just one of those eye-candy apps. It'll be the first thing I delete.
Spotlight does a so much better job.
Agreed. I keep my dock pretty sparse so if the app ain't there it's only a few keystrokes away.
The new Launcher is just one of those eye-candy apps. It'll be the first thing I delete.
�algiris
Apr 6, 03:53 PM
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
1. Have you seen how those apps "scale" on XOOM? That doesn't make them optimized for tablets, just fit more screen space and even that doesn't work that well.
2. Bull.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
1. Have you seen how those apps "scale" on XOOM? That doesn't make them optimized for tablets, just fit more screen space and even that doesn't work that well.
2. Bull.