ctdonath
Mar 22, 02:04 PM
Now it has become a battle of who will get my $500 bucks.
A competitor who fails to show up in time forfeits the match.
Not much of a battle now, is it?
A competitor who fails to show up in time forfeits the match.
Not much of a battle now, is it?
nickspohn
Apr 25, 04:08 PM
If you notice, Congress has been conspicuously absent since sending off a letter to Steven P. Jobs.
Actually they haven't.
Actually they haven't.
fivepoint
Apr 27, 01:54 PM
First off, before the ignorant attacks begin, no I'm not a birther. I'm personally of the opinion that he was born in America and generally share the president's feelings that this is a giant waste of time.
Now... to the issue at hand: I'm not an expert in layout/graphic-design, but can someone please tell me why the PDF Certificate of Live Birth has Illustrator layers? If it's a scan, shouldn't it just be a single image, jpg, pdf, png, etc. consisting of a bunch of pixels and not layers? I downloaded the file from whitehouse.gov, opened it in Adobe Illustrator, and after releasing the layers slide the black text around seperate from the green/white background. I'm not sure what's going on here, can someone shed some light on the issue?
I'm assuming there's a logical explanation, any graphic artists here want to update the rest of us?
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5026/5662168856_0e95c82cc7_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5066/5661600471_9ebebdaf36_b.jpg
Now... to the issue at hand: I'm not an expert in layout/graphic-design, but can someone please tell me why the PDF Certificate of Live Birth has Illustrator layers? If it's a scan, shouldn't it just be a single image, jpg, pdf, png, etc. consisting of a bunch of pixels and not layers? I downloaded the file from whitehouse.gov, opened it in Adobe Illustrator, and after releasing the layers slide the black text around seperate from the green/white background. I'm not sure what's going on here, can someone shed some light on the issue?
I'm assuming there's a logical explanation, any graphic artists here want to update the rest of us?
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5026/5662168856_0e95c82cc7_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5066/5661600471_9ebebdaf36_b.jpg
marksman
Mar 23, 08:24 AM
Complete BS "iphone" lookalikes date back to ebfore the iphone was anounced. So either some companys have people who can predict the future, or the design and tech behind the iphone was aused BEFORe it was released and apple just changed excisting designs.
Ipad is basicly a large smartphone.
LOL what?
Perhaps you just dont have any experience with other UI's? That people jailbreak to specificly change certain parts of it shows there is something lacking.
The context where UI and grid-like were used were not correct.
Better notifications, different user profiles, better accesibility on settings, better multitasking, better start screen , more interactivity on the home screen,...
People are saying they want the UI changed because it LOOKS dated, not because of anything it allows the user to do.
You dont seem to understand what he is saying.
multitasking is being able to run different programs at the same time. The ipad 1 isnt really capable of this as it laks ram to hold those programs in memeory.
Apple solution is a cripled form of multitasking. Certain task can be done in the background and even certain programs are allowed to run completly in the background yet this all has to be coded AND remains hampered by the lack of ram.
I am pretty sure I know what Apple does and the person I was replying to did not, not sure why you are defending them when they clearly did not understand it.
Even in the browser you have trouble keeping open tabs as they constantly need to refresh as you switch as it runs out of memory.
Yeah on the original iPad, and on the original iPhone as well. With the memory added now it is not a problem. Again people complaining about things they don't even understand.
So you really think an extra 256MB of ram would have destroyed the battery life on the ipad? Strange how it DOESNT do that on the iphone 4 or comparable tablets.
The original iPad had only 256mb of ram because Apple wanted to reach a killer price point, at $499. They managed to do it, and do it in Spades. This one factor alone has made it amazingly difficult for anyone to compete with the iPad in the space to deliver the specs and price point. You notice the iPad 2 has more memory right?
If you got any source to back this up, post it otherwise its a myth like the "multitasking destroys battery life"
WAT? Do you know how computers work?
You should perhaps look beyond macrumors, plenty out there and depending on the consumer some better other worse then the ipad 1 and 2 .
Plenty of what out where? Tablets? Are you serious? The Xoom, some tiny galaxy tab that is not really a comparable device? Are you serious that there are plenty out there? When the iPad 2 was already finished being designed and developed there were NO other legitimate tablet models in the marketplace.
And britney spears sold a lot of almbums at a time, so at that time she was "the best"? BS of course.
LOL what? So Apple sells a lot of expensive computing devices because they suck? Your point doesn't make sense. It is like you are just spinning in circles with this post about to throw up.
Wich will be no different then for the iphone, and we both know within 2 years android outsold the iphone.
So you don't understand the primary differences between the cellphone market and the launch of the iPhone and the tablet market and the launch of the iPad. If you did you would understand why this is not the case.
Not to mention Android is an OS and the iPhone is a piece of hardware. You do know the difference between an operating system and a piece of hardware right?
Ipad is basicly a large smartphone.
LOL what?
Perhaps you just dont have any experience with other UI's? That people jailbreak to specificly change certain parts of it shows there is something lacking.
The context where UI and grid-like were used were not correct.
Better notifications, different user profiles, better accesibility on settings, better multitasking, better start screen , more interactivity on the home screen,...
People are saying they want the UI changed because it LOOKS dated, not because of anything it allows the user to do.
You dont seem to understand what he is saying.
multitasking is being able to run different programs at the same time. The ipad 1 isnt really capable of this as it laks ram to hold those programs in memeory.
Apple solution is a cripled form of multitasking. Certain task can be done in the background and even certain programs are allowed to run completly in the background yet this all has to be coded AND remains hampered by the lack of ram.
I am pretty sure I know what Apple does and the person I was replying to did not, not sure why you are defending them when they clearly did not understand it.
Even in the browser you have trouble keeping open tabs as they constantly need to refresh as you switch as it runs out of memory.
Yeah on the original iPad, and on the original iPhone as well. With the memory added now it is not a problem. Again people complaining about things they don't even understand.
So you really think an extra 256MB of ram would have destroyed the battery life on the ipad? Strange how it DOESNT do that on the iphone 4 or comparable tablets.
The original iPad had only 256mb of ram because Apple wanted to reach a killer price point, at $499. They managed to do it, and do it in Spades. This one factor alone has made it amazingly difficult for anyone to compete with the iPad in the space to deliver the specs and price point. You notice the iPad 2 has more memory right?
If you got any source to back this up, post it otherwise its a myth like the "multitasking destroys battery life"
WAT? Do you know how computers work?
You should perhaps look beyond macrumors, plenty out there and depending on the consumer some better other worse then the ipad 1 and 2 .
Plenty of what out where? Tablets? Are you serious? The Xoom, some tiny galaxy tab that is not really a comparable device? Are you serious that there are plenty out there? When the iPad 2 was already finished being designed and developed there were NO other legitimate tablet models in the marketplace.
And britney spears sold a lot of almbums at a time, so at that time she was "the best"? BS of course.
LOL what? So Apple sells a lot of expensive computing devices because they suck? Your point doesn't make sense. It is like you are just spinning in circles with this post about to throw up.
Wich will be no different then for the iphone, and we both know within 2 years android outsold the iphone.
So you don't understand the primary differences between the cellphone market and the launch of the iPhone and the tablet market and the launch of the iPad. If you did you would understand why this is not the case.
Not to mention Android is an OS and the iPhone is a piece of hardware. You do know the difference between an operating system and a piece of hardware right?
BBC B 32k
Jul 27, 10:13 AM
I am just waiting to pull the trigger and get myself a 20"er. Hurry up with those chips Mr Jobs. Ah and where has the wireless mouse/kbd option gone in the store? Maybe they will be free with the upgraded iMacs. :p
What a world away from the G5 iMacs these beasts will be. Still when (not if) they are out I will prob. start waiting for the chinless 23" wonder - my ideal requirement.
Must hold out...
What a world away from the G5 iMacs these beasts will be. Still when (not if) they are out I will prob. start waiting for the chinless 23" wonder - my ideal requirement.
Must hold out...
iMikeT
Aug 26, 07:11 PM
Oh man.... I sure these new processors make their way into the PowerMac G5.
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.
dante@sisna.com
Aug 18, 04:53 AM
Untill the cooling-solution starts to leak fluids, that is ;)?
Not likely to happen.
I have used liquid cooling setups in my PC's that were not nearly as well built as the AC Delco inpired Quad G5 without any problems for more than 5 years running.
Besides, my $99 a year apple care will more than cover this.
There are minimal to no reports of problems with the Quad G5 cooling system. I've run 3 of these for nearly 9 months with no problems.
DJO
Not likely to happen.
I have used liquid cooling setups in my PC's that were not nearly as well built as the AC Delco inpired Quad G5 without any problems for more than 5 years running.
Besides, my $99 a year apple care will more than cover this.
There are minimal to no reports of problems with the Quad G5 cooling system. I've run 3 of these for nearly 9 months with no problems.
DJO
TheManOfSilver
Aug 27, 08:57 PM
I think im gonna wait and buy in 2007 with leopard and iLife 07 :rolleyes:
That's my plan (if I can hold out until then) ... as much as I'm dying to get my hands on an iMac right now, having an upgraded iMac and an upgraded OS will be that much better.
That's my plan (if I can hold out until then) ... as much as I'm dying to get my hands on an iMac right now, having an upgraded iMac and an upgraded OS will be that much better.
neko girl
Mar 3, 11:12 PM
Invalid because it endorses something that could cause the collapse of society
This is true because you say it's true?
This is true because you say it's true?
killr_b
Apr 25, 02:13 PM
And the next time somebody calls you, make sure you get their permission to store their phone number. Don't want to record their data without their consent.
They consented to me retaining their data when they didn't block their number before calling. Which is possible and an option. There was no option for this "tracking list" other than a stupid TOS that you can't op out of partially.
They consented to me retaining their data when they didn't block their number before calling. Which is possible and an option. There was no option for this "tracking list" other than a stupid TOS that you can't op out of partially.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 05:59 AM
With all these new technologies with 4, 8 and eventually 24-core capacities (some time in the not too distant future) all running at 64-bit, we musn't forget that software also has tobe developed for these machienes in order to get the most out of the hardware. At the moment we aren't even maximising core-duo, let alone a quad core and all the rest!!!!
Besides, for 90% of what non-pro users do, these advances will help very little. Internet will still run at the same spead and my ipod will still chug along with USB2 etc.
Pros with pro apps acn rejoice, only if software keeps the pace!!!
Let's hope so!!!Not exactly. Multiple cores is as much about multitasking multiple applications or multiple instances of the same application simultaneously as it is about running one or two that use all the cores. The OS X system delegates multicore use to some extent already. I'm sure that all the developers will be looking at how to use all the cores Intel can throw at them at this year's WWDC. :)
I can tell you from experience that it is very easy to fill up four cores with work and max out what you can do simultaneously on the G5 Quad. So for those of us who do the kind of work that needs a lot of cores, 8 core Macs won't come soon enough.
In this example, all of the applications are running slower than they would with 8 cores. They are already slowed down by virtue of only having 4 cores to work in. Both Toast 7 and Handbrake can use more than two cores for each instance. I sometimes run as many as three of each simultaneously. They each have to run dog slow in that circumstance due to lack of core volume. So 8 is a start. 16 would be much more helpful to me immediately.
Besides, for 90% of what non-pro users do, these advances will help very little. Internet will still run at the same spead and my ipod will still chug along with USB2 etc.
Pros with pro apps acn rejoice, only if software keeps the pace!!!
Let's hope so!!!Not exactly. Multiple cores is as much about multitasking multiple applications or multiple instances of the same application simultaneously as it is about running one or two that use all the cores. The OS X system delegates multicore use to some extent already. I'm sure that all the developers will be looking at how to use all the cores Intel can throw at them at this year's WWDC. :)
I can tell you from experience that it is very easy to fill up four cores with work and max out what you can do simultaneously on the G5 Quad. So for those of us who do the kind of work that needs a lot of cores, 8 core Macs won't come soon enough.
In this example, all of the applications are running slower than they would with 8 cores. They are already slowed down by virtue of only having 4 cores to work in. Both Toast 7 and Handbrake can use more than two cores for each instance. I sometimes run as many as three of each simultaneously. They each have to run dog slow in that circumstance due to lack of core volume. So 8 is a start. 16 would be much more helpful to me immediately.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 09:26 AM
Just returned from Radio Shack.
I turned in my 32GB 3GS (with all accessories)
which was in almost excellent condition except
for a chip and a scratch and received a $247 credit.
They handed my SIMM card back to me so essentially
the phone is rendered useless.
That falls between what their website pays for
a pristine phone ($301) and a moderate wear ($226).
So, not bad, a $247 credit off of iPhone 4.
Radio Shack is taking preorders starting Thursday.
Essentially, they special order the phone for you.
That pretty much guarantees you a phone on opening day.
All you need to do is leave a $50 deposit when ordering.
They are not certain if they will have the phone
accessories or not.
I turned in my 32GB 3GS (with all accessories)
which was in almost excellent condition except
for a chip and a scratch and received a $247 credit.
They handed my SIMM card back to me so essentially
the phone is rendered useless.
That falls between what their website pays for
a pristine phone ($301) and a moderate wear ($226).
So, not bad, a $247 credit off of iPhone 4.
Radio Shack is taking preorders starting Thursday.
Essentially, they special order the phone for you.
That pretty much guarantees you a phone on opening day.
All you need to do is leave a $50 deposit when ordering.
They are not certain if they will have the phone
accessories or not.
Leoff
Aug 6, 05:36 AM
MacBegginer and MacBookBeginner: Enough of this "Pro" stuff, the MacBeginner will be an old beige Performas with a Duo core shoved in there, to help the recycling effort. The MacBookBeginner will be an old 1400c, as they had a few dozen still laying about.
MacCon: A cardboard box with both an Apple and "Intel Inside" logo on the front, a blank CD stuck in the side, and a hole in the top (simulated iSight for your friends). Will still be superior to anything Dell has.
iPod Newton: Radical case design redesign for the iPod where it will now survive a fall from an apple tree.
XBox Server: Microsoft and Apple join forces again. X-box controls included with every XServer, but because it's Microsoft, it locks up more frequently. Server reliability plummets, but the help desk techs have a LOT of fun.
MacCon: A cardboard box with both an Apple and "Intel Inside" logo on the front, a blank CD stuck in the side, and a hole in the top (simulated iSight for your friends). Will still be superior to anything Dell has.
iPod Newton: Radical case design redesign for the iPod where it will now survive a fall from an apple tree.
XBox Server: Microsoft and Apple join forces again. X-box controls included with every XServer, but because it's Microsoft, it locks up more frequently. Server reliability plummets, but the help desk techs have a LOT of fun.
andiwm2003
Apr 25, 03:01 PM
Maybe next time read the post you are responding to - rather negatively to boot. The post I quoted discussed Apple exploiting people.
So an old post says apple is exploiting them and you imply I said that then? I said on numerous occasions clearly that this is not about Apple using this data. Interesting way to quote posts you have there:rolleyes:
So an old post says apple is exploiting them and you imply I said that then? I said on numerous occasions clearly that this is not about Apple using this data. Interesting way to quote posts you have there:rolleyes:
generik
Sep 19, 06:08 AM
Why do you even visit this site? You are doing nothing but criticising Apple and their products. Please leave.
Ps. If I was Admin I would ban you :p
Apple is beyond critique! Omg! :rolleyes:
Ps. If I was Admin I would ban you :p
Apple is beyond critique! Omg! :rolleyes:
mcrain
Mar 23, 02:59 PM
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong? They absolutely lied, and they got stuff wrong. I believe there was malevolent intent, and to the extent that can't be proven, there was clear reckless disregard for the truth.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations? There are many in the mainstream media and many on the left who are saying today that there are problems. Asking why we didn't go into other African countries, criticizing the coalition and the idea that this is "minimal" US involvement. I'm not claiming the left is perfect, but rather pointing out that your claim (re: hipocricy from 'the left in media') is far too broad and ignores the realities of the media coverage and congressional responses.
But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. I've been in these forums for a long time, and I can tell you that while some denial occurs, liberals are far more likely to be critical of the politicians they support than conservatives are.
great real estate flyers.
great real estate flyers.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations? There are many in the mainstream media and many on the left who are saying today that there are problems. Asking why we didn't go into other African countries, criticizing the coalition and the idea that this is "minimal" US involvement. I'm not claiming the left is perfect, but rather pointing out that your claim (re: hipocricy from 'the left in media') is far too broad and ignores the realities of the media coverage and congressional responses.
But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. I've been in these forums for a long time, and I can tell you that while some denial occurs, liberals are far more likely to be critical of the politicians they support than conservatives are.
aswitcher
Jul 20, 04:55 PM
First rev prices for any such beasts are going to be "excessive"
roland.g
Apr 6, 10:39 AM
I have something better than a MacBook Air. It's called an iPad 2.
That with my iMac and I have no need anymore for my 13" aluminum MacBook. While the Air is a nice looking and light machine, I still like having things like Firewire, an optical drive (without having to pay extra for it or plug it in), and above all, screen real estate.
My 24" iMac gives me that. While my iPad 2 gives my instant on, mobile, and light. When the iMacs get a refresh and ship with Lion, it will be time for a 27".
That with my iMac and I have no need anymore for my 13" aluminum MacBook. While the Air is a nice looking and light machine, I still like having things like Firewire, an optical drive (without having to pay extra for it or plug it in), and above all, screen real estate.
My 24" iMac gives me that. While my iPad 2 gives my instant on, mobile, and light. When the iMacs get a refresh and ship with Lion, it will be time for a 27".
DeathChill
Aug 7, 08:33 PM
Well I wouldn't say "Nothing" as obviously it required a lot of programmer time to move the OS to Intel, create the new XCode compiler, create & debug rosetta, re-write all of the iLife, and Pro-Apps offered by Apple, etc. etc.
Eh, they didn't create Rosetta, Transitive did. The creation of XCode was already done, they just added a package so Intel compiling was possible. They didn't rewrite all of iLife or any of the pro-apps, did they? All they did was fix anything that relied on PowerPC in order to make them Universal.
However, I want to know if the developers are getting a copy of Leopard within the next few days!
Eh, they didn't create Rosetta, Transitive did. The creation of XCode was already done, they just added a package so Intel compiling was possible. They didn't rewrite all of iLife or any of the pro-apps, did they? All they did was fix anything that relied on PowerPC in order to make them Universal.
However, I want to know if the developers are getting a copy of Leopard within the next few days!
jholzner
Jul 27, 03:54 PM
Maybe not way too low, but a bit low, especially when you compare specs to the $799 mini. The problem with MAC by itself as a name is that people will ask "what kind of mac" and the response is "Mac". It's a bad slapstick routine. It's like Ford selling a car called the Ford.
Actually, it'd be like Ford selling a car named Model. Instead, they used to use Model-T etc. What model is it? It's a T model. What Mac is it? it's a mini...and i(Mac) etc.
Actually, it'd be like Ford selling a car named Model. Instead, they used to use Model-T etc. What model is it? It's a T model. What Mac is it? it's a mini...and i(Mac) etc.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
dclocke
Sep 19, 09:28 AM
AMEN!!!! This whole thread has the tone of a spoiled 13 year old's "I want" tirade. All the benchmarks show little difference between Merom and what you can buy today...and the 64 bit argument is really moot for most users because....(ready for it)....it's a laptop! Very few will have more than 2GB RAM on it anyway, and addressing larger RAM partitions is the #1 64 bit advantage.
Addressing larger RAM partitions is not the #1 advantage for me. I will not be putting >4GB of memory into my laptop. And I suspect it is not the #1 advantage for most of the people posting in this thread. If you don't like the subject matter of this thread, then don't read it. Simple as that.
Addressing larger RAM partitions is not the #1 advantage for me. I will not be putting >4GB of memory into my laptop. And I suspect it is not the #1 advantage for most of the people posting in this thread. If you don't like the subject matter of this thread, then don't read it. Simple as that.
THX1139
Aug 21, 02:09 AM
I stopped by the Apple store tonight to play with a Macpro. I'm getting ready to buy and thought I'd get some hands on experience to see how it performed with Finalcut Pro. I was especially interested in how it handles playback of uncompressed footage.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.
No comments:
Post a Comment