sycho
Jan 31, 09:43 PM
4 replacement winter tires since mine were toast.
Continental ExtremeWinterContact, as there was no Blizzaks in the size I wanted. 205/70/15, for a GOLF!
Continental ExtremeWinterContact, as there was no Blizzaks in the size I wanted. 205/70/15, for a GOLF!
hulugu
May 2, 12:53 AM
If you want to go that route, milk it for all it's worth. Preserve him, decorate him as a pi�ata, and have anyone who wants take three whacks on primetime worldwide TV. Families of 9/11 victims get to be first in line.
I'm not sure stuffing a corpse with candy is very hygienic. ;)
Seriously, though, we're going to treat him like Hector? Like he was some great hero worthy of our wrath and opprobrium?
I disagree, we should wrap him in an army blanket and bury Bin Laden in an unmarked grave; the man's had enough celebrity already.
I'm not sure stuffing a corpse with candy is very hygienic. ;)
Seriously, though, we're going to treat him like Hector? Like he was some great hero worthy of our wrath and opprobrium?
I disagree, we should wrap him in an army blanket and bury Bin Laden in an unmarked grave; the man's had enough celebrity already.
strang
Apr 13, 02:00 PM
Personally it's a lot easier to swallow $99 a year for a new Apple TV (set top box) than $999 a year for a new Apple branded television.
mc68k
Oct 29, 07:18 PM
right now its reformatting into a RAID, boss wanted to RAID it. lost 2 frames no biggie. here's what i got before that
[22:05:44] pleted 2500 out of 250000 steps (1%)
[22:54:37] Completed 5000 out of 250000 steps (2%)
so thats about 50 mins per frame. i was thinking maybe that was due to the clock speed being 2.26 or the HT. the old 3ghz MP does a frame in the low to mid 40s
wont get to test until tomorrow
[22:05:44] pleted 2500 out of 250000 steps (1%)
[22:54:37] Completed 5000 out of 250000 steps (2%)
so thats about 50 mins per frame. i was thinking maybe that was due to the clock speed being 2.26 or the HT. the old 3ghz MP does a frame in the low to mid 40s
wont get to test until tomorrow
SiliconAddict
Nov 4, 12:50 PM
If it's taking you two minutes to resume a session and two minutes plus to suspend it, on that machine you mentioned the specs of, something is frickin' wrong with that machine.
2.16 Core 2 Duo 20" iMac here, 2GB, stock 250GB drive, Parallels does the following:
- it cold starts in 4 seconds
- it boots my XP VM (512MB of RAM/8GB virtual hard disk) to the Desktop in 9
- it suspended that same XP VM in 14
- it restored that same XP VM in 11
And that's with Crossover for Mac running several Windows apps in the background too, so some of my resources are already drained when I fired up Parallels and the VM. Memory usage at the moment for the entire machine is sitting at 1154MB of 2048MB, 69 tasks, 330 threads as measured by MenuMeters.
So, give that box a tuneup or whatever, because you're certainly not getting the performance from Parallels that you should be getting. Also, check your VT-x flags under Parallels to make sure it's functioning properly.
btw, this is Parallels build 1970, the latest and greatest, and I've had nothing but positive usage of Parallels since I bought it off the shelf in an Apple Store along with this iMac a month ago. 3 upgrades so far, no issues at all.
bb
I've reinstalled OS X twice in the last 9 months. The latest being about 3 weeks ago when I upgraded to a 160GB hard drive. There is nothing wrong with my computer. (OK there is something wrong with its sleeping mech but that has nothing to do with performance.)
Parallels just sucks. Also I�m willing to bet the more you use the disk image and Windows the more parallels slows down. I�ve got a 14GB disk image, a ton of apps loaded, along with being in it every day for 8+ hours, USB peripherals all over the place, network settings for home and work, firewall enabled along with antivirus software. (I can�t use Office 2003 with SAP in OS X.) I probably use it more extensively then most Mac users. The simple fact is the reason why I keep reinstalling the demo instead of outright buying it is because I�m waiting on VMWare�s solution. VMWare is THE industry�s Microsoft when it comes to virtualizing. Just without the whole evilness thing. I�ve used Parallels extensively. I�m not impressed.
2.16 Core 2 Duo 20" iMac here, 2GB, stock 250GB drive, Parallels does the following:
- it cold starts in 4 seconds
- it boots my XP VM (512MB of RAM/8GB virtual hard disk) to the Desktop in 9
- it suspended that same XP VM in 14
- it restored that same XP VM in 11
And that's with Crossover for Mac running several Windows apps in the background too, so some of my resources are already drained when I fired up Parallels and the VM. Memory usage at the moment for the entire machine is sitting at 1154MB of 2048MB, 69 tasks, 330 threads as measured by MenuMeters.
So, give that box a tuneup or whatever, because you're certainly not getting the performance from Parallels that you should be getting. Also, check your VT-x flags under Parallels to make sure it's functioning properly.
btw, this is Parallels build 1970, the latest and greatest, and I've had nothing but positive usage of Parallels since I bought it off the shelf in an Apple Store along with this iMac a month ago. 3 upgrades so far, no issues at all.
bb
I've reinstalled OS X twice in the last 9 months. The latest being about 3 weeks ago when I upgraded to a 160GB hard drive. There is nothing wrong with my computer. (OK there is something wrong with its sleeping mech but that has nothing to do with performance.)
Parallels just sucks. Also I�m willing to bet the more you use the disk image and Windows the more parallels slows down. I�ve got a 14GB disk image, a ton of apps loaded, along with being in it every day for 8+ hours, USB peripherals all over the place, network settings for home and work, firewall enabled along with antivirus software. (I can�t use Office 2003 with SAP in OS X.) I probably use it more extensively then most Mac users. The simple fact is the reason why I keep reinstalling the demo instead of outright buying it is because I�m waiting on VMWare�s solution. VMWare is THE industry�s Microsoft when it comes to virtualizing. Just without the whole evilness thing. I�ve used Parallels extensively. I�m not impressed.
triceretops
May 3, 09:15 AM
The i7 isn't the default processor?:confused:
Stella
Jul 28, 09:23 AM
It seems that nobody ever likes anything successful.. Look at poor mcdonalds,coca cola,Ford and now apple and its ipod.... All the biggest comapanies always get in trouble. BMW and their idrive, ford and the firestone blowouts, apple and hearing loss... while dont people stop being jealous and peee off.
Ford and GM problems are their own fault - they don't produce fuel efficient cards - in north america - other ( non u.s ) manufacturers do - and they are reaping the benefits - whilst oil prices are high.
Once again the drones at Microsoft can't come up with anything new so they spend all their money trying to muscle in on something someone else had the vision to create. I hope they fail big time.
By the time M$ get any sort of marketshare Apple will be onto something new and innovative that that Big Bill will have to throw even more $$$ down the drain to catch up.
Jobs must be laughing his A*** off, he's forced M$ to create something that's going to lose them money, whilst Apple turns a tidy profit on each iPod sold!
What, your saying that Apple should have the MP3 market to itself, no one else can try and muscle in - its called competition, and competition is heathly. Apple entered the MP3 market when people thought it was already saturated... this is a case of double standards, in afraid. :-\
Ford and GM problems are their own fault - they don't produce fuel efficient cards - in north america - other ( non u.s ) manufacturers do - and they are reaping the benefits - whilst oil prices are high.
Once again the drones at Microsoft can't come up with anything new so they spend all their money trying to muscle in on something someone else had the vision to create. I hope they fail big time.
By the time M$ get any sort of marketshare Apple will be onto something new and innovative that that Big Bill will have to throw even more $$$ down the drain to catch up.
Jobs must be laughing his A*** off, he's forced M$ to create something that's going to lose them money, whilst Apple turns a tidy profit on each iPod sold!
What, your saying that Apple should have the MP3 market to itself, no one else can try and muscle in - its called competition, and competition is heathly. Apple entered the MP3 market when people thought it was already saturated... this is a case of double standards, in afraid. :-\
ChrisA
Jul 11, 03:02 PM
[The Microsoft music player could be a huge success if Microsoft wants it to be. MS could offer them at such a low price they they would sell fast. Of course MS would loose a pile of money on each unit but why would they care if the goal is to run the competition out of bussenis. A $50 player with 10 GB of space would pretty much kill the iPod.
mandis
Apr 13, 04:55 PM
It will probably cost twice the price of the equivalent LG/Samsung and at first will only offer half the features.:rolleyes:
Farns514
Nov 8, 10:23 PM
Burberry Pullover
http://g.nordstromimage.com/imagegallery/store/product/Large/10/_6217670.jpg
http://g.nordstromimage.com/imagegallery/store/product/Large/6/_6233646.jpg
http://g.nordstromimage.com/imagegallery/store/product/Large/10/_6217670.jpg
http://g.nordstromimage.com/imagegallery/store/product/Large/6/_6233646.jpg
jav6454
Apr 29, 10:51 AM
Chrmjenkins
That is all.
That is all.
likemyorbs
May 2, 03:09 AM
Rather macabre, in my opinion...
Cry about it :)
Cry about it :)
NativeOSXboy
Apr 22, 10:06 AM
Who's blasting Apple ? This shouldn't be an emotional discussion about the history of both corporations, this is about a specific case/cases. As such it should be rooted in facts and objective commentary, not in some subjective tangeant ranting like you went on.
The copying isn't so blatant, and it's highly model dependant. Some biased Apple media is making it look worse than it is with cherry picked images. Here's a post where I clear up the muddied waters a bit :
And here's one about the famous Icon grid :
To claim "Blatant copying" at this point is only to get eat whatever the media is feeding you. The courts will decide how much Samsung does or doesn't infringe on Apple's various trademarks and the trade dress claims.
Your right. I didn't see it before, I did mix up emotions in a logical argument. My bad, you make a great case.
The copying isn't so blatant, and it's highly model dependant. Some biased Apple media is making it look worse than it is with cherry picked images. Here's a post where I clear up the muddied waters a bit :
And here's one about the famous Icon grid :
To claim "Blatant copying" at this point is only to get eat whatever the media is feeding you. The courts will decide how much Samsung does or doesn't infringe on Apple's various trademarks and the trade dress claims.
Your right. I didn't see it before, I did mix up emotions in a logical argument. My bad, you make a great case.
stroked
Apr 24, 07:39 PM
That's not very christian of you.
Christians are expected to protect their children, and I have never claimed to be a Christian.
Christians are expected to protect their children, and I have never claimed to be a Christian.
chrmjenkins
Apr 22, 03:12 PM
Really? So the fact that they did not have laptops with mainstream mobile quad core CPUs before Sandy Bridge when every other computers manufacturer had them is "immaterial" now? With LTE it's the same story all over. After they finally get in a year or two you'll probably be able to say again that it's immaterial. I bet it's very material to those who want iPhone with LTE now. Another major problem here is that Apple sticks to having just one model of iPhone (CDMA vs GSM differences aside). As if all people wanted the same thing. They don't.
No, you're trying to bring attention Apple's lack of using the latest components as why they won't use LTE. That's not the case anymore. They use mobile quad cores now. Therefore, your argument is irrelevant. It doesn't matter what they used to do if their most recent action is different. You need a complete history of them not doing it to support your point. That history doesn't exist.
Apple has no interest in making different sizes/models of iPhones. If you don't care for that, apple isn't for you. They are a greatest common denominator company.
No, you're trying to bring attention Apple's lack of using the latest components as why they won't use LTE. That's not the case anymore. They use mobile quad cores now. Therefore, your argument is irrelevant. It doesn't matter what they used to do if their most recent action is different. You need a complete history of them not doing it to support your point. That history doesn't exist.
Apple has no interest in making different sizes/models of iPhones. If you don't care for that, apple isn't for you. They are a greatest common denominator company.
maclaptop
Apr 12, 11:26 PM
The only possible way Apple could announce it at WWDC, is if they already have all parts in stock.
stroked
May 1, 10:34 PM
President Bush gets credit for starting the military effort that killed him. President Obama gets credit for continuing the military effort that killed him. The people who actually KILLED him are the minds and wo/men of the US military. They get all of the credit in the world.
I don't know who wrote this, but I agree. I'm going to have a beer to celebrate.
I don't know who wrote this, but I agree. I'm going to have a beer to celebrate.
ITGuy
Apr 23, 07:05 PM
I can see the iPhone 4 coming out on T-Mobile in short order, probably once the white iPhone 4 is available. This way Verizon and T-Mobile will eventually be able to offer it as the lower cost iPhone in conjunction with iPhone 5. Right now only AT&T can exclusively offer the $49 iPhone 3GS alongside the iPhone 4. No carrier will have that exclusive low cost advantage with iPhone 5.
I think Apple launched iPhone 4 on Verizon while in the final phase of bringing it to T-Mobile.
I think Apple launched iPhone 4 on Verizon while in the final phase of bringing it to T-Mobile.
AndroidfoLife
Apr 24, 04:38 PM
Thanks for the anecdote.
The iPhone sets the bar. Google has to flood the market with a lot of junk to achieve higher share. That's hardly impressive. Google is the MS of mobile. Hardly a compliment. License out your beta OS to anyone that can slam together a box, give it away, and away you go.
The iPhone is still the #1 selling handset. Where are the iPhone killers? There aren't any. Because the competition doesn't know how to make one. Because Apple approaches tech from a totally different place.
The iOS platform still dominates, and given the iPad's success, it'll be that way for the foreseeable future.
Android enjoys highest smartphone market share. Yet the OS is pretty brutal and their ecosystem is a mess. So why do they have greater share? Not because they make a superior product, but because the only alternative to an iPhone was an Android-based device, and Eric T. Mole got to work licensing it out to everyone with no regard for design or User Experience. If you flood the market with what, 70+ (probably a lot more) devices and let everyone and their dog make the devices you'll eventually enjoy force of numbers.
Android is given away free to anyone to manufacture, to make as many POS devices as they wish, to sell for peanuts, in massive volume.
That's all it is. Market flooding at every price point and you get some sort of touchscreen and some sort of app store. And given Google's Microsoftian horizontal business model, that's all it'll ever be.
For instance, THIS is the kind of total junk that Google puts their name to:
http://www.gsmarena.com/zte_racer-reviews-3423.php
And guess what: Dell went ahead and copied it. The DELL XCD28. Same junk. But Android market share just went up!
Here's another amazing Android device:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2010/11/worst-gadget-ever-ars-reviews-a-99-android-tablet.ars
Anything to be proud of? But hey, they're dirt cheap. And uh . . . "open" or whatever.
If Google actually *cared* about what they put the Android name to, if they actually gave a damn about the USER, would they allow this? Ask yourself that. That's the difference. There are some things Apple *will not* allow to exist - namely: garbage.
Yes, highest market share. Until you go hunting for the REASON.
Its only in opinions which OS is better. I know Windows is better for me because it allows me to build my own hardware. Not all android phones are dirt cheap. The top selling ones are not the dirt cheap ones it is the ones that compete directly with the iPhone in the high end smart phone. There are a lot of phones out there that top the iPhone. The Atrix, the G2X, Evo and multiple other ones are all better phones then the iPhone 4. The iPhone is a good phone, But is far from the best. It will never turn into a one horse game. There will never be an "iPhone Killer", And android is here to stay.
The iPhone can not meet everyones needs some people need a physical keyboard, Larger screen, SD slot, Smaller screen, HDMI, High end camaras, various things that end the end the Single model of the iPhone will not work for them
The iPhone sets the bar. Google has to flood the market with a lot of junk to achieve higher share. That's hardly impressive. Google is the MS of mobile. Hardly a compliment. License out your beta OS to anyone that can slam together a box, give it away, and away you go.
The iPhone is still the #1 selling handset. Where are the iPhone killers? There aren't any. Because the competition doesn't know how to make one. Because Apple approaches tech from a totally different place.
The iOS platform still dominates, and given the iPad's success, it'll be that way for the foreseeable future.
Android enjoys highest smartphone market share. Yet the OS is pretty brutal and their ecosystem is a mess. So why do they have greater share? Not because they make a superior product, but because the only alternative to an iPhone was an Android-based device, and Eric T. Mole got to work licensing it out to everyone with no regard for design or User Experience. If you flood the market with what, 70+ (probably a lot more) devices and let everyone and their dog make the devices you'll eventually enjoy force of numbers.
Android is given away free to anyone to manufacture, to make as many POS devices as they wish, to sell for peanuts, in massive volume.
That's all it is. Market flooding at every price point and you get some sort of touchscreen and some sort of app store. And given Google's Microsoftian horizontal business model, that's all it'll ever be.
For instance, THIS is the kind of total junk that Google puts their name to:
http://www.gsmarena.com/zte_racer-reviews-3423.php
And guess what: Dell went ahead and copied it. The DELL XCD28. Same junk. But Android market share just went up!
Here's another amazing Android device:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2010/11/worst-gadget-ever-ars-reviews-a-99-android-tablet.ars
Anything to be proud of? But hey, they're dirt cheap. And uh . . . "open" or whatever.
If Google actually *cared* about what they put the Android name to, if they actually gave a damn about the USER, would they allow this? Ask yourself that. That's the difference. There are some things Apple *will not* allow to exist - namely: garbage.
Yes, highest market share. Until you go hunting for the REASON.
Its only in opinions which OS is better. I know Windows is better for me because it allows me to build my own hardware. Not all android phones are dirt cheap. The top selling ones are not the dirt cheap ones it is the ones that compete directly with the iPhone in the high end smart phone. There are a lot of phones out there that top the iPhone. The Atrix, the G2X, Evo and multiple other ones are all better phones then the iPhone 4. The iPhone is a good phone, But is far from the best. It will never turn into a one horse game. There will never be an "iPhone Killer", And android is here to stay.
The iPhone can not meet everyones needs some people need a physical keyboard, Larger screen, SD slot, Smaller screen, HDMI, High end camaras, various things that end the end the Single model of the iPhone will not work for them
sickracer2015
Apr 24, 09:27 PM
whats not to say someone just changed the carrier name? I don't own an iphone but I did search and its totally possible.
I don't see a reason apple would need to create an iPhone for T-Mobile if the AT&T plan goes through. If it's rejected than maybe thats a reason then to possibly go on T-Mobile.
I don't see a reason apple would need to create an iPhone for T-Mobile if the AT&T plan goes through. If it's rejected than maybe thats a reason then to possibly go on T-Mobile.
chrisgeleven
Jul 24, 03:53 PM
Bah, these things are rubbish. The scroll wheel clogs up with dirt, just as scroll ball mice did in days gone by - except there is no user access to clean it thoroughly. Apple need to re-think the design on this one before updating it.
And what makes you think that a fix for that is not part of this update?
If they come out with a Bluetooth mouse, I am all over it. My wrists get very tired using my Macbook's trackpad all day.
And what makes you think that a fix for that is not part of this update?
If they come out with a Bluetooth mouse, I am all over it. My wrists get very tired using my Macbook's trackpad all day.
rusty2192
Apr 3, 08:29 AM
Another one from my outing last week. I got some nice shots yesterday, but I'm still working on editing them. I tried avoiding posting this one, but ran out of others. While I am happy with it for myself, I know it is rather (ok, very) cliche to post a duck shot ;)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5133/5564642341_20e57c806e.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/)
IMG_3102 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/) by Rusty2192 (http://www.flickr.com/people/48874590@N02/), on Flickr
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5133/5564642341_20e57c806e.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/)
IMG_3102 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/) by Rusty2192 (http://www.flickr.com/people/48874590@N02/), on Flickr
nizz
Oct 21, 06:46 PM
2011 wrx
realistically, i'll get it in november :)
screw waiting for christmas
realistically, i'll get it in november :)
screw waiting for christmas
gerrycurl
Nov 3, 02:06 PM
all i have to say is that vmware is a strong company financially with a very good long term vision/proven track record, there's no way parallels will survive. there's no way all the hardware companies will fully cooperate with parallels, i don't see them lasting, you're better off putting money in vmware, they'll give you a good product, they've been doing it longer and better. but i understand how it is with firsts, it's always hard to part with them. ;)
even though i didn't get an invite into the beta program, i'm shocked at how quick they're actually executing. that indian exec at vmware said it would be coming soon at the last wwdc, but this is great.
even though i didn't get an invite into the beta program, i'm shocked at how quick they're actually executing. that indian exec at vmware said it would be coming soon at the last wwdc, but this is great.
