TOYSTER17
Apr 23, 08:22 PM
http://www.9to5mac.com/63457/leaked-t-mobile-iphone-has-an-a5-chip-might-be-the-iphone-4s/
They think it has an A5 chip. I'd take a wager if true, it's definitely coming to T-mobile. I'm sure Apple knows of the hurdles AT&T needs to overcome to buyout Tmobile, why take the chance of not releasing an iPhone and then the buyout doesn't go through? I can see it now, "we're announcing the iPhone on T-Mobile USA, 42+Mbps, it's magical" -Steve
They think it has an A5 chip. I'd take a wager if true, it's definitely coming to T-mobile. I'm sure Apple knows of the hurdles AT&T needs to overcome to buyout Tmobile, why take the chance of not releasing an iPhone and then the buyout doesn't go through? I can see it now, "we're announcing the iPhone on T-Mobile USA, 42+Mbps, it's magical" -Steve
twoodcc
Nov 23, 04:32 PM
Hi everyone, just joined the team.
I have an iMac core duo going at it. She isn't much with her 1.83Ghz but it'll be at it 24h a day. It's about to complete it's first WU after 1day 19hours. It sounds a bit long to me compared to the times a say reading the thread, is this normal?
glad to have you!
I also just joined. Let see what my '08 Octo 2.8 MP can contribute to our score/rankings:D
glad to have you! like SciFrog said, get a passkey and run the bigadv units on that mac pro!
Strange it hasn't been done yet. It would help as we struggle to take on ClubLexus as they have raised their production very close to our level.
On another note, it looks like the Gulftown 6 core that will be next in the Mac Pro are screaming. It will be hard to resist getting a 12 core machine (24 with hyperthreading) unless the price is ridiculous. Should be good for 60k PPD ;)
yeah i'm surprised that they said they would give us the points, and still haven't.
have you read some info about the Gulftown's? please share if you have! oh i know it will be hard to resist buying one!
I have an iMac core duo going at it. She isn't much with her 1.83Ghz but it'll be at it 24h a day. It's about to complete it's first WU after 1day 19hours. It sounds a bit long to me compared to the times a say reading the thread, is this normal?
glad to have you!
I also just joined. Let see what my '08 Octo 2.8 MP can contribute to our score/rankings:D
glad to have you! like SciFrog said, get a passkey and run the bigadv units on that mac pro!
Strange it hasn't been done yet. It would help as we struggle to take on ClubLexus as they have raised their production very close to our level.
On another note, it looks like the Gulftown 6 core that will be next in the Mac Pro are screaming. It will be hard to resist getting a 12 core machine (24 with hyperthreading) unless the price is ridiculous. Should be good for 60k PPD ;)
yeah i'm surprised that they said they would give us the points, and still haven't.
have you read some info about the Gulftown's? please share if you have! oh i know it will be hard to resist buying one!
thereubster
Oct 24, 08:24 AM
I've currently got a single 1GB stick in a three year old PB - will that be OK to swap into a new MBP?
Iain
NO, even if it was the last powerbook G4 with DDR2 ram it still isn't compatible, different speed and spd DDR2 dont seem to mix very well. Best to buy a new stick from a reputable store (and remember Apple overcharges for RAM)
Iain
NO, even if it was the last powerbook G4 with DDR2 ram it still isn't compatible, different speed and spd DDR2 dont seem to mix very well. Best to buy a new stick from a reputable store (and remember Apple overcharges for RAM)
KnightWRX
Dec 30, 10:43 PM
Under normal circumstances, you're more or less right.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
gkarris
Feb 28, 04:20 PM
According to this, he's demanding a 50% pay increase...
http://omg.yahoo.com/blogs/thefamous/charlie-sheen-demands-3-million-per-episode/739?nc
:eek:
http://omg.yahoo.com/blogs/thefamous/charlie-sheen-demands-3-million-per-episode/739?nc
:eek:
antman2x2
May 2, 10:08 AM
Eh I'm feeling a bit weary about tommorow. We haven't heard anything good at all recently.
LT Peanut
Nov 29, 04:26 PM
Warrior Cats?
Precisely! Do you read the books too? I would assume so, hehe
Precisely! Do you read the books too? I would assume so, hehe
Snowy_River
Dec 1, 07:19 PM
I hope you understand what exactly you are saying. Under 10% is still Millions of systems. Included in that small percentage are hundreds if not thousands of businesses, thousands of schools, and many home businesses. Like anything in life, there are people that like the easy stuff, the work that effects the most people, or the work that provides the most challenge.
Worldwide impact is likely motivation for some hackers, however it doesn't include all of them!
Yes. This is part of why the low market share argument always seemed a bit weak. One can argue that there is a threshold beyond which a platform starts getting more attention from malware writers, but to argue that OS X had a small enough market share such that NO malware writers were trying to write a virus, trojan, worm, adware or spyware has just never made sense.
Worldwide impact is likely motivation for some hackers, however it doesn't include all of them!
Yes. This is part of why the low market share argument always seemed a bit weak. One can argue that there is a threshold beyond which a platform starts getting more attention from malware writers, but to argue that OS X had a small enough market share such that NO malware writers were trying to write a virus, trojan, worm, adware or spyware has just never made sense.
SiCbe
Oct 23, 08:08 AM
For Mac users, why would we want to install Vista-(via BootCamp) and then also use it under virtualization?
What situation is there that you would want to run the same OS on the same box, one natively installed and one in virtualization?:confused:
well I would want to install Vista in bootcamp to play games... and the same one under parallels to be able to do simple tasks in windows without having to reboot OSX... :-) until parallels comes up with that 3d enabled version we'll have to install it twice ;-)
What situation is there that you would want to run the same OS on the same box, one natively installed and one in virtualization?:confused:
well I would want to install Vista in bootcamp to play games... and the same one under parallels to be able to do simple tasks in windows without having to reboot OSX... :-) until parallels comes up with that 3d enabled version we'll have to install it twice ;-)
ten-oak-druid
Apr 25, 12:40 PM
matte screen option or fail.
Given that the option is available for the macbook pro, I'd guess the imacs will get them.
Given that the option is available for the macbook pro, I'd guess the imacs will get them.
balamw
Oct 23, 09:29 AM
So I'll say that, if this is accurate, I stand corrected. After a few years of reading Microsoft (and other) EULAs, even I thought Microsoft wouldn't be that retarded. ;-)
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
The more "interesting" restriction I saw (and mentioned in the other thread) was the "don't use DRM in a VM" restriction even with business or ultimate. :eek: :rolleyes:
B
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
The more "interesting" restriction I saw (and mentioned in the other thread) was the "don't use DRM in a VM" restriction even with business or ultimate. :eek: :rolleyes:
B
pit29
Apr 2, 01:23 PM
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2165/1896328691_d5944c4b06.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pehein/1896328691/)
NoExpectations
Sep 30, 02:39 PM
So this is a headline article based on a diagnosis and opinion of an Apple Genius Bar technician? In additoin, it is coming from a reader on Gizmodo. It may or may not be true that 20-30% dropped call is expected for those areas, but why headline this article when it is merely coming from the voice of an Apple store representative? It is very deceptive and may trick people into believing that this is a factual statement coming from AT&T themselves. Too many people on the internet always believe what they read from any source and that is why the legitimate journalist are p o'd about the future of journalism and reportings.
Edit: Sorry, not headline, but front page.
Agreed. I'm not sure how much weight we should put in the response from a single low-level Apple employee...but for some reason, his/her opinion is now accepted as a fact.
I'm not saying that there are no service issues, but I wonder if they would be any better at Verizon (who refused the iPhone) or Sprint or T-Mobile.....or anyone else.
Edit: Sorry, not headline, but front page.
Agreed. I'm not sure how much weight we should put in the response from a single low-level Apple employee...but for some reason, his/her opinion is now accepted as a fact.
I'm not saying that there are no service issues, but I wonder if they would be any better at Verizon (who refused the iPhone) or Sprint or T-Mobile.....or anyone else.
Nermal
Nov 3, 01:37 PM
At least the interface looks like an OS X application. I've always hated Parallels mega cheesy Longhorn icon looking crappy interface.
Indeed. I was appalled when Apple started promoting it!
Indeed. I was appalled when Apple started promoting it!
lmalave
Oct 24, 07:53 AM
anything for macbooks? please?
What I'd like is the base MacBook to drop to $999 and the base mini to drop to $499. That's what the G4 versions cost before they were replaced by the Intel versions.
What I'd like is the base MacBook to drop to $999 and the base mini to drop to $499. That's what the G4 versions cost before they were replaced by the Intel versions.
mcmlxix
Apr 13, 02:40 PM
Only slightly off topic�
Without using iTunes & ATV, does anyone know of a product where you can wirelessly stream the media contents of any shared volume to the TV? I would imagine such a product would need a PC/Mac side client as well as a TV attached gizmo�like iTunes & ATV. I have both anyway, but I was wondering of different options.
Without using iTunes & ATV, does anyone know of a product where you can wirelessly stream the media contents of any shared volume to the TV? I would imagine such a product would need a PC/Mac side client as well as a TV attached gizmo�like iTunes & ATV. I have both anyway, but I was wondering of different options.
appleguy123
Apr 30, 03:42 PM
That's what he said. Reread what he wrote.
Eldiablojoe can be our token blonde in the afterlife?
Eldiablojoe can be our token blonde in the afterlife?
HGW
Jul 12, 09:44 AM
i gave up wanting more from an ipod when discovered you cant take pictures from an ipod photo
kevin.rivers
Jul 28, 08:42 AM
That's not entirely true. The Xbox 360 doesn't play HD-DVDs, but it does upscale standard dvds to 720p. http://www.avforums.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-256882.html
Better link:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/xbox360/physics.htm
The OP statement was that the 360 was the only HD player on the market right now. Which clearly isn't true. Upscaling isn't HD in my book. But that is me.
Better link:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/xbox360/physics.htm
The OP statement was that the 360 was the only HD player on the market right now. Which clearly isn't true. Upscaling isn't HD in my book. But that is me.
randyharris
Jul 10, 12:36 PM
Well, I guess these kinds of things are preferential. Perhaps I'm more used to Micro$oft Office toolbars.
Anyhow, I find myself using Pages more often. I'll just tell my boss to buy a Mac Mini if he wants to read my documents. :D
If Apple does come out with a spreadsheet, it better be more usable than what one can get currently on Pages. One major omission is that one cannot create a graph directly from a table (you have to 'cut and paste').
I'm with KookAid, I find that the Inspector is far more time consuming than a well laid out Icon Bar with drop boxes. Maybe it's because I've been using Microsoft Office forever. But I have given Pages a serious try and I find that I really like it, except for it's lacking AutoCorrection and Inspector.
Randy
Anyhow, I find myself using Pages more often. I'll just tell my boss to buy a Mac Mini if he wants to read my documents. :D
If Apple does come out with a spreadsheet, it better be more usable than what one can get currently on Pages. One major omission is that one cannot create a graph directly from a table (you have to 'cut and paste').
I'm with KookAid, I find that the Inspector is far more time consuming than a well laid out Icon Bar with drop boxes. Maybe it's because I've been using Microsoft Office forever. But I have given Pages a serious try and I find that I really like it, except for it's lacking AutoCorrection and Inspector.
Randy
seble
Apr 15, 07:37 AM
You can 'like' a purchased track from within the music player app now, and post a comment about it. Surprised no one else mentioned this yet... Anyone else spotted any additional changes?
http://instagr.am/p/DKjvV/
I picked up on this before, it was in 4.3.1 for sure
http://instagr.am/p/DKjvV/
I picked up on this before, it was in 4.3.1 for sure
Detlev
Jul 26, 09:06 PM
I'm going to assume it doesn't mean that you actually control the thing without touching it, rather it just makes the wheel disappear when you aren't holding it. That seems to be a more useful idea.
I mean, otherwise, it's a useless feature, except to prevent screen scratching.
That is more likely. Even if a user did not have to touch the screen it would be extremely foreign to people to type or control a piece of hardware without actually touching it�air typing. Look at the new ATMs that are controlled on screen. You can see people reactions to the machine when it does not operate as assumed. They press harder on the screen :rolleyes:
I mean, otherwise, it's a useless feature, except to prevent screen scratching.
That is more likely. Even if a user did not have to touch the screen it would be extremely foreign to people to type or control a piece of hardware without actually touching it�air typing. Look at the new ATMs that are controlled on screen. You can see people reactions to the machine when it does not operate as assumed. They press harder on the screen :rolleyes:
renewed
Sep 14, 11:01 PM
Had the limited pre-ordered and picked it up today. Kinda regret not getting the legendary edition.
Seeing pics of the halo reach console are getting me jealous lol. I'm a halo nut, I might just end up buying it. That's if it's still available and not sold out that is.
$399 at newegg. No tax and free shipping.
Seeing pics of the halo reach console are getting me jealous lol. I'm a halo nut, I might just end up buying it. That's if it's still available and not sold out that is.
$399 at newegg. No tax and free shipping.
iMacx
Apr 13, 07:50 PM
Who cares anymore?
No comments:
Post a Comment