skiltrip
Oct 11, 08:37 PM
I just received the Belkin Grip Vue (Tint) from belkin.com. It's structurally exactly the same as the Grip Vue cases from Best Buy, without the extremely bright and obnoxious colors. The (Tint) is translucent, so you can see your iPod logo thru the back. But it's slightly frosted on the inside, so you get NO watermarking, and it makes the back look really nice. I got the black one, which is basically a really dark smoke color. Really subtle and nice case.
One very noticeable improvement over the Best Buy Grip Vues is that the volume buttons are way easier to press. I have been using my Best Buy Grip Vue for a week, and the buttons have broken in a little and have become easier. But the buttons on the Grip Vue (Tint) right out of the box are easier to press. Maybe the clearer material is just inherently a little bit softer.
Tweet
Love with the fans to re-tweet
Twitterjustin ieber question
Rebecca Black is officially a
Justin Bieber Tweets About
Rebecca has gotten over 100
Rebecca Black#39;s new pop music
selena gomez rebecca black
Rebecca Black has reached 100
Is Rebecca Black the Next
Rebecca Black thanked Justin
Rebecca Black Urges Followers
#News rebecca black
Rebecca Black shot onto the
rebecca black Rebecca Black
Rebecca Black.
Bieber Dissed Rebecca Black On
Rebecca Black Wants To Sing A
One very noticeable improvement over the Best Buy Grip Vues is that the volume buttons are way easier to press. I have been using my Best Buy Grip Vue for a week, and the buttons have broken in a little and have become easier. But the buttons on the Grip Vue (Tint) right out of the box are easier to press. Maybe the clearer material is just inherently a little bit softer.
mazola
Sep 7, 09:53 AM
And 'The Boatniks' too!
NebulaClash
Sep 14, 10:00 AM
I guess you don't read the news. Toyota has recalled millions of vehicles this year, even though not every owner of those vehicles was specifically experiencing the problem.
I guess you don't read my posts carefully. I said what you said, that Toyota issues a recall, but the onus is on the owner to bring in the vehicle for servicing. Exactly as Apple has now done: if you experience a problem, let them know and you can get a free bumper.
To Consumer Reports this is an unacceptable way to deal with a design flaw. If it's Apple. For Toyota, it's fine and considered the normal way to handle a design flaw.
I guess you don't read my posts carefully. I said what you said, that Toyota issues a recall, but the onus is on the owner to bring in the vehicle for servicing. Exactly as Apple has now done: if you experience a problem, let them know and you can get a free bumper.
To Consumer Reports this is an unacceptable way to deal with a design flaw. If it's Apple. For Toyota, it's fine and considered the normal way to handle a design flaw.
mainstreetmark
Jul 19, 03:47 PM
Count me in, too.
Of course, they got an extra $200 out of me, because I wanted a black Macbook. *grumble*
Of course, they got an extra $200 out of me, because I wanted a black Macbook. *grumble*
PowerFullMac
Jan 12, 12:50 PM
Just thinking... Perhaps the MacBook Air IS the tablet Mac!
Henk Poley
Mar 24, 02:34 PM
Could somebody give an overview of the price and performance range of this list of cards? Just numbers is kind of opaque.
Fukui
Mar 21, 07:11 PM
What people don't understand is that Apple is dying....
Everyone is buying IBMs and if Apple doesn't do something then they are dead.
Not exactly. Everyone's buying DELLs.
And, For What its worth, apples market share may be lower over time, but thier installed/customer base IS increasing. Just not at the same growth level as the Big Players. The only thing that prevents apples larger growth is largely microsoft.
When customers cant access the website they want, take classes to learn MS office only on PC's because the mac version is different, cant use all the same peripherals as windows users (not as bad as it used to be for sure) etc, apple will grow slower than the bigger PC companies.
How come Acer isnt dying with its meager 3 percent market share?
Lower prices don't seem to help them that much...
Its much more than price that determines market share, things like advertising...which is what apple is actually doing for the iPod.
Everyone is buying IBMs and if Apple doesn't do something then they are dead.
Not exactly. Everyone's buying DELLs.
And, For What its worth, apples market share may be lower over time, but thier installed/customer base IS increasing. Just not at the same growth level as the Big Players. The only thing that prevents apples larger growth is largely microsoft.
When customers cant access the website they want, take classes to learn MS office only on PC's because the mac version is different, cant use all the same peripherals as windows users (not as bad as it used to be for sure) etc, apple will grow slower than the bigger PC companies.
How come Acer isnt dying with its meager 3 percent market share?
Lower prices don't seem to help them that much...
Its much more than price that determines market share, things like advertising...which is what apple is actually doing for the iPod.
balamw
Sep 8, 03:58 PM
Airport Express still shows available within 24 hours, so looks like Extreme is getting updated but Express is not.
Or they have a decent inventory of Express units and just want to throw us off... :p
B
Or they have a decent inventory of Express units and just want to throw us off... :p
B
iMark
Feb 24, 02:33 AM
Thanks, the speakers are Eclipse td307paii
http://www.eclipse-td.net
http://www.eclipse-td.net
Clubbernox
Jan 11, 09:36 PM
what if this slim macbook had a touch pad keyboard? that would be one way to make it smaller
kyeblue
Aug 29, 11:41 AM
Incredibly underwhelming.
If they're going to stay yonah, at least bump the clock speed more than that.
The only upside to this is that it leaves a HUGE gap between the mini and Pro, could mean that apple really is planning a conroe minitower/pizzabox/mediacenter.
That, and the fact that ThinkSecret is NEVER right. EVER.
This is exactly what I am crying for. A headless mac between pro and mini that i can hook it to my HDTV. Not because mac pro is too expensive, it doesn't look nice in my living room.
Will not be surprised if mini also gets a price cut to $499 and $599. I am happy with G4.
If they're going to stay yonah, at least bump the clock speed more than that.
The only upside to this is that it leaves a HUGE gap between the mini and Pro, could mean that apple really is planning a conroe minitower/pizzabox/mediacenter.
That, and the fact that ThinkSecret is NEVER right. EVER.
This is exactly what I am crying for. A headless mac between pro and mini that i can hook it to my HDTV. Not because mac pro is too expensive, it doesn't look nice in my living room.
Will not be surprised if mini also gets a price cut to $499 and $599. I am happy with G4.
iBorg20181
Oct 24, 01:35 AM
The current Napa64 platform (that is, Napa with Merom as the CPU) does support 64-bit instructions. It can't address more than 4 GiB of physical memory, but it can run the faster 64-bit instructions.
And that's exactly what I've been waiting for! I don't care about using more than 4GB ram (or 3.2GB as Applied Visual has pointed out), but the 64-bit capability of Merom MBPs will be, I believe, important within the next couple of years that I'll be using this new lappie!
:D
iBorg
And that's exactly what I've been waiting for! I don't care about using more than 4GB ram (or 3.2GB as Applied Visual has pointed out), but the 64-bit capability of Merom MBPs will be, I believe, important within the next couple of years that I'll be using this new lappie!
:D
iBorg
cmaier
Apr 3, 12:01 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Are you kidding me. I haven't looked into it but I would bet there's nothing holding you back from investing in apple. You have a computer most likely with an Internet connection?
Go online and trade. If you want to use an investing firm there are plenty, all you gotta do is call them or go to their site.
Try www.Wedbush.com
All you have to do is wire them
Your money or send them a check with the amount you want to invest plus the investment fee ($10 to $50+) and there
you go.
Lol. "stock" as in "I wish iPads were in stock"; not as in equities.
Are you kidding me. I haven't looked into it but I would bet there's nothing holding you back from investing in apple. You have a computer most likely with an Internet connection?
Go online and trade. If you want to use an investing firm there are plenty, all you gotta do is call them or go to their site.
Try www.Wedbush.com
All you have to do is wire them
Your money or send them a check with the amount you want to invest plus the investment fee ($10 to $50+) and there
you go.
Lol. "stock" as in "I wish iPads were in stock"; not as in equities.
ju5tin81
Nov 28, 02:30 PM
I have no idea where you got that one from. The original Xbox never made a profit. Microsoft is deliberately selling the Xbox 360 at a loss to capture marketshare. However, the PS3 and Ninetindo Wii are selling like hotcakes, are latest big things, and have the buzz. The best laid plans ...
No real, true, stats on that one yet. Moving on...
However, the one thing I'm amazed at... The EU has this whole 'Anti-trust' thing going on with M$ at the mo...
How can this company, legally, be allowed to sell their product at a loss with the sole intention being: capturing market share? Isn't this: putting ��$ behind a product to guarantee a products sucess ( & break smaller companies, not nessecarily Apple) : hugely illegal, and destroying consumer choice? Whether it be Zune, XboX whateva... :confused:
I'm amazed that this practice is tollerated, let alone endorsed by the music lables, and their little $1 per Zune thang... I thought they were worried about APPLE being in control, never mind M$.... :eek:
No real, true, stats on that one yet. Moving on...
However, the one thing I'm amazed at... The EU has this whole 'Anti-trust' thing going on with M$ at the mo...
How can this company, legally, be allowed to sell their product at a loss with the sole intention being: capturing market share? Isn't this: putting ��$ behind a product to guarantee a products sucess ( & break smaller companies, not nessecarily Apple) : hugely illegal, and destroying consumer choice? Whether it be Zune, XboX whateva... :confused:
I'm amazed that this practice is tollerated, let alone endorsed by the music lables, and their little $1 per Zune thang... I thought they were worried about APPLE being in control, never mind M$.... :eek:
cube
Mar 24, 04:50 PM
AMD's CPU's are trash and they're cheap for a reason.
For someone who doesn't use Windows you sure seem interested in Windows only API's. Love all of those OpenCL applications you listed by the way. ;)
I am not interested in Windows APIs. That's how the hardware capabilities are referred to. OpenGL has tended to lag in new features, so if the hardware has extra capabilities, it will probably support some future OpenGL version too.
For someone who doesn't use Windows you sure seem interested in Windows only API's. Love all of those OpenCL applications you listed by the way. ;)
I am not interested in Windows APIs. That's how the hardware capabilities are referred to. OpenGL has tended to lag in new features, so if the hardware has extra capabilities, it will probably support some future OpenGL version too.
iJohnHenry
Mar 27, 09:59 AM
Really? How shocking!
Imagine, the U.S. European Command, headed by an American!
Next you'll be telling us that the U.S. President is an American, too.
Oh? He chose to leave those two significant letters out of his post. :confused:
Some more cynical than me (impossible) might consider that disinformation. :rolleyes:
Imagine, the U.S. European Command, headed by an American!
Next you'll be telling us that the U.S. President is an American, too.
Oh? He chose to leave those two significant letters out of his post. :confused:
Some more cynical than me (impossible) might consider that disinformation. :rolleyes:
ghostface147
Apr 2, 08:27 PM
nice...
prady16
Oct 23, 08:12 AM
I hope to have it order Tuesday and delivered by the end of the week?
Any chance?
I highly doubt it!
Any chance?
I highly doubt it!
juanm
Jan 1, 06:45 PM
Steve will take the stage and announce that they have created artificial life that can sing every song on your iPod while cleaning your house, he says they will be called PodPeople.:rolleyes:
Or maybe... iRobot? :D
Sorry, but I had to say it.
Or maybe... iRobot? :D
Sorry, but I had to say it.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 06:20 PM
Because there is not enough of it, and it will increase our need of foreign oil not lessen it.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
Machead III
Sep 7, 08:38 AM
A good idea, just poorly executed.
Actually makes more sense than the system we have now.
Agreed.
Actually makes more sense than the system we have now.
Agreed.
RaceTripper
Jan 10, 09:26 PM
I really don't car about close racing in F1 as I would just prefer teams the engineering to be unregulated (except for safety). My opinion I believe is in the minority.
For road based cars, I want close racing. I really do agree that ALMS and LeMans are fantastic, as well as touring cars. If I ever go (which I plan on doing sooner than later) I might have to try to say "hi" to you. I much enjoy your photos. Being near the pits would be the cats meow for me. Its the work done behind the scenes and fuel/tire changes that make me feel as if I just drank 3 Chai chargers:D
The US GP in Austin is still supposed to take place correct?I'm glad you like the pictures. Thanks for looking. If you plan to attend an ALMS race I go to let me know. We can arrange a meet up. Unlike F1, fans get full access to the paddock (but not hot pits) and drivers in ALMS. But you can get close enough to the hot pits to see what the drivers are eating between stints. Working the pits is pretty cool, but it can get pretty busy if all your cars come in at the same time.
The Austin GP is on for 2012. I believe they have broken ground for track construction recently. We plan to attend (we attended the USGP 2003-2007).
For road based cars, I want close racing. I really do agree that ALMS and LeMans are fantastic, as well as touring cars. If I ever go (which I plan on doing sooner than later) I might have to try to say "hi" to you. I much enjoy your photos. Being near the pits would be the cats meow for me. Its the work done behind the scenes and fuel/tire changes that make me feel as if I just drank 3 Chai chargers:D
The US GP in Austin is still supposed to take place correct?I'm glad you like the pictures. Thanks for looking. If you plan to attend an ALMS race I go to let me know. We can arrange a meet up. Unlike F1, fans get full access to the paddock (but not hot pits) and drivers in ALMS. But you can get close enough to the hot pits to see what the drivers are eating between stints. Working the pits is pretty cool, but it can get pretty busy if all your cars come in at the same time.
The Austin GP is on for 2012. I believe they have broken ground for track construction recently. We plan to attend (we attended the USGP 2003-2007).
poppe
Sep 1, 12:46 PM
Hmm... the problem with that line-up is that when consumers see the shiny new advert saying "Meet the new iMacs" they'll look at the clock speeds and say "What new iMacs?". I think it would be reasonable for Apple to offer...
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
If the Mac Mini and the MB would have stayed under 500 and 1000 repsectively then I would have said you are so wrong, but because they didn't I wouldn't be surprised if they came out with one just above 1999.
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
If the Mac Mini and the MB would have stayed under 500 and 1000 repsectively then I would have said you are so wrong, but because they didn't I wouldn't be surprised if they came out with one just above 1999.
pope
Jan 13, 09:28 AM
introducing...MacBook Error
No comments:
Post a Comment