ArtOfWarfare
Apr 12, 09:42 PM
Better yet, 9 to 5 mac has a video stream.
http://www.9to5mac.com/61109/nab-2011/
This is working equally not well.
http://www.9to5mac.com/61109/nab-2011/
This is working equally not well.
zorinlynx
Mar 24, 02:29 PM
Hmm, maybe we are thinking of two different things. How is this going to maintain a protected path? How would Apple keep us from grabbing the stream as it is being sent to the GPU (to be shown on the screen)? That is the part I am thinking of, that is what HDCP/DPCP is supposed to prevent. If we are sending data down the PCIe side then how is it being protected from snooping?
I've always found this obsession the industry has with "protected path" incredibly hilarious, because NO ONE in the piracy scene actually rips media from the video driver stream in any way, shape or form.
Ripping is typically done directly from the media; the actual h.264 or MPEG video is decrypted from the disc and saved without even "playing" it the traditional way. It's always been that way since the days of DVDs; no serious pirate back then ripped from component or S-video jacks either.
Why the media industry is so incredibly obsessed with protecting a path nobody actually rips from is beyond my understanding. It's like stationing an armed guard at your back door when all the robberies have happened through the front. In fact, I've never seen consumer equipment that can "record" a DVI stream.
I've always found this obsession the industry has with "protected path" incredibly hilarious, because NO ONE in the piracy scene actually rips media from the video driver stream in any way, shape or form.
Ripping is typically done directly from the media; the actual h.264 or MPEG video is decrypted from the disc and saved without even "playing" it the traditional way. It's always been that way since the days of DVDs; no serious pirate back then ripped from component or S-video jacks either.
Why the media industry is so incredibly obsessed with protecting a path nobody actually rips from is beyond my understanding. It's like stationing an armed guard at your back door when all the robberies have happened through the front. In fact, I've never seen consumer equipment that can "record" a DVI stream.
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 02:41 PM
I;m going to go out on a limb and preemptively complain my MacPro 1.1 isn't supported :( and is only as configurable as an iMac...the irony...
You can upgrade to the latest 5870 card if you wanted to right now. It might not be 'officially' supported but you can still do it.
Please don't put an AMD 5XXX series into the new iMacs! :(
If they do it will for sure be only in the low-end 21.5" iMac (5670).
You can upgrade to the latest 5870 card if you wanted to right now. It might not be 'officially' supported but you can still do it.
Please don't put an AMD 5XXX series into the new iMacs! :(
If they do it will for sure be only in the low-end 21.5" iMac (5670).
bmx433
Jan 12, 05:04 PM
just because they used Air in their banner doesn't mean its called MacBook Air.. Apple is not stupid.. its all about slim and light..
I'll be the one who'll tell you "I told you so" ;) .. enjoy the show!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4732961&postcount=94
or this..
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4733969&postcount=100
:apple:MacBook Lite:apple:
Feb 2008
that's a good point. i don't remember if they use key words in their teases. what was the tease for the ipod touch? did it have one and if so, was the word "touch" ever mentioned?
I'll be the one who'll tell you "I told you so" ;) .. enjoy the show!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4732961&postcount=94
or this..
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4733969&postcount=100
:apple:MacBook Lite:apple:
Feb 2008
that's a good point. i don't remember if they use key words in their teases. what was the tease for the ipod touch? did it have one and if so, was the word "touch" ever mentioned?
Hraggleblarg
Sep 29, 10:41 PM
Every time I go by CR's reviews, I make a terrible purchase... I wonder what that says.
Evangelion
Jul 20, 05:00 AM
Gah. The Linux community doesn't want to unify. In fact, not unifying is the core of their philosophy.
You do realize that you are full of crap? There is acautlly quite a bit work being done in order to unify various areas of Linux.
It's why there are 415 distributions (none of which are compatible with each other)
Again: you do realize that you are full of crap? There are handful of distributions that matter, rest are more or lesss niche. The ones that matter are (IMO): Fedora/Red Hat, SUSE, Ubuntu, Debian and Gentoo. Of those, Ubuntu and Debian are quite compatible with each other.
9,843 window managers (none of which have remotely similar configuration options), and 3.43x10^15 terminal emulators (none of which actually emulate terminals any better or worse than any other one).
Maybe they realized that "one size does NOT fit all"? Why should there be just WM, just one editor, just one browser, just one email-client etc. etc.?
Yes, Linux has several options to choose from. And is that a bad thing? Is it a good thing to cram some specific thing down users throatts without gicing them the option to choose? It has two primary GUI's (with several smaller ones floating around as well): GNOME and KDE. And while they are both GUI's, they are both sufficiently different that they do not overlap as much. They have different architecture behind them, different design-goals, different ideology... And they cater to different types of users. I have used both, and I can appreciate the strengths of either of them.
You do realize that you are full of crap? There is acautlly quite a bit work being done in order to unify various areas of Linux.
It's why there are 415 distributions (none of which are compatible with each other)
Again: you do realize that you are full of crap? There are handful of distributions that matter, rest are more or lesss niche. The ones that matter are (IMO): Fedora/Red Hat, SUSE, Ubuntu, Debian and Gentoo. Of those, Ubuntu and Debian are quite compatible with each other.
9,843 window managers (none of which have remotely similar configuration options), and 3.43x10^15 terminal emulators (none of which actually emulate terminals any better or worse than any other one).
Maybe they realized that "one size does NOT fit all"? Why should there be just WM, just one editor, just one browser, just one email-client etc. etc.?
Yes, Linux has several options to choose from. And is that a bad thing? Is it a good thing to cram some specific thing down users throatts without gicing them the option to choose? It has two primary GUI's (with several smaller ones floating around as well): GNOME and KDE. And while they are both GUI's, they are both sufficiently different that they do not overlap as much. They have different architecture behind them, different design-goals, different ideology... And they cater to different types of users. I have used both, and I can appreciate the strengths of either of them.
h'biki
Apr 16, 03:21 AM
when marketshare is almost 0 % you are close to dying, look a 1 % of all new machines built is not giving me any confidence in the platform. sure we have 10 % in a installed platform but are loosing everywhere( thank you motorola for holding up the ass end. Fact is Pcs are running away from Mac and when a 500 dollar machine kicks a new $2000 Imac its time to say so long to Jobs and his croonies. Supported you guys way to long at my expense.
Layman's version:
When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.
If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!
For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:
*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).
To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.
Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.
Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).
The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).
The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.
Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"
Layman's version:
When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.
If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!
For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:
*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).
To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.
Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.
Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).
The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).
The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.
Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"
macOSX-tastic
Sep 6, 06:00 PM
this surely is good news. but i wont be watching movies on my current 'pod...the window is too small. all this being dependent on wether or not it's gonna be available in the UK. it's a real bummer not to be able to download TV shows i love like you americans can!
S
S
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 12:49 PM
I'm ambivalent on this issue. I think its just one of those things the experts at trademark law will have to iron out in or out of court. It certainly isn't as big an issue as Samsung's dishonorable blatant copy of the overall ipad design and experience.
As for Amazons names, I find the Kindle to be a strange name for an Amazon product. Burn the rain forest? That said, I opted for the kindle wifi for my tablet. I have an iphone and the kindle gives me the better reading experience for less cost. The iphone/kindle wifi combination is perfect for me. The ipad would have just been a duplication of the iphone on a larger scale for just about everything. Not that I'm knocking the ipad. I like it a lot.
The kindle app on the iphone is nice for night reading too. Another benefit of the iphone/kindle combination for me: night and day reading between the two devices.
As for Amazons names, I find the Kindle to be a strange name for an Amazon product. Burn the rain forest? That said, I opted for the kindle wifi for my tablet. I have an iphone and the kindle gives me the better reading experience for less cost. The iphone/kindle wifi combination is perfect for me. The ipad would have just been a duplication of the iphone on a larger scale for just about everything. Not that I'm knocking the ipad. I like it a lot.
The kindle app on the iphone is nice for night reading too. Another benefit of the iphone/kindle combination for me: night and day reading between the two devices.
Frobozz
Mar 24, 01:50 PM
This is HUGE, ginormous news. If Lion, or even later released of Snow Leopard, has this kind of support, ti would revitalize the Mac gaming scene. Even 3D artists would have more options, especially when you consider how well the high end consumer cards stack up against their FireGL competition.
Now all they need is complete 6900 series support-- yeah, I'm lookin' at you, 6990. ;-)
Now all they need is complete 6900 series support-- yeah, I'm lookin' at you, 6990. ;-)
skunk
Mar 21, 05:05 PM
I think this would be conterproductive to the end result though.Oh, the Humanity!
lifeinhd
Mar 1, 03:19 PM
Here is the College setup, I will eventually upgrade to the Logitech Performance wireless mouse. What is seen in the picture:
27" iMac
11.6" Macbook Air
Blackberry Tour
PS3 Slim
Xbox 360 Slim
Are you living on campus? And if so, they actually let you mount a TV on the wall? :eek: Where do you go?
I. Love. This. Room. ^_^ I'm going to steal it! :D MUHAHAHAH!
+1. It just looks like such a nice place to be. Then I look around my room, with gray walls, shades over the windows, dismantled iMacs all over the floor, and I think "Meh...."
27" iMac
11.6" Macbook Air
Blackberry Tour
PS3 Slim
Xbox 360 Slim
Are you living on campus? And if so, they actually let you mount a TV on the wall? :eek: Where do you go?
I. Love. This. Room. ^_^ I'm going to steal it! :D MUHAHAHAH!
+1. It just looks like such a nice place to be. Then I look around my room, with gray walls, shades over the windows, dismantled iMacs all over the floor, and I think "Meh...."
isgoed
Aug 25, 06:47 AM
I don't think we are going to see Core Duos in Apples for much longer, though it is possible that the base Mini will offer a Core Duo, and the better model a Core 2 Duo.
Still, I think it much more likely that with this revision, both Minis will sport Core 2 Duos, probably Meroms to keep them quiet and lower-powered, and will feature the 965 graphics chipset which frankly is a very nice and inexpenisve graphics solution.
What I am really hoping is that there will be an add-on base module in a similar form factor to turn any Mini into a full-blown HD/Audio media centre. Now that could really be exciting. While Tivos and Sky+ boxes are welcome in my home, we are just aching for someone to really rethink the entire home media experience. I'd love to see Apple take a shot at that.That is almost exactly what I am thinking.
The way I see it there are two kind of people who buy the mac mini:
Selena Gomez Nominated For BET
justin bieber and selena gomez
Still, I think it much more likely that with this revision, both Minis will sport Core 2 Duos, probably Meroms to keep them quiet and lower-powered, and will feature the 965 graphics chipset which frankly is a very nice and inexpenisve graphics solution.
What I am really hoping is that there will be an add-on base module in a similar form factor to turn any Mini into a full-blown HD/Audio media centre. Now that could really be exciting. While Tivos and Sky+ boxes are welcome in my home, we are just aching for someone to really rethink the entire home media experience. I'd love to see Apple take a shot at that.That is almost exactly what I am thinking.
The way I see it there are two kind of people who buy the mac mini:
jettredmont
Apr 12, 10:25 PM
This all started just because I said I hope Final Cut doesn't turn into iMovie. Somehow that turned into iMovie is pro and Final Cut is the Model T of editing.
No, no one said iMovie was Pro. You said you didn't want FCP to take the same "backward step" iMovie did. The hue and cry here is that, where we stand now, iMovie is a far more capable editor than iMovie HD ever was, and has room to grow where iMovieHD did not. It was NOT a step backwards.
Your rebuttal has been that iMovie is not pro, but that's obvious. iMovie HD was not pro (and was significantly less capable than iMovie today is in terms of precision editing, audio work, etc).
For my hobby work (NOT pro), I went from a die-hard Final Cut Pro user (I worked for Apple and got a hell of a discount on FCStudio) to an iMovie user with the past two revs of iMovie. I tried and simply could not use iMovie HD for what I wanted to do. I hit some barriers with iMovie today, but nothing like the crap that iMovie HD and before gave me.
No, no one said iMovie was Pro. You said you didn't want FCP to take the same "backward step" iMovie did. The hue and cry here is that, where we stand now, iMovie is a far more capable editor than iMovie HD ever was, and has room to grow where iMovieHD did not. It was NOT a step backwards.
Your rebuttal has been that iMovie is not pro, but that's obvious. iMovie HD was not pro (and was significantly less capable than iMovie today is in terms of precision editing, audio work, etc).
For my hobby work (NOT pro), I went from a die-hard Final Cut Pro user (I worked for Apple and got a hell of a discount on FCStudio) to an iMovie user with the past two revs of iMovie. I tried and simply could not use iMovie HD for what I wanted to do. I hit some barriers with iMovie today, but nothing like the crap that iMovie HD and before gave me.
RodThePlod
Sep 7, 07:00 AM
Even though Apple is Apple, going up against Amazon, which will have more movie options at the time of launch is going to be tough...
unless... they release some sort of new hardware [full screen ipod, plzkthx] that will take the spotlight.
Here's hoping for "one more thing"... on Sept 12.
I think it's funny that this is pretty much the only mention of Amazon in this thread... even though Amazon will be announcing a competing movie store in a few days with supposedly much more content than Apple's offering! :D
It just shows how people think that Amazon will simply not be able to compete with what Apple has up it's sleeve. You just *know* that Apple would not announce this thing until they had the end-to-end user experience worked out to perfection - iPod-iTunes styleee - effectively using hardware and software that works seamlessly and that anyone can pick up and use.
In contrast, Amazon will launch a service that will have a very comprehensive back catalog but will be frustrating to use as after downloading your movie, your options will be:
Singers Selena Gomez L and
with selena gomez oscars,
with selena gomez oscars,
Justin Bieber, Selena Gomez
unless... they release some sort of new hardware [full screen ipod, plzkthx] that will take the spotlight.
Here's hoping for "one more thing"... on Sept 12.
I think it's funny that this is pretty much the only mention of Amazon in this thread... even though Amazon will be announcing a competing movie store in a few days with supposedly much more content than Apple's offering! :D
It just shows how people think that Amazon will simply not be able to compete with what Apple has up it's sleeve. You just *know* that Apple would not announce this thing until they had the end-to-end user experience worked out to perfection - iPod-iTunes styleee - effectively using hardware and software that works seamlessly and that anyone can pick up and use.
In contrast, Amazon will launch a service that will have a very comprehensive back catalog but will be frustrating to use as after downloading your movie, your options will be:
wmmk
Jul 13, 11:17 PM
Yeah! Since this guy doesn't want it, neither do the rest of us!
Actually, he has a point. Bluray is not currently at a reasonable price, and doing away with combo drives would be a bigger deal than getting Bluray for at least 70% of users.
Actually, he has a point. Bluray is not currently at a reasonable price, and doing away with combo drives would be a bigger deal than getting Bluray for at least 70% of users.
MaxMike
Nov 27, 12:17 PM
Thanks to Black Friday, I ended up with...
-LG Blu-Ray Player
-HDMI Switch
-The Hangover on Blu-Ray
-Grown Ups on Blu-Ray
-HDMI Cable
-Need for Speed Hot Pursuit
-A hard drive cover for my HP tablet I got for free
-LG Blu-Ray Player
-HDMI Switch
-The Hangover on Blu-Ray
-Grown Ups on Blu-Ray
-HDMI Cable
-Need for Speed Hot Pursuit
-A hard drive cover for my HP tablet I got for free
Zadillo
Oct 23, 01:16 PM
I'm hoping for a MPB with: Core 2 Duo up to 2.33 Ghz - Flash boot (NAND memory) - better GPU, ATI launched her x1800 mobile GPU march 2006 - 802.11n - more ram capacity - firewire 800 and faster super drive.
But Im afread I have to wait untill january for this master piece of mobile technology. :(
The X1800 is a monster though...... I think the only thing you can even find it in is some of those high-end 17" gaming behemoth laptops. I can't see any possible way they'd fit it into the 15 or 17" MBP.
But Im afread I have to wait untill january for this master piece of mobile technology. :(
The X1800 is a monster though...... I think the only thing you can even find it in is some of those high-end 17" gaming behemoth laptops. I can't see any possible way they'd fit it into the 15 or 17" MBP.
toddybody
Apr 19, 11:41 AM
Ah yes, well a desktop card would be nice. And the 27" does have the room when compared to the 21". They could engineer it in there if they wanted to.
But yes, I share your dream.
The vapor chambers and relatively efficient TDP of the 6950, could be combined with a much needed re-engineered iMac cooling system(the current "slit" the back is silly)...I know I complain too much about this topic...but a 2650x1440 monitor should be powered by a MUCH more substantial GPU
But yes, I share your dream.
The vapor chambers and relatively efficient TDP of the 6950, could be combined with a much needed re-engineered iMac cooling system(the current "slit" the back is silly)...I know I complain too much about this topic...but a 2650x1440 monitor should be powered by a MUCH more substantial GPU
QuarterSwede
Apr 10, 06:18 PM
as the other guys have said, in the UK automatics are pretty rare. i think we all know one friend or so who has an Auto only license, everyone else just gets a normal license.
if you are the sort of person who enjoys driving to any degree then a manual gearbox is much better. autos are just so boring, they never kick down when you need it or bizarrely hold on to a gear for much longer than you were expecting. im sure there are some good autos out there but they will always be more inefficient than a manual.
When is the last time you were in an automatic and what year/make/model was the car?
Automatics these days are generally a LOT better than they used to be. This is coming from someone who really loves driving a stick on country roads and likes the control you get from one.
I'm starting to think most stick drivers are blind to how much automatics have changed.
if you are the sort of person who enjoys driving to any degree then a manual gearbox is much better. autos are just so boring, they never kick down when you need it or bizarrely hold on to a gear for much longer than you were expecting. im sure there are some good autos out there but they will always be more inefficient than a manual.
When is the last time you were in an automatic and what year/make/model was the car?
Automatics these days are generally a LOT better than they used to be. This is coming from someone who really loves driving a stick on country roads and likes the control you get from one.
I'm starting to think most stick drivers are blind to how much automatics have changed.
Jimmy Guphanti
Apr 21, 01:26 PM
Not expecting a huge update here other than Sandy Bridge, Thunderbolt, and 6XXX series AMD graphics.
Will the higher end models having the chance of 6XXX cards, will the lower end models, the $1199 and the $1499 have better graphics like 5XXX with 1GB GDDR5 or do you all think that they will stay the same? I say that the refresh will happen on either May 3 or May 10. If it does not happen on either of these days, it will happen at WWDC.
Will the higher end models having the chance of 6XXX cards, will the lower end models, the $1199 and the $1499 have better graphics like 5XXX with 1GB GDDR5 or do you all think that they will stay the same? I say that the refresh will happen on either May 3 or May 10. If it does not happen on either of these days, it will happen at WWDC.
coder12
Apr 21, 12:20 PM
Good catch! I just noticed this once you pointed it out.
I will be having fun with this +1 deally...
I will be having fun with this +1 deally...
iStudentUK
Mar 27, 10:58 AM
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:
That guy in the MSN video rasmasyean linked is a bit of a douche. Especially when he says "if we take our toys home this is all over ... its pretty much us [USA]". This isn't a game and these aren't toys. A little under half the forces are US, Britain and France are next, but there are over a dozen countries that have committed forces.
Many of the countries in this coalition could do this alone- US, France and Britain all have airbases within range, attack subs/ships to fire missiles, reconnaissance planes, special forces to gain intelligence and easily enough fighters to attack ground targets and what is left of the Libyan airforce. However, it just looks like everyone is trying to make sure that no single country dominates.
With Iraq and Afghanistan the West need to be careful not to make this look like another invasion, but instead helping repressed people succeed in their revolution. Contributions and support from some Middle Eastern states (Qatar and the UAE have both sent fighters) help reinforce this. Making sure the UN and NATO are involved keeps this from becoming one country attacking another and hopefully avoids more hatred targeted towards the West.
Some more cynical than me (impossible) might consider that disinformation. :rolleyes:
That guy in the MSN video rasmasyean linked is a bit of a douche. Especially when he says "if we take our toys home this is all over ... its pretty much us [USA]". This isn't a game and these aren't toys. A little under half the forces are US, Britain and France are next, but there are over a dozen countries that have committed forces.
Many of the countries in this coalition could do this alone- US, France and Britain all have airbases within range, attack subs/ships to fire missiles, reconnaissance planes, special forces to gain intelligence and easily enough fighters to attack ground targets and what is left of the Libyan airforce. However, it just looks like everyone is trying to make sure that no single country dominates.
With Iraq and Afghanistan the West need to be careful not to make this look like another invasion, but instead helping repressed people succeed in their revolution. Contributions and support from some Middle Eastern states (Qatar and the UAE have both sent fighters) help reinforce this. Making sure the UN and NATO are involved keeps this from becoming one country attacking another and hopefully avoids more hatred targeted towards the West.
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 3, 10:27 AM
IMHO, I dislike it. I don't like the guy's voice which sounds phony and overly-reverential. Once you call something you make magical it automatically sucks any magic it may have had out. And the ad is saccharine to me. I generally hate Apple ads but enjoy their products.
I know that's your opinion but you really are missing the whole point of the Ad.
It's like critiquing the way a piece of art looks based on the frame it's in and not the art itself.
I know that's your opinion but you really are missing the whole point of the Ad.
It's like critiquing the way a piece of art looks based on the frame it's in and not the art itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment