chrmjenkins
Apr 26, 05:53 PM
AT&T's HSPA+ can pull down 21 MB theoretically. 4x faster than HSPA 7.2.
The theoretical never actually happen though. That's why I'd take a superior network standard with a lower frequency, and thus better building penetration, any day.
The theoretical never actually happen though. That's why I'd take a superior network standard with a lower frequency, and thus better building penetration, any day.
dXTC
Mar 10, 09:03 PM
I have stayed out of this one for a while, but now he has gone from "sick" to "awesome" with this video on Funny or Die.
http://FunnyOrDie.com/m/5cwg
I don't even know what to say...
Honestly, me neither. I don't know whether to shake my head incredulously or LMAO. Did Charlie get paid for this?
Say nothing.
It's the only way to kill him.
Won't happen. Chuck Norris can't even kill Charlie Sheen; the Adonis DNA-infused tiger blood is like Kryptonite to Norris.
http://FunnyOrDie.com/m/5cwg
I don't even know what to say...
Honestly, me neither. I don't know whether to shake my head incredulously or LMAO. Did Charlie get paid for this?
Say nothing.
It's the only way to kill him.
Won't happen. Chuck Norris can't even kill Charlie Sheen; the Adonis DNA-infused tiger blood is like Kryptonite to Norris.
andiwm2003
Oct 23, 07:56 AM
This is incorrect.
Microsoft's Vista EULA says:
4. USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.
This means you can't use the *same* installation of Vista Home inside a virtualization technology on the licensed device.
This DOES NOT mean you can't use it by itself in a virtualization product on any platform.
The reason this is included in the EULA is because Vista Business and Ultimate actually include additional licenses specifically so the same license can be used to also run in a virtualization environment on the same device where Vista is already installed.
So, the higher end versions of Vista actually include more in terms of virtualization licensing than any other commercial OS.
In any case, all versions of Vista can be legally used standalone in a virtualized environment, such as Parallels or VMWare.
that sounds more reasonable to me. i'm not a lawyer but i thought in most countries it would be not legal to restrict the software use to certain hardware settings after you bought a full version.
Microsoft's Vista EULA says:
4. USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.
This means you can't use the *same* installation of Vista Home inside a virtualization technology on the licensed device.
This DOES NOT mean you can't use it by itself in a virtualization product on any platform.
The reason this is included in the EULA is because Vista Business and Ultimate actually include additional licenses specifically so the same license can be used to also run in a virtualization environment on the same device where Vista is already installed.
So, the higher end versions of Vista actually include more in terms of virtualization licensing than any other commercial OS.
In any case, all versions of Vista can be legally used standalone in a virtualized environment, such as Parallels or VMWare.
that sounds more reasonable to me. i'm not a lawyer but i thought in most countries it would be not legal to restrict the software use to certain hardware settings after you bought a full version.
stroked
Apr 27, 02:36 PM
Nope, the thing you haven't understood is that I thought it was a Clever idea, as right after, the attackers left. Nothing "crappy" about acknowledging something which saved her from further sufferance. Of course, you interpreted my post as being insincere and cold, but it was merely an observation and never did I have the intention to be hurtful.
No, but he assumed your intention was hurtful
No, but he assumed your intention was hurtful
more...
twoodcc
Oct 21, 12:57 PM
It's rather cool to touch when it's not charging. Charging, then I'll probably burn my finger if I touch the "ESC/F1/F2" area.
but how often do you have it folding and not charging?
yes i understand the point. but i don't find a reason.
and yes, i do have all the computers in my household contributing to my personal team.
i can't 'compete'. the whole thing is basically it's whoever has a very nice computer/folding rig, or whoever has a nice computer and doesn't use it, but leaves it on to fold. so technically it's not 'competing' because they are computers, you aren't actually doing any work besides for setting up the actual client, and having it run well on your machine.
well i never actually thought of having my own team. and i can see a little personal value there.
but really, it is fun to have team members to kinda compete with. i know we aren't doing work ourselves, but it's a good cause, and what gets people to fold besides the cause is to beat each other. without the points system, not many people would fold.
i hope you decide to join MR oneday soon
but how often do you have it folding and not charging?
yes i understand the point. but i don't find a reason.
and yes, i do have all the computers in my household contributing to my personal team.
i can't 'compete'. the whole thing is basically it's whoever has a very nice computer/folding rig, or whoever has a nice computer and doesn't use it, but leaves it on to fold. so technically it's not 'competing' because they are computers, you aren't actually doing any work besides for setting up the actual client, and having it run well on your machine.
well i never actually thought of having my own team. and i can see a little personal value there.
but really, it is fun to have team members to kinda compete with. i know we aren't doing work ourselves, but it's a good cause, and what gets people to fold besides the cause is to beat each other. without the points system, not many people would fold.
i hope you decide to join MR oneday soon
cupcakes2000
Apr 12, 08:58 AM
Taken from the top of Mount Leconte in Great Smoky Mountain National Park.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5230/5612220000_7144b1b7a4_b.jpg
---f/14---1/20"---ISO100---18mm---
This is really cool!
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5230/5612220000_7144b1b7a4_b.jpg
---f/14---1/20"---ISO100---18mm---
This is really cool!
more...
Whistleway
Oct 24, 07:52 AM
Solid upgrade. Kudos Apple.
rasmasyean
May 1, 10:42 PM
Looking forward to the movie version. ;)
Just keep up with Youtube for the loads of "indy" movies. ;)
Just keep up with Youtube for the loads of "indy" movies. ;)
more...
lordonuthin
Oct 26, 06:19 PM
27 mins? On the 2.26 octo?
Getting 43 mins on my 3ghz octo from 2007...
I thought it seemed pretty good.
#39;American Idol#39; contestant and
more...
on American Idol tonight,
was just Haley Reinhart,
more...
Haley Reinhart Gets Standing
American Idol: Who Should Go
more...
American Idol: Songs Your
Haley Reinhart and Stefano
more...
American Idol contestants
Haley Reinhart American Idol
Which American Idol contestant
Getting 43 mins on my 3ghz octo from 2007...
I thought it seemed pretty good.
diegous79
May 3, 08:43 AM
Not sure if anyone noticed this but while trying to price one, I noticed that the 21" model can't be maxed to 16gb as their page says.... :mad:
more...
playaj82
Aug 15, 03:30 PM
Has that pop-up video flavor, doesn't it??? Stylin...
I wish you could change the color or shape of the pop-up.
Or, if you could use Independent ResUI and have it zoom in on that portion of the web page where the word appears, but within the Safari web browser.
Or combine it with some core animation stuff and blacken the rest of the screen except for the Safari browser, and put red dots on the term each place it shows up like a laser pointer in a presentation
That would be slick
I wish you could change the color or shape of the pop-up.
Or, if you could use Independent ResUI and have it zoom in on that portion of the web page where the word appears, but within the Safari web browser.
Or combine it with some core animation stuff and blacken the rest of the screen except for the Safari browser, and put red dots on the term each place it shows up like a laser pointer in a presentation
That would be slick
dmr727
Feb 25, 10:42 AM
Poor Jon Cryer. :D
I feel worse for the kid. That initially cute and pudgy face didn't exactly grow into something that'll be useful in the industry down the line. :p
I feel worse for the kid. That initially cute and pudgy face didn't exactly grow into something that'll be useful in the industry down the line. :p
more...
Surely
Jan 26, 11:12 AM
Wish I could get my taxes done, worked 3 jobs last year and only got my W2 for one of them :( didnt make much though...probably about 4k so maybe a $200 refund if that. Anyone have a guess? I always mark no dependencies or whatever so they take all the taxes out.
What?
Seriously dude, you're in the wrong thread.
This isn't the "What Is Your Wish?" or "Random Thought For The Day" thread.
What?
Seriously dude, you're in the wrong thread.
This isn't the "What Is Your Wish?" or "Random Thought For The Day" thread.
alexf
Oct 18, 10:32 PM
Why, my friend, by "the iPod is Apple's cash cow", you imply that there is only one cash cow. But if you want to use the traditional definition (http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2&Database=*&Query=cash+cow) of "cash cow", "a project that generates a continuous flow of money," then the Mac would be more of a cash cow than the iPod, because it has always represented a larger proportion of Apple's profits and revenues. Not once has the iPod represented more of Apple's revenues. So the Mac generates a larger continuous flow of money.
Not sure what set of rules of logic you are using, but either way you are wrong. The Mac is still more important to Apple's bottom line than the iPod. Apple is also innovating more on the Mac than with the iPod.
By the way, you might want to look up the definition of the word "emotional" as well. I'm using facts, you're making things up.
Listen, it's quite simple: For over 25 years Apple was a maker of almost exclusively personal computers and software. Five years ago, they introduced the iPod, followed by the music store (and now video, etc.). All of a sudden - within a period of only five years - iPod and music/video related sales account for almost half of their profit, and soon - by many estimates - will account for at least a full half (and possibly more).
Now, do you think that Apple considers the iPod and the iTunes Music Store a cash cow? Hmmm... :rolleyes:
Not sure what set of rules of logic you are using, but either way you are wrong. The Mac is still more important to Apple's bottom line than the iPod. Apple is also innovating more on the Mac than with the iPod.
By the way, you might want to look up the definition of the word "emotional" as well. I'm using facts, you're making things up.
Listen, it's quite simple: For over 25 years Apple was a maker of almost exclusively personal computers and software. Five years ago, they introduced the iPod, followed by the music store (and now video, etc.). All of a sudden - within a period of only five years - iPod and music/video related sales account for almost half of their profit, and soon - by many estimates - will account for at least a full half (and possibly more).
Now, do you think that Apple considers the iPod and the iTunes Music Store a cash cow? Hmmm... :rolleyes:
more...
macshark
Oct 23, 12:16 PM
If Microsoft makes it more difficult for Mac/Linux users to run virtual copies of Vista, maybe Vise will be developed faster than Wine...
Troll
Apr 27, 04:12 PM
Tuesday was yesterday. QUICK! Create a new thread saying that the new iMacs will be here NEXT TUESDAY!
more...
benhollberg
Apr 6, 10:28 AM
Has anybody bought any tickets off eBay?
ug.mac
Nov 3, 10:12 PM
Well. I have to say Bravo! VMWare!!!!
It use SOOOOOOO little amount of memory compare to Parallels (4xxMB vs 2.xxGB), so there is better system performance. I cannot wait to test it on my Macbook but the different on my Mac Pro was HUGE!!
It use SOOOOOOO little amount of memory compare to Parallels (4xxMB vs 2.xxGB), so there is better system performance. I cannot wait to test it on my Macbook but the different on my Mac Pro was HUGE!!
twoodcc
Oct 21, 08:34 AM
Someone claim the got 43 mins frame time on the biadv with a core i860 and Linux, same CPU as the higher end iMac. That is the same as my 3Ghz 8 core Mac Pro. You think it is possible?
i think it was overclocked to 3.8 ghz or did i read that somewhere else?
I was looking at that and the link just gives me a whole bunch of binary text crap. I'm not sure what to do with that.
really? i know i was able to download it somewhere. let me know if you can't find it and i can help later tonight when i get home from work
I think they were dreaming;) my i7 920 with ubuntu does normal frames in about 6 minutes, I think, I'm at work now so not absolutely sure but in that range. The mp is running normal frames at about 2 minutes.
2 minutes? dang that's fast. you really need to be running the bigadv units then.
Looks like 45 mins is more realistic. These chips seems as fast as i920, Impressive.
yeah, they should be about as fast, maybe even slightly faster. the main difference is the 920 is easier to overclock
I spent most of the night last night trying to get gpu2 running in wine on the i7 machine but ran into a problem and gave up. But I have found that the issue may not be with my set up, it may be the wu are bad so I will work on that again tonight to see what happens if I can get a different wu. Here is some info. (http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=82110)
I would love to add the points from my 2 gtx 960's especially since that is why I got them :D
let me know if you get it working. i might try it as well
here is a how too: http://moderngeek.com/node/81
This might help too: http://gpu2.twomurs.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
thanks for the links. i might give it a shot this weekend
i think it was overclocked to 3.8 ghz or did i read that somewhere else?
I was looking at that and the link just gives me a whole bunch of binary text crap. I'm not sure what to do with that.
really? i know i was able to download it somewhere. let me know if you can't find it and i can help later tonight when i get home from work
I think they were dreaming;) my i7 920 with ubuntu does normal frames in about 6 minutes, I think, I'm at work now so not absolutely sure but in that range. The mp is running normal frames at about 2 minutes.
2 minutes? dang that's fast. you really need to be running the bigadv units then.
Looks like 45 mins is more realistic. These chips seems as fast as i920, Impressive.
yeah, they should be about as fast, maybe even slightly faster. the main difference is the 920 is easier to overclock
I spent most of the night last night trying to get gpu2 running in wine on the i7 machine but ran into a problem and gave up. But I have found that the issue may not be with my set up, it may be the wu are bad so I will work on that again tonight to see what happens if I can get a different wu. Here is some info. (http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=82110)
I would love to add the points from my 2 gtx 960's especially since that is why I got them :D
let me know if you get it working. i might try it as well
here is a how too: http://moderngeek.com/node/81
This might help too: http://gpu2.twomurs.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
thanks for the links. i might give it a shot this weekend
DisMyMac
Apr 11, 01:41 PM
I just want a TB-USB 3 adapter. That's all
Steelers7510
Apr 15, 07:09 AM
For once BGR isn't just talking out of there arses.
johnntd
Apr 21, 10:56 PM
Even more entertaining is the fact that Apple is so arrogant they fail to realize how stupid they look.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
The only stupid thing Apple did was to not realize that other companies are copying their designs left and right. Samsung has always been the worst of all. They copy everything. It is in their nature to do so. Look at everything they make. It is all a copycat in one form or another.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
The only stupid thing Apple did was to not realize that other companies are copying their designs left and right. Samsung has always been the worst of all. They copy everything. It is in their nature to do so. Look at everything they make. It is all a copycat in one form or another.
Snowy_River
Jul 25, 11:05 AM
The 3G iPod did not have physical feedback, and they worked.
They most certainly did have physical feedback. You had to touch them to activate the buttons or drag your finger across the scroll wheel to use it. This would constitute a tactile feedback, even if there is no click. What people are questioning is the usability of an interface where you don't have any tactile feedback. I think that the answer is that there would have to be visual feedback to replace it, thus the further issue that you couldn't simply use this iPod in your pocket or use it very safely while driving. However, if we consider that this is meant to be the video / ebook iPod, where you'll be staring at the screen anyway, this is much less of an issue.
But the problem here is everyone is assuming that none-touch means you don't even touch the iPod. Did it occur to anyone that it means you don't have to touch the screen? This allows Apple to put a more durable transparent cover over the entire face of the iPod.
Think about it - a nice smooth seamless iPod face. When you put your finger over the display, the controls appear. Your finger touches the cover, but not the screen underneath. This allows for easy cleaning, and protection of the actual screen.
What you're describing is far less revolutionary, and wouldn't really constitute a none-touch interface. The current displays all have a durable, transparent cover over them, and they still get scratches and finger prints from handling. I think the reason that this interface idea is so exciting is that it offers the possibility of having a full screen for viewing without needing to worry about the act of touching the screen for controls making the screen dirty so you can't watch.
They most certainly did have physical feedback. You had to touch them to activate the buttons or drag your finger across the scroll wheel to use it. This would constitute a tactile feedback, even if there is no click. What people are questioning is the usability of an interface where you don't have any tactile feedback. I think that the answer is that there would have to be visual feedback to replace it, thus the further issue that you couldn't simply use this iPod in your pocket or use it very safely while driving. However, if we consider that this is meant to be the video / ebook iPod, where you'll be staring at the screen anyway, this is much less of an issue.
But the problem here is everyone is assuming that none-touch means you don't even touch the iPod. Did it occur to anyone that it means you don't have to touch the screen? This allows Apple to put a more durable transparent cover over the entire face of the iPod.
Think about it - a nice smooth seamless iPod face. When you put your finger over the display, the controls appear. Your finger touches the cover, but not the screen underneath. This allows for easy cleaning, and protection of the actual screen.
What you're describing is far less revolutionary, and wouldn't really constitute a none-touch interface. The current displays all have a durable, transparent cover over them, and they still get scratches and finger prints from handling. I think the reason that this interface idea is so exciting is that it offers the possibility of having a full screen for viewing without needing to worry about the act of touching the screen for controls making the screen dirty so you can't watch.
Small White Car
Apr 13, 01:58 PM
Not a single analyst has explained WHY this would be better for Apple than simply selling more Apple TVs. They just say it like it makes sense and expect us to believe them.
I'm sorry, but that's not good enough.
WHY would Apple want to take on shipments of large, expensive packages?
WHY would Apple want to limit their market for a new product to people who want an entirely new TV?
WHY do you think Apple cares more about what logo is on the back of the TV that by what software is showing up on the screen?
And WHY isn't the Apple TV good enough for the goal of getting the iOS and iTunes worlds into the living room?
I think the changes to the latest Apple TV is a sign of where Apple wants to be headed. The next Apple TV will be even smaller and come free when you buy a Mac, iPad, or iPhone. Wait and see! Just like giving e-mail away helps Google's ecosystem, so does getting Apple TVs into people's houses help Apple's ecosystem.
Selling some $2,000 TV doesn't help with that.
I'm sorry, but that's not good enough.
WHY would Apple want to take on shipments of large, expensive packages?
WHY would Apple want to limit their market for a new product to people who want an entirely new TV?
WHY do you think Apple cares more about what logo is on the back of the TV that by what software is showing up on the screen?
And WHY isn't the Apple TV good enough for the goal of getting the iOS and iTunes worlds into the living room?
I think the changes to the latest Apple TV is a sign of where Apple wants to be headed. The next Apple TV will be even smaller and come free when you buy a Mac, iPad, or iPhone. Wait and see! Just like giving e-mail away helps Google's ecosystem, so does getting Apple TVs into people's houses help Apple's ecosystem.
Selling some $2,000 TV doesn't help with that.
No comments:
Post a Comment