Ricard
Aug 23, 05:43 PM
Apple needs to sell 334,448.160535117 iPods to get the "investment" money back...
ten-oak-druid
Apr 4, 12:45 PM
And that is precisely why people who have concealed weapon permits are trained in the legal ramifications of carrying a firearm in the public arena. We don't carry firearms to "save the day". We carry firearms to save our lives. Legally, I cannot get involved in a shooting that doesn't directly involve me.. I have no idea what is going on and could just as easily be shooting an undercover cop as a miscreant.
I'm not a gun control advocate. I own a gun. But I laugh at the absurd notion of being a hero when threatened. These glorified stories of what would have happened in situation X if someone had had a gun are laughable. It doesn't work like that.
Happens about 2,000,000 times a year. Check the FBI stats if you don't believe me. You don't hear much about that because (A) our media doesn't like to report "good" shootings, and (B) about 97% of the time no shooting is required, as the criminal gets the idea quick and stops threatening innocents in a hurry.
And most of the time when you hear that in situation X, if only someone had a had a gun...
When that right to life guy walked into the church and shot up the congregation, people said if the church goers had carried guns for instance. No way. He opened fire without warning.
Or take the incident in Tucson with the congress woman. No one would have stopped that with a gun either. It doesn't work like that. Yes you may stop a crime but it is usually a criminal who never intends to actually kill. If someone intends to kill or doesn't care about killing, then forget it.
I'm not a gun control advocate. I own a gun. But I laugh at the absurd notion of being a hero when threatened. These glorified stories of what would have happened in situation X if someone had had a gun are laughable. It doesn't work like that.
Happens about 2,000,000 times a year. Check the FBI stats if you don't believe me. You don't hear much about that because (A) our media doesn't like to report "good" shootings, and (B) about 97% of the time no shooting is required, as the criminal gets the idea quick and stops threatening innocents in a hurry.
And most of the time when you hear that in situation X, if only someone had a had a gun...
When that right to life guy walked into the church and shot up the congregation, people said if the church goers had carried guns for instance. No way. He opened fire without warning.
Or take the incident in Tucson with the congress woman. No one would have stopped that with a gun either. It doesn't work like that. Yes you may stop a crime but it is usually a criminal who never intends to actually kill. If someone intends to kill or doesn't care about killing, then forget it.
Tonewheel
Apr 4, 12:51 PM
Unless that guard's life was in danger, there was no reason to shoot anyone, especially in the head. The placement of that shot was no accident.
That being said, I'm sure there are a lot of facts we don't know. Innocent until proven guilty, of course.
Your last paragraph is the only one you should have posted.
40 shots were reported to have been exchanged. FORTY. I'd say lives were most definitely in danger, and a trained law enforcement officer is not taught "shoot to hurt." You take down your target and end the ordeal.
That being said, I'm sure there are a lot of facts we don't know. Innocent until proven guilty, of course.
Your last paragraph is the only one you should have posted.
40 shots were reported to have been exchanged. FORTY. I'd say lives were most definitely in danger, and a trained law enforcement officer is not taught "shoot to hurt." You take down your target and end the ordeal.
Jesus
Aug 28, 12:08 PM
I dream of a new macbook pro enclosure...
Chundles
Sep 5, 02:05 PM
Good move but I bet its riddled with DRM:mad:
It would have to be otherwise the studios won't agree to it.
It would have to be otherwise the studios won't agree to it.
Eriamjh1138@DAN
Apr 19, 07:48 PM
This is just another pissing contest to result in a settlement and some bizarre technology sharing or nothing in particular.
It's posturing.
It's posturing.
!� V �!
Apr 30, 06:39 PM
Except for the fact you missed the golden age of computing. ;) Telix and a 2400 baud modem was a far superior experience to this Internet crap. Long live Codepage 437 graphics. With only 16 colors to choose from, no one needed a calibrated monitor :
http://www.penguinpetes.com/images/BBS_art/ANSI/Dust_n_Bones.jpg
That was my computer screen. I used to own an Atari and had a Sony Trinitron for a gaming display. Though for some reason I still feel privileged. :D
http://www.penguinpetes.com/images/BBS_art/ANSI/Dust_n_Bones.jpg
That was my computer screen. I used to own an Atari and had a Sony Trinitron for a gaming display. Though for some reason I still feel privileged. :D
roadbloc
Apr 4, 04:26 PM
Thanks, McAfee,
Ever since I got my first mac in you and other antivirus vendors have been reminding me, every six months or so, that OS X is facing an imminent security meltdown.
Though this is yet to happen, it's always enough to remind me to make sure I've got the latest version of the excellent and free ClamXav, and that I have a good working backup of my machine, which is made possible by many other wonderful free tools.
Though I'll never buy your software, you provide a great service to me.
Thanks, Ed
ClamXav only detects Windows viruses.
Ever since I got my first mac in you and other antivirus vendors have been reminding me, every six months or so, that OS X is facing an imminent security meltdown.
Though this is yet to happen, it's always enough to remind me to make sure I've got the latest version of the excellent and free ClamXav, and that I have a good working backup of my machine, which is made possible by many other wonderful free tools.
Though I'll never buy your software, you provide a great service to me.
Thanks, Ed
ClamXav only detects Windows viruses.
WildGuess
Apr 20, 10:03 AM
This is great for my alcoholic blackouts. Fire up the program and find out where I've been. Although on my last trip to San Diego it put me across the border and into a Tijuana cat house.
EagerDragon
Sep 4, 08:16 PM
If you're like me, you don't have your Mac right next to your TV. Not only would I have to string a DVI/HDMI cable aaaall the way across the room, I would also have to get an equally long digital audio cable. Probably end up costing about the same as a video AirPort Express (if they keep the prices the same) but with the added hassle of getting those cables across the room.
This would be a lot less expensive than buying a Mac mini, especially if you already have a powerful desktop just waiting to play some HD videos...
I see your point but I do not yet see HD over 802.11g. Maybe with some new codex and some decoding on the device, but I still don't think so. Come on Apple make a believer out of me.
This would be a lot less expensive than buying a Mac mini, especially if you already have a powerful desktop just waiting to play some HD videos...
I see your point but I do not yet see HD over 802.11g. Maybe with some new codex and some decoding on the device, but I still don't think so. Come on Apple make a believer out of me.
jasper77
Sep 5, 05:50 PM
NOW you're on to something.Let's expand on that ;)
Where is the video out from the airport going to go ? The TV of course!
Now..
Why not just make a Mini type box with 802.11n with DVI/HDMI/S-Video and Digital/Analog out ports.Connect that to the tv then stream from your computer or the movie store.While we're at it toss a hefty HD in the mini for recording.
It's much more convenient too.Just sit on the couch and surf Front Row for movies then buy it and send it to the tv.POW! one step..
Apple IS about ease of use..
ease of use à la apple = buy/download a movie in the itunes movie store and stream it via airport av from your mac to a tv. or take a subscription to a tv show (like Lost or Prison Break) and let iTunes automatically download each new episode (via RSS) to your hard drive and than stream it to your tv whenever you want.
I don't think recording is the future.
Where is the video out from the airport going to go ? The TV of course!
Now..
Why not just make a Mini type box with 802.11n with DVI/HDMI/S-Video and Digital/Analog out ports.Connect that to the tv then stream from your computer or the movie store.While we're at it toss a hefty HD in the mini for recording.
It's much more convenient too.Just sit on the couch and surf Front Row for movies then buy it and send it to the tv.POW! one step..
Apple IS about ease of use..
ease of use à la apple = buy/download a movie in the itunes movie store and stream it via airport av from your mac to a tv. or take a subscription to a tv show (like Lost or Prison Break) and let iTunes automatically download each new episode (via RSS) to your hard drive and than stream it to your tv whenever you want.
I don't think recording is the future.
Eraserhead
Apr 11, 03:22 AM
55 miles to the gallon isn't even abnormal, a lot of standard hatchbacks/small family cars do that and more.
55 miles per US gallon ;). Thats 70 miles per imperial gallon as US gallons are smaller.
55 miles per US gallon ;). Thats 70 miles per imperial gallon as US gallons are smaller.
whateverandever
Mar 23, 05:21 PM
People who speed and drive under the influence make me sick. Pull the apps. And when you catch the scum, throw them in jail and take away their licence. The don't deserve to walk among us.
So... you're calling everyone who's ever gone over the speed limit scum that is worth of jail? Chances are good you'd fall into that category as well, even if you only accidentally went 1mph over the speed limit -- breaking the law is breaking the law.
So... you're calling everyone who's ever gone over the speed limit scum that is worth of jail? Chances are good you'd fall into that category as well, even if you only accidentally went 1mph over the speed limit -- breaking the law is breaking the law.
Pravius
Apr 22, 08:02 AM
I take it, you do not see this ahead?
A world without Books, CD's or DVD's for sale in charity shops to help fund services in need.
Well maybe we can save a few trees with this idea? Our rainforests are disappearing at alarming rates, so if I have to sacrifice not having a book in my hands for this and have a eBook instead. So be it.
A world there you cannot give a CD, DVD, Book etc that you no longer want to a family friend as a gift.
You can still gift ebooks and music.
A world where you cannot sell on a Book, CD, DVD, Game to get a little bit of money back, perhaps to buy a new thing you want.
Be the first one to be innovative and come up with an online marketplace where it is legal to sell, buy, and trade electronic digital files. Bet this would make you some money, you can thank me later.
This to me seems where the industry wants to take us.
Everything is purchased by the individual, can only be used by the individual and locked totally to them, so it can never be passed on, given away, or sold by yourself to anyone else.
Can no one else see this is where it COULD go if we all just "go along with it"
This is a good thing in my opinion, better for the environment, and technology is taking us in directions that we not have been able to imagine years ago.
A world without Books, CD's or DVD's for sale in charity shops to help fund services in need.
Well maybe we can save a few trees with this idea? Our rainforests are disappearing at alarming rates, so if I have to sacrifice not having a book in my hands for this and have a eBook instead. So be it.
A world there you cannot give a CD, DVD, Book etc that you no longer want to a family friend as a gift.
You can still gift ebooks and music.
A world where you cannot sell on a Book, CD, DVD, Game to get a little bit of money back, perhaps to buy a new thing you want.
Be the first one to be innovative and come up with an online marketplace where it is legal to sell, buy, and trade electronic digital files. Bet this would make you some money, you can thank me later.
This to me seems where the industry wants to take us.
Everything is purchased by the individual, can only be used by the individual and locked totally to them, so it can never be passed on, given away, or sold by yourself to anyone else.
Can no one else see this is where it COULD go if we all just "go along with it"
This is a good thing in my opinion, better for the environment, and technology is taking us in directions that we not have been able to imagine years ago.
Putzi360
Apr 22, 12:25 PM
For me I just need the backlit keyboard reintroduced into the Air.
Then my wife would get my MBp13 instantly.
Then my wife would get my MBp13 instantly.
cozmot
Mar 18, 12:00 AM
The Safari exploit launched a Mac OSX program. How is that NOT an "OS" issue? The exploit could have just as easily told the Mac to delete a directory on the hard drive, for instance. So it's not just Safari that's an issue but the fact that OSX would let Safari execute a program outside the browser.
I'd like to know where this idea that "many have tried" to create viruses and/or malware for OSX comes from. How do you know what people have done or tried? I'm not saying Unix is easy to exploit, but I know darn well it's not invulnerable. If they held an OS hacking event with a prize, I'm sure someone would prove my point for me.
And this idea that nothing can be done on the Mac until a virus or other malware exploit shows up on a news site is absurd. There are plenty of tools out there, for instance, to point out dangerous web sites that could be a threat to a computer. Most OSX users wouldn't bother to install one if one was offered to them because they believe themselves invulnerable. So why worry about visiting a malware site? Some exploits are potentially cross-platform (adobe flash, for example). Again, I say most OSX users are far too comfortable in a foolish belief that they are not in danger from anything out there.
Before I could even get to this, cwt1nospam and GGJstudios jumped on it. I'll add that a Safari exploit just can't take over an OS X system. It can do some minor things, but doesn't give admin or root access to the OS.
You nervous Windows users -- and you have every right to be -- are used to exploits commandeering your computers. It's your every day reality. For Mac users, it doesn't happen. Never has. But to characterize us as engaging in "foolish belief" that we're not in danger out there is a false argument.
Rather than go through the laborious repeat of my earlier post to you, please re-read it. Mac users don't deny the dangers. Unlike Windows users we're just not lulled into installing expensive, beastly software that drags our systems down that gives us a false sense of security that we're safe and protected. Most exploits come from unsafe computing, including the incomplete list I assembled above. Mac users don't take this dope, and have clearer minds about the proper steps to protect their systems.
I have multiple lines of defense built up against attackers using malware, viruses, worms, Trojan Horses and the like. It starts with the firewall in my wireless router, OpenDNS, safe practices and other methods I've learned from Mac and other forums.
I have never experienced a hack, a virus, a worm, a Trojan Horse or any other exploit in over 20 years because of this. And in the next 20 I will not either, because I'll keep learning and building up my defenses, without wasting a dollar on beastly software that gives me a false sense of security and relieves me of my responsibility for safe computing.
I'd like to know where this idea that "many have tried" to create viruses and/or malware for OSX comes from. How do you know what people have done or tried? I'm not saying Unix is easy to exploit, but I know darn well it's not invulnerable. If they held an OS hacking event with a prize, I'm sure someone would prove my point for me.
And this idea that nothing can be done on the Mac until a virus or other malware exploit shows up on a news site is absurd. There are plenty of tools out there, for instance, to point out dangerous web sites that could be a threat to a computer. Most OSX users wouldn't bother to install one if one was offered to them because they believe themselves invulnerable. So why worry about visiting a malware site? Some exploits are potentially cross-platform (adobe flash, for example). Again, I say most OSX users are far too comfortable in a foolish belief that they are not in danger from anything out there.
Before I could even get to this, cwt1nospam and GGJstudios jumped on it. I'll add that a Safari exploit just can't take over an OS X system. It can do some minor things, but doesn't give admin or root access to the OS.
You nervous Windows users -- and you have every right to be -- are used to exploits commandeering your computers. It's your every day reality. For Mac users, it doesn't happen. Never has. But to characterize us as engaging in "foolish belief" that we're not in danger out there is a false argument.
Rather than go through the laborious repeat of my earlier post to you, please re-read it. Mac users don't deny the dangers. Unlike Windows users we're just not lulled into installing expensive, beastly software that drags our systems down that gives us a false sense of security that we're safe and protected. Most exploits come from unsafe computing, including the incomplete list I assembled above. Mac users don't take this dope, and have clearer minds about the proper steps to protect their systems.
I have multiple lines of defense built up against attackers using malware, viruses, worms, Trojan Horses and the like. It starts with the firewall in my wireless router, OpenDNS, safe practices and other methods I've learned from Mac and other forums.
I have never experienced a hack, a virus, a worm, a Trojan Horse or any other exploit in over 20 years because of this. And in the next 20 I will not either, because I'll keep learning and building up my defenses, without wasting a dollar on beastly software that gives me a false sense of security and relieves me of my responsibility for safe computing.
z4n3
Apr 20, 10:56 AM
I do not seem to have this file! :D
guess there are some users that are safe....
guess there are some users that are safe....
LagunaSol
Apr 29, 01:21 PM
x-box wasn't a money loser for that long.
My bet is Xbox has yet to pay back the years of big losses.
My bet is Xbox has yet to pay back the years of big losses.
MacRumors
Apr 22, 11:17 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/production-of-new-thunderbolt-equipped-macbook-airs-set-for-next-month/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/22/121513-macbook_air_2010_13in_side.jpg
Reacent Post
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/22/121513-macbook_air_2010_13in_side.jpg
Micjose
Mar 22, 01:16 PM
Finally some Mac rumors.. :D
scu
Oct 27, 10:17 AM
I'm a Green Peace supporter, but with Bush in the Whitehouse, don't they have bigger fish to fry?
I agree. Apple is in the spotlight a great deal so they are using this as a method to market themselves.
I agree. Apple is in the spotlight a great deal so they are using this as a method to market themselves.
Forensic111
Apr 4, 12:44 PM
The author wrote this was a hold-up, but he did not mention "Who" was held up. All he said was a security guard caught the suspects smashing the windows of the store. This is not a hold-up, it's a burglary. No store employee was involved. Also the author did not say say the suspect/s fired at the security guard. If they did, then the security had the right to defend himself, if it was just a burglary and the suspect/s did not fire on the guard, then he had no right to use deadly force. The author also stated it was a "Head-Shot", apparently the author has never had a gun pointed at him, nor been in a fire fight. The fact that the suspect was shot in the head is a tough shot to make at a moving target. The author just wrote it that way to attract attention to his story. He should find out the facts and use the proper terms and don't elaborate. If the guard was a retired or off duty police office, he would have aimed for the X-10 ring...not the head.
auxplage
Sep 26, 07:20 AM
I may have to break down and buy my first cell phone. I feel so out of place being 18 and in college without a cell phone. Well, at least when I do get the "iPhone" I can be "cool" for three months? :o :rolleyes: :)
djrobsd
Apr 11, 03:29 PM
AMAZING!!!!!!
I'm very excited to see this come to XBMC. Cannot wait!
I'm confused... What will this give us in XBMC that we don't already have? Since I'm assuming you're running XBMC on Apple TV2, Airplay already works just fine...
From my iTunes library on my PC I can stream to my Apple TV2 in the bedroom, or to my Airport Express in the living room. From my iPhone, I can stream almost any app (Napster, Pandora, Netflix, etc) to either my AppleTV2 or the living room Airport express (audio only).
So, I'm confused what additional capability this is going to give those of us who have already invested in an Apple ecosystem.
I'm very excited to see this come to XBMC. Cannot wait!
I'm confused... What will this give us in XBMC that we don't already have? Since I'm assuming you're running XBMC on Apple TV2, Airplay already works just fine...
From my iTunes library on my PC I can stream to my Apple TV2 in the bedroom, or to my Airport Express in the living room. From my iPhone, I can stream almost any app (Napster, Pandora, Netflix, etc) to either my AppleTV2 or the living room Airport express (audio only).
So, I'm confused what additional capability this is going to give those of us who have already invested in an Apple ecosystem.
0 comments:
Post a Comment