Gregg2
Apr 10, 08:34 PM
I've ... never tried any of the fancy auto shifting modern cars.D
The last car I sold had manual transmission, and the one it replaced did as well. I now have automatics, and later this year will be buying one with that "fancy" shifting. On the one I'm planning to get, it's called Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT). I test drove it and thought it was a novelty, but fun to do after having only conventional automatics for a few years now.
The last car I sold had manual transmission, and the one it replaced did as well. I now have automatics, and later this year will be buying one with that "fancy" shifting. On the one I'm planning to get, it's called Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT). I test drove it and thought it was a novelty, but fun to do after having only conventional automatics for a few years now.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 12:41 AM
Well, personally I would consider "loyalists" part of military assets. And I'm sure most generals do as well because that's the way they talk about killing soldiers. Thus inflicting "material" damage should include the people who operate the weapons via command.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
Machead III
Sep 7, 06:34 AM
I know they don't blow up 747s anymore, and the days of John Woo film sets with million dollar explosives going off in every scene being over (aside from the odd Speilberg or Scott production), but admittedly there are plenty of expensive CGI films out there.
It seems you can save a lot of money by avoiding a lot of pure CGI; films like Star Wars and King Kong that contain vast portions of CGI developed from scratch seem to cost a lot more than films like Sin City and A Scanner Darkly that are essentially live-action films that have been doctored in post-production.
Renaissance is the exception because although it's entirely from-scratch-CGI, the scenes are no where near as complex and detailed as King Kong etc.
It seems you can save a lot of money by avoiding a lot of pure CGI; films like Star Wars and King Kong that contain vast portions of CGI developed from scratch seem to cost a lot more than films like Sin City and A Scanner Darkly that are essentially live-action films that have been doctored in post-production.
Renaissance is the exception because although it's entirely from-scratch-CGI, the scenes are no where near as complex and detailed as King Kong etc.
mangis
Aug 24, 05:42 PM
It May Be Time For A Mac For My Entertainment Center
elrock
Sep 9, 07:02 PM
I am looking for a cheap, simple case with a clip to wear on my gym clothes when I am exercising. I'm not interested in an armband contraption. If you come across any such case/clip combos, please share. Thanks.
SockRolid
Jun 22, 07:50 PM
I just remembered why I stopped reading LoopRumors about 2 years ago. They flip-flopped between two states: 1) Weeks and weeks of "We'll have news real soon now" and 2) outrageous claims that were apparently totally made up as clickbait.
I guess things haven't changed over there. I might check again next year.
I guess things haven't changed over there. I might check again next year.
andiwm2003
Nov 15, 02:32 PM
So, that means that there's no practical reason Apple couldn't give an 8-core BTO option right away... Say, for around an additional $999? (The 3GHz quad-core model is an additional $799.) For those that need it, the extra $200 would be well worth it. For those that just want the bragging rights, well, I guess they can afford the $200.
let's see if there will be a cpu market. people buy quadcore chips to max out their 3.0 mac pros. then they sell their 3.0 chips to the owners of 2.0 mac pros. i wish there was a way to put the 2.0 xeons into mac mini's;)
let's see if there will be a cpu market. people buy quadcore chips to max out their 3.0 mac pros. then they sell their 3.0 chips to the owners of 2.0 mac pros. i wish there was a way to put the 2.0 xeons into mac mini's;)
ecflagcorp
Jun 23, 12:21 PM
I can see many benefits to develop from this. Maybe not on an iMac, but a larger iPad with iMac or Mac Pro power from a designing stand point.
Yes, keep the use of a mouse and/or keyboard for the comfort side of things. But when it comes to intricate design, a mouse is just a pain to use. A Wacom tablet has been around a while and some still use it, but you're pretty much drawing blind folded. If you could use a type of stylus or a finger and draw/edit directly on the screen that would make detail work sooooo much easier and faster.
I think this is a good direction. Who says the iMac will still be a desktop monitor/computer? It could be like the iPad maybe with a popout easel for use as a freestanding monitor (maybe not as cheesy as that, but you get the picture), while still keeping your "all in one" desktop component.
Yes, keep the use of a mouse and/or keyboard for the comfort side of things. But when it comes to intricate design, a mouse is just a pain to use. A Wacom tablet has been around a while and some still use it, but you're pretty much drawing blind folded. If you could use a type of stylus or a finger and draw/edit directly on the screen that would make detail work sooooo much easier and faster.
I think this is a good direction. Who says the iMac will still be a desktop monitor/computer? It could be like the iPad maybe with a popout easel for use as a freestanding monitor (maybe not as cheesy as that, but you get the picture), while still keeping your "all in one" desktop component.
wordoflife
Nov 25, 06:30 PM
Yeah, I know, They are very expensive sunglasses that I don't feel comfortable just "tossing into a gym bag or suitcase."
It feels awesome to have every god damn person here giving you crap about your last purchase.
What if I gave everyone who purchases McDonalds a "fat@$$" or anyone with a nice car a "rich snob."
Gosh, Is everyone here so desensitized towards expensive things, That if they break them they just don't care?
I bought a protective case to put something I invested a lot of money in, And IF anyone cared to read my replies to your jerky comments, I explained that I plan on putting a SECOND pair of glasses in the case, Which would cost 400-500 dollars, Which is a great amount of money to me, So I don't want to break them.
I find it repulsing that so many people on here find my latest purchase SO DISTURBING and bothering to them that they feel they need to make me feel bad about it.
Happy Thanksgiving. Jerk.
I'm not going to give you **** for your last purchase, but wouldn't one of these do the job?
http://www.best4glasses.co.uk/images/products/free_case_a.jpg
Anyways, I don't really care. Btw, why do you center your posts?
_________________________________________________________________
My last purchase was renting Karate Kid in HD for $4.99. Loved it.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/20/Karate_kid_2010.jpg
It feels awesome to have every god damn person here giving you crap about your last purchase.
What if I gave everyone who purchases McDonalds a "fat@$$" or anyone with a nice car a "rich snob."
Gosh, Is everyone here so desensitized towards expensive things, That if they break them they just don't care?
I bought a protective case to put something I invested a lot of money in, And IF anyone cared to read my replies to your jerky comments, I explained that I plan on putting a SECOND pair of glasses in the case, Which would cost 400-500 dollars, Which is a great amount of money to me, So I don't want to break them.
I find it repulsing that so many people on here find my latest purchase SO DISTURBING and bothering to them that they feel they need to make me feel bad about it.
Happy Thanksgiving. Jerk.
I'm not going to give you **** for your last purchase, but wouldn't one of these do the job?
http://www.best4glasses.co.uk/images/products/free_case_a.jpg
Anyways, I don't really care. Btw, why do you center your posts?
_________________________________________________________________
My last purchase was renting Karate Kid in HD for $4.99. Loved it.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/20/Karate_kid_2010.jpg
paddy
Aug 24, 07:07 PM
Obviously???
the Mac Pro is one thing, but you wont see dual optical drives in an iMac much less a Mini, there's no point 4 the standard consumer market.
I gather that he was joking because of that smiley at the end of the post.
the Mac Pro is one thing, but you wont see dual optical drives in an iMac much less a Mini, there's no point 4 the standard consumer market.
I gather that he was joking because of that smiley at the end of the post.
WeegieMac
Apr 2, 02:39 AM
As far as I know, Snow Leopard "fixed" what Leopard started. Mac OS X Lion is a completely new OS with new features, most of which are not present in Snow Leopard.
See, I would have to disagree with that.
All of the framework, the underlaying core system changes, were done in Leopard and then refined in Snow Leopard.
All Lion is adding, from what I've seen, is interface changes and some new features that, lets be honest, not every user is going to bother with. Sure, Launchpad looks nice, even in it's frame rate lacking beta form, and Mission Control is a new take on Expose, but other than that it's iOS inspired UI changes, a new version of Safari, and some application interface changes (Mail & iCal come to mind).
I don't think Lion will be a �29/$29 upgrade, but I think given that it'll launch on the Mac App Store, it will follow the example of iLife and Aperture and be cheaper to purchase online than it is off the shelf in a box.
See, I would have to disagree with that.
All of the framework, the underlaying core system changes, were done in Leopard and then refined in Snow Leopard.
All Lion is adding, from what I've seen, is interface changes and some new features that, lets be honest, not every user is going to bother with. Sure, Launchpad looks nice, even in it's frame rate lacking beta form, and Mission Control is a new take on Expose, but other than that it's iOS inspired UI changes, a new version of Safari, and some application interface changes (Mail & iCal come to mind).
I don't think Lion will be a �29/$29 upgrade, but I think given that it'll launch on the Mac App Store, it will follow the example of iLife and Aperture and be cheaper to purchase online than it is off the shelf in a box.
Chris Bangle
Aug 16, 07:45 AM
Its going to be extremly tough to decide between a wii and a fullscreen ipod. I really want a wii.
tny
Aug 7, 08:11 AM
Let me steer this off topic real quick. I have read before that Apple has two OS teams so "in theory" Leopard would, in fact, be Panther 2.0 and 10.7 would be Tiger 2.0. Again, in theory� Can someone clear that up?
Nope. Here's how it works, usually (not saying this is what Apple does, but nearly everyone else does this, so ...). You've got one master codebase, called the "trunk." Everyone works with that. When it's time to start working toward a release candidate, you copy off the code base and create what's called a "branch."
Changes to the trunk are rarely back-ported to the branch (it usually depends upon whether they are bug fixes or new features; bug fixes, often are back-ported if they aren't risky; new features almost never); any changes to the branch which are relevent to the trunk *are* ported to the trunk (since most of them are bug fixes, and the rest are probably new features whose loss might be noticed in the next release).
The branch keeps being used by one team that is working on, let's say, Tiger, right up through the release and during maintenance (10.4.1, 10.4.2, 10.4.3, etc. are all from the branch, not from the trunk), while another team keeps working on the trunk until the time they branch (10.5 Alpha) the next release (let's say Leopard). When the newer branch hits release, one of two things happen: either the team that did the development on the new branch continues doing maintenance (10.5.1, 10.5.2, 10.5.3), or the group that was doing maintenance on the earlier release does maintenance on the new branch and the folks who designed the new branch go back to work on the trunk until it's time to branch again (10.6, let's call it Lion). Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages.
I'm guess this it what is meant by "Apple has two teams working on OS X." Two teams, but only one code base trunk. And thus 10.4 is derived from 10.3, not 10.2.
Nope. Here's how it works, usually (not saying this is what Apple does, but nearly everyone else does this, so ...). You've got one master codebase, called the "trunk." Everyone works with that. When it's time to start working toward a release candidate, you copy off the code base and create what's called a "branch."
Changes to the trunk are rarely back-ported to the branch (it usually depends upon whether they are bug fixes or new features; bug fixes, often are back-ported if they aren't risky; new features almost never); any changes to the branch which are relevent to the trunk *are* ported to the trunk (since most of them are bug fixes, and the rest are probably new features whose loss might be noticed in the next release).
The branch keeps being used by one team that is working on, let's say, Tiger, right up through the release and during maintenance (10.4.1, 10.4.2, 10.4.3, etc. are all from the branch, not from the trunk), while another team keeps working on the trunk until the time they branch (10.5 Alpha) the next release (let's say Leopard). When the newer branch hits release, one of two things happen: either the team that did the development on the new branch continues doing maintenance (10.5.1, 10.5.2, 10.5.3), or the group that was doing maintenance on the earlier release does maintenance on the new branch and the folks who designed the new branch go back to work on the trunk until it's time to branch again (10.6, let's call it Lion). Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages.
I'm guess this it what is meant by "Apple has two teams working on OS X." Two teams, but only one code base trunk. And thus 10.4 is derived from 10.3, not 10.2.
twoodcc
Aug 26, 12:04 AM
...also known as The New Form-Factor Conroe Mini-Tower/Pizza-Box!
The problem with the all-in-one form factor of the iMacIntel is that when the LCD dies - you have a good computer that you can't use. And if the computer dies - you have a good screen that you can't use.
Or, more likely, when the computer is obsolete you have a good screen that you can't use.
Apple needs something between the horribly constrained MiniMac, and the preposterously huge ProMac.
A Conroe (64-bit, single-socket, dual-core) system would fit the bill.... When will The Steve see the light?
i agree.....when will they start listening to you?
The problem with the all-in-one form factor of the iMacIntel is that when the LCD dies - you have a good computer that you can't use. And if the computer dies - you have a good screen that you can't use.
Or, more likely, when the computer is obsolete you have a good screen that you can't use.
Apple needs something between the horribly constrained MiniMac, and the preposterously huge ProMac.
A Conroe (64-bit, single-socket, dual-core) system would fit the bill.... When will The Steve see the light?
i agree.....when will they start listening to you?
PeterQVenkman
Mar 25, 04:13 PM
That's bad ass!
Cygnus311
Sep 7, 10:17 AM
Low priced rentals only for me please. Not paying the same price for a movie as I can get the DVD for in stores, not to mention it needs to be playable on people's big HDTV's (which I'm sure they're aware of).
jav6454
Mar 24, 01:30 PM
Mac Pro's have big power supplies but thats mainly for the CPU and Ram, adding a 6970 would be pushing its limits, especially for gaming.
Getting a Mac Pro for gaming is such a waste of cash. The only real benefit of the Mac Pro is the dual CPU nature. However, games now a days are not CPU bounded, but rather GPU bounded. Another nail on the coffin for Mac Pro gaming.
Getting a Mac Pro for gaming is such a waste of cash. The only real benefit of the Mac Pro is the dual CPU nature. However, games now a days are not CPU bounded, but rather GPU bounded. Another nail on the coffin for Mac Pro gaming.
CRAZYBUBBA
Jan 11, 07:59 PM
added a line to the article...
"- It will be called the MacBook Air"
arn
worst-name-ever. i hope that it's anything but "macbook air"
"- It will be called the MacBook Air"
arn
worst-name-ever. i hope that it's anything but "macbook air"
Unorthodox
Aug 6, 08:59 PM
100,00 users!
Yikes! I wonder how many this year....
I bet it's 500,000+
Arn has a LOT of bandwidth.
I bet he could walk thorough his internet connection without bumping his head.
March a whole army thorough there. Three abreast.
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
Yikes! I wonder how many this year....
I bet it's 500,000+
Arn has a LOT of bandwidth.
I bet he could walk thorough his internet connection without bumping his head.
March a whole army thorough there. Three abreast.
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
brooklyn360
Sep 13, 12:08 AM
has anyone tried the sonix case from amazon.
Ipod Touch 4g Case Sonix - Amazon 24.95 colors: pink, grey, black, blue (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0041LPGT4?tag=12thstfootpoo-20&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=B0041LPGT4&adid=0WZMM00GVVA182713N67&)
Ipod Touch 4g Case Sonix - Amazon 24.95 colors: pink, grey, black, blue (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0041LPGT4?tag=12thstfootpoo-20&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=B0041LPGT4&adid=0WZMM00GVVA182713N67&)
gikku
Jan 2, 05:25 AM
Leopard for G3s, please.
An iMac with an adjustable screen height, with dual C2D chips.
A Macbook with a proper keys on the board.
A new low end range of desktops and notebooks with a core solo chip, for volume sales.
Mac Mini C2D 2.33Ghz
An iMac with an adjustable screen height, with dual C2D chips.
A Macbook with a proper keys on the board.
A new low end range of desktops and notebooks with a core solo chip, for volume sales.
Mac Mini C2D 2.33Ghz
skunk
Mar 19, 02:56 PM
yet again it goes back to who has AWACS which yet again is the US.The French and British also have AWACS capabilities.
appleguy123
Mar 20, 06:26 PM
Maybe Apple should ban all religious apps.
In a way, religion is very like homeopathy, since it pretends that something non-existant has the ability to cure/help/heal etc.
Like homeopathy, religion can encourage one to do nothing of value ('let's pray for Japan', 'let's try to cure cancer with just water') rather than something physical which actually has an effect. It could be construed as being dangerous and damaging in that sense.
Imagine if Apple actually banned all religious apps. I bet that they would lose a substantial amount of sales. I know people at my church (when I was still religious) who would buy iOS stuff just for using bible apps.
In a way, religion is very like homeopathy, since it pretends that something non-existant has the ability to cure/help/heal etc.
Like homeopathy, religion can encourage one to do nothing of value ('let's pray for Japan', 'let's try to cure cancer with just water') rather than something physical which actually has an effect. It could be construed as being dangerous and damaging in that sense.
Imagine if Apple actually banned all religious apps. I bet that they would lose a substantial amount of sales. I know people at my church (when I was still religious) who would buy iOS stuff just for using bible apps.
MarkMS
Mar 30, 09:17 PM
Don't know about you guys, but this new iCal is killing me. Just doesn't look right. :confused:
No comments:
Post a Comment