This is not quite correct. While they do not have an Al Queda connection, Iraq does have other terrorist factions they support and whom support Iraq.
Of course, but I was just pointing out the misconceptions in the previous statement. It was first war on drugs, then war on terrorism, now war on Iraq. While some on the themes exist, the enemies are constantly changing. The general American public though, fails to understand that and simplifies it. The terrorists that Bush was so adamantly after have nothing to do with Iraq.
It is actually Americas obligation, dating back pre-gulf war to enforce the UN resolutions on Iraq. This has been going on for over a decade now, and I think America is mostly just fed up with having to keep this Iraq situation in their minds and want to end it now.
Granted, but then you fall into a catch-22. American says it must stop Iraq because it was given that responsibilty by the UN, but the UN so far has been against invading Iraq. You can't use the former without accepting the latter.
In 1996 against Kurdish forces, for instance. Of course 26,000 Iraqi soldiers defected and fought for the opposition.
If that were a reason for attack in 1996, sure. But it wasn't then and isn't now.
Terrorism costs money, the people supporting it are not necessarily the oil tychoons of Saudi, but they feed off of those oil tychoons.
Damn straight they do. But attacking Iraq won't stop any of it (going back to my original post).
Hell, I'm not even against this war on Iraq. I was just correcting some points by that previous poster. My stance is basically; USA shouldn't go it alone. They should wait for the UN to acknowledge the problem and decide what to do then. The UN should get off there asses and wake up. Things need to change in every respect. And just so you know I'm a "liberal" Canadian that thinks Bush is way out of his league, but your not going to see me cheering on any other side than that of America's in this war.
Don't forget Photoshop. When I'm applying a filter to a 400MB file I'll switch over to Safari to surf the web for a few minutes (I'm using an ancient G4 450) and the progress bar for that filter appears on the Photoshop icon in the dock, so instead of switching between apps, I can see how far the progress has gone and when it is done.
What about terrorism, banned weapons and genocide to name a few other reasons?
Iraq has nothing to do with the terrorists. The same group that flies planes into buildings and blows up clubs in Bali dislike Iraq just as much.
Of course CNN won't tell you this because you're being lead to believe that everyone who "lives with camels" are ready to die just to show America up. Please.
As for the weapons, that is the U.N.'s concern, not America. Its bad enough that it was Reagan who sold a majority of those weapons to Iraq.
The genocide is also a foolish comment, considering that type of thing hasn't occured since the last time USA was over there in 1991.
And just so you know the "SUVs funding terrorism" has nothing to do with Iraq and everything to do with Saudi Arabia. The majority of terrorist who are an actual threat to the god ol' USA are middle-class to wealthy Saudies who are mad at America for a number of reasons, starting with the American assistance to keep the monarchy in power instead of a democratic government.
Only if you ignore the real specs. I suggest reading my other post on the thread - the two are very comparable, but the Dell is about 20% less expensive.
Hey, I'm not trying to argue specs for specs (I've given up that long ago). I was just pointing out that the largest PC manufacturer is still trying to catch up with Apple (in terms of design).
I had to give up my ThinkPad a little while ago, and would love a lighter version of this laptop. I don't think I'll ever toss down the 5 grand for a TiBook, so the only thing holding me back on this laptop is weight and battery life.
Are you seriously trying to say that more pixels will make a laptop heavier?
I think the original poster is trying to say that since Apple can make a 17" laptop light, Dell should be able to make their 15.2" one lighter (especially without a optical drive).
Dell, the leader in PC market share can't make a laptop as well designed as Apple's, thats the point.
When I was in 6th grade (1991) a new school opened up a couple blocks from my house. It was heralded as a new era of education, and with a special deal from Apple, there was basically a computer for every student.
I continued going to my original school, but many other students transfered to this new one. They were taught how to make multimedia CDs with Hypercard along with other "new" things to do with computers. I thought it would have been the greatest school to attend.
Well, 12 years have passed and with a little foresight I have been able to form an opinion on this kind of news. While they had more fun in school, and I'm sure for those first few years attendance was up, they still received the same education I did. Those students that transfered attended the same high-school as I did and had no apparent advantage over the other students. Now that "new era of education" school is severely out of date. Attendance and enthusiasm is basically the same as any other school in the area.
So what I'm saying is that for the first few years this program will seem cool to a lot of people, but in the long run it is pointless.
From other reports on the net, it sounds like the files will be AAC.
From the LA Times:
Sources said Apple will make the songs available for sale through a new version of iTunes, its software for managing music files on Macs. Users will be able to buy and download songs with a single click and transfer them automatically to any iPod they've registered with Apple....Rather than make the songs available in the popular MP3 format, Apple plans to use a higher fidelity technology known as Advanced Audio Codec.
See, your problem is that you're thinking. And not good "I have to think up a great Soviet Russia joke about this" or the ever classic "Beowulf cluster" joke thinking, but really thinking thinking.
I take it you have never owned an upgraded Macintosh. Almost every PowerMac can be upgraded to at least a G3 (but most can go up to a G4) without changing the motherboard.
Heh, and people say that Macs can't be upgraded. Sheesh.
give everyone a Mac to play with for a week, then take it away.
It funny you mentioned that because when my Dad was looking an a new computer he first went to a store that sold PCs and he wasn't very impressed with what they had to offer.
He then headed over to an authorized Apple dealer and instead of just letting him play with it in the store, they let hime take it home. Despite the machine costing almost twice as much as the PC he was looking at, he decided to go for the Mac.
He says nowadays that if they didn't let him try it out for the week he probably would be using a Wintel machine.
So not only do you have a fine idea, it is also a proven one.
Oh, did I mention that this was in 1985? Still a great idea though. Because of this I've been a Mac user all of my life.
Yes, people support Google here and yes people attack Microsoft here, but they do it for a reason.
Imagine that co-worker you really hate gets huge promotion. Man, you'd be pissed. You'll say that he's an ass and that there is no way that he should even still be employed. Now if you buddy (who works just as hard as that guy you hate) gets the promotion, you'd be happy for him. The same actions were done to earn that promotion, but due to things in the past that let you gain an opinion of the subject is what guides your current opinion of the event.
What I'm (poorly) attempting to say is that sure, people are more likely to defend Apple, Google and every other company than say, Microsoft, but there is a reason for it.
While you see it as techno-elitism because someone uses their past personal opinion to comment on such a story, I see it as pretty short-sighted to jump down their throats for it.
Here's a thought... get off your hobbyhorse, and start evaluating things based on FACTS
The fact is that those previous posters like Google. The fact is they want them to succeed. The fact is that Google hasn't done anything to give people a bad impression of them. The fact is that we all know understanding jokes written in Perl does make us cool.
I'd hate to see the horribly inefficient code that requires more than 4GB of RAM for such simple tasks.
While I'm sure everyone agrees that the jump to > 4GB RAM will cause some lazy developers to write much more bloated code, it shouldn't be used as an excuse for holding back on technology.
By that logic, we should let all highways degrade and not be maintained in order to keep a few people from speeding (okay, poor anology, but you should still get my point).
No, let's let the programmers compete with other programmers and not out of date hardware, because if there is a chance that someone will use the technology as an excuse to write bloat, then there is a chance that someone will use it to write something amazing.
Mandrake is the ONLY good thing ever to come from France.
Considering how big of an American tourist trap this is, I'm sure there are a number of Americans who'll say that there is a few more things they cherish that came from France.
Where's the US Army to rescue this group of dying frenchmen?
I find it odd that Americans are all so willing to insult France for being defeated by one of the most powerful armies in modern time, but are now all upset when they don't want to aid an attack on a small, middle-eastern country who has shown no signs of a direct threat.
Actually, this "unacceptably loud" noise is only on certain Powermacs. I bought a dual 867 in august and there is no "vacuum like noise" (as so many of those complaining describe it). I've heard the audio samples from g4noise.com and my MDD is nothing like that. I don't know why but only some of the G4s are really bad, the others are noisier than older Macs, but not noticable from other rooms.
That being said, I'm still going to order the new powersupply. I'll try it out too see if there really is a difference (hey for $20 bucks, why not?).
While attempts with viruses and worms may be more due to populartiy, there are other factors that result in an insecure system.
Just saying that viruses and worms are more popluar because of Microsoft's success is mearly a cop-out. Their success should be a benefit to their security (more resources should be dedicated to it), not an excuse for it.
Apple basically has to grow 10x more than Microsoft does in a year just to make a noticable difference in market share. That is a next to impossible feat. Apple's marketshare has dropped since 1997 yet their user base is up. I'm sure anyone can tell you it is a difficult thing competing with Microsoft. In fact, Apple is one of the only companies that has lasted for a resonable amount of time.
At 4% Apple is simply irrelevant.
Think about the waves Apple makes when they do anything. I think it is safe to say Apple is probably one of the most relevent, if not the most relevent company in the computer industry.
4% is all they have and think of the affect they have one everything. Microsoft is like 24x the size of Apple and they are struggling to get as much attention in the tech industry. That says a lot right there.
Slashdot Mirror
This is not quite correct. While they do not have an Al Queda connection, Iraq does have other terrorist factions they support and whom support Iraq.
Of course, but I was just pointing out the misconceptions in the previous statement. It was first war on drugs, then war on terrorism, now war on Iraq. While some on the themes exist, the enemies are constantly changing. The general American public though, fails to understand that and simplifies it. The terrorists that Bush was so adamantly after have nothing to do with Iraq.
It is actually Americas obligation, dating back pre-gulf war to enforce the UN resolutions on Iraq. This has been going on for over a decade now, and I think America is mostly just fed up with having to keep this Iraq situation in their minds and want to end it now.
Granted, but then you fall into a catch-22. American says it must stop Iraq because it was given that responsibilty by the UN, but the UN so far has been against invading Iraq. You can't use the former without accepting the latter.
In 1996 against Kurdish forces, for instance. Of course 26,000 Iraqi soldiers defected and fought for the opposition.
If that were a reason for attack in 1996, sure. But it wasn't then and isn't now.
Terrorism costs money, the people supporting it are not necessarily the oil tychoons of Saudi, but they feed off of those oil tychoons.
Damn straight they do. But attacking Iraq won't stop any of it (going back to my original post).
Hell, I'm not even against this war on Iraq. I was just correcting some points by that previous poster. My stance is basically; USA shouldn't go it alone. They should wait for the UN to acknowledge the problem and decide what to do then. The UN should get off there asses and wake up. Things need to change in every respect. And just so you know I'm a "liberal" Canadian that thinks Bush is way out of his league, but your not going to see me cheering on any other side than that of America's in this war.
What, are you too good for karma?
Damn elitists!
Don't forget Photoshop. When I'm applying a filter to a 400MB file I'll switch over to Safari to surf the web for a few minutes (I'm using an ancient G4 450) and the progress bar for that filter appears on the Photoshop icon in the dock, so instead of switching between apps, I can see how far the progress has gone and when it is done.
Don't forget that OS X can also run XP apps.
What about terrorism, banned weapons and genocide to name a few other reasons?
Iraq has nothing to do with the terrorists. The same group that flies planes into buildings and blows up clubs in Bali dislike Iraq just as much.
Of course CNN won't tell you this because you're being lead to believe that everyone who "lives with camels" are ready to die just to show America up. Please.
As for the weapons, that is the U.N.'s concern, not America. Its bad enough that it was Reagan who sold a majority of those weapons to Iraq.
The genocide is also a foolish comment, considering that type of thing hasn't occured since the last time USA was over there in 1991.
And just so you know the "SUVs funding terrorism" has nothing to do with Iraq and everything to do with Saudi Arabia. The majority of terrorist who are an actual threat to the god ol' USA are middle-class to wealthy Saudies who are mad at America for a number of reasons, starting with the American assistance to keep the monarchy in power instead of a democratic government.
"Friday Morning Release Party" is everybody elses "Thursday Afternoon Release Party".
Only if you ignore the real specs. I suggest reading my other post on the thread - the two are very comparable, but the Dell is about 20% less expensive.
Hey, I'm not trying to argue specs for specs (I've given up that long ago). I was just pointing out that the largest PC manufacturer is still trying to catch up with Apple (in terms of design).
I had to give up my ThinkPad a little while ago, and would love a lighter version of this laptop. I don't think I'll ever toss down the 5 grand for a TiBook, so the only thing holding me back on this laptop is weight and battery life.
Are you seriously trying to say that more pixels will make a laptop heavier?
I think the original poster is trying to say that since Apple can make a 17" laptop light, Dell should be able to make their 15.2" one lighter (especially without a optical drive).
Dell, the leader in PC market share can't make a laptop as well designed as Apple's, thats the point.
When I was in 6th grade (1991) a new school opened up a couple blocks from my house. It was heralded as a new era of education, and with a special deal from Apple, there was basically a computer for every student.
I continued going to my original school, but many other students transfered to this new one. They were taught how to make multimedia CDs with Hypercard along with other "new" things to do with computers. I thought it would have been the greatest school to attend.
Well, 12 years have passed and with a little foresight I have been able to form an opinion on this kind of news. While they had more fun in school, and I'm sure for those first few years attendance was up, they still received the same education I did. Those students that transfered attended the same high-school as I did and had no apparent advantage over the other students. Now that "new era of education" school is severely out of date. Attendance and enthusiasm is basically the same as any other school in the area.
So what I'm saying is that for the first few years this program will seem cool to a lot of people, but in the long run it is pointless.
In other words, I couldn't agree with you more.
From the LA Times:
See, your problem is that you're thinking. And not good "I have to think up a great Soviet Russia joke about this" or the ever classic "Beowulf cluster" joke thinking, but really thinking thinking.
Stop it.
I take it you have never owned an upgraded Macintosh. Almost every PowerMac can be upgraded to at least a G3 (but most can go up to a G4) without changing the motherboard.
Heh, and people say that Macs can't be upgraded. Sheesh.
give everyone a Mac to play with for a week, then take it away.
It funny you mentioned that because when my Dad was looking an a new computer he first went to a store that sold PCs and he wasn't very impressed with what they had to offer.
He then headed over to an authorized Apple dealer and instead of just letting him play with it in the store, they let hime take it home. Despite the machine costing almost twice as much as the PC he was looking at, he decided to go for the Mac.
He says nowadays that if they didn't let him try it out for the week he probably would be using a Wintel machine.
So not only do you have a fine idea, it is also a proven one.
Oh, did I mention that this was in 1985? Still a great idea though. Because of this I've been a Mac user all of my life.
One dollar Bob.
But it's the damned truth, and you know it.
Yes, people support Google here and yes people attack Microsoft here, but they do it for a reason.
Imagine that co-worker you really hate gets huge promotion. Man, you'd be pissed. You'll say that he's an ass and that there is no way that he should even still be employed. Now if you buddy (who works just as hard as that guy you hate) gets the promotion, you'd be happy for him. The same actions were done to earn that promotion, but due to things in the past that let you gain an opinion of the subject is what guides your current opinion of the event.
What I'm (poorly) attempting to say is that sure, people are more likely to defend Apple, Google and every other company than say, Microsoft, but there is a reason for it.
While you see it as techno-elitism because someone uses their past personal opinion to comment on such a story, I see it as pretty short-sighted to jump down their throats for it.
Here's a thought... get off your hobbyhorse, and start evaluating things based on FACTS
The fact is that those previous posters like Google. The fact is they want them to succeed. The fact is that Google hasn't done anything to give people a bad impression of them. The fact is that we all know understanding jokes written in Perl does make us cool.
I'd hate to see the horribly inefficient code that requires more than 4GB of RAM for such simple tasks.
While I'm sure everyone agrees that the jump to > 4GB RAM will cause some lazy developers to write much more bloated code, it shouldn't be used as an excuse for holding back on technology.
By that logic, we should let all highways degrade and not be maintained in order to keep a few people from speeding (okay, poor anology, but you should still get my point).
No, let's let the programmers compete with other programmers and not out of date hardware, because if there is a chance that someone will use the technology as an excuse to write bloat, then there is a chance that someone will use it to write something amazing.
Mandrake is the ONLY good thing ever to come from France.
Considering how big of an American tourist trap this is, I'm sure there are a number of Americans who'll say that there is a few more things they cherish that came from France.
Where's the US Army to rescue this group of dying frenchmen?
I find it odd that Americans are all so willing to insult France for being defeated by one of the most powerful armies in modern time, but are now all upset when they don't want to aid an attack on a small, middle-eastern country who has shown no signs of a direct threat.
Oh dear, do you have any idea what you may have just started here?
PowerMac...It's closed hardware, you see.
Here we go again...
Have you ever had peameal bacon? That's Canadian bacon to them crazy yankees.
It's not as good as regular bacon, but I still enjoy a couple slices with my Sunday brunch.
Actually, this "unacceptably loud" noise is only on certain Powermacs. I bought a dual 867 in august and there is no "vacuum like noise" (as so many of those complaining describe it). I've heard the audio samples from g4noise.com and my MDD is nothing like that. I don't know why but only some of the G4s are really bad, the others are noisier than older Macs, but not noticable from other rooms.
That being said, I'm still going to order the new powersupply. I'll try it out too see if there really is a difference (hey for $20 bucks, why not?).
Your problem is solved via a firmware update.
If you only get the really bad noise in Mac OS 9 it is firmware, but if you get it no matter what OS it is hardware.
(I think I just saved you $20).
Or if you want to forget all about fink you can take an even easier route.
Ummm, do you mean this upgrade?
While attempts with viruses and worms may be more due to populartiy, there are other factors that result in an insecure system.
Just saying that viruses and worms are more popluar because of Microsoft's success is mearly a cop-out. Their success should be a benefit to their security (more resources should be dedicated to it), not an excuse for it.
why is Apple's market share not growing?
Apple basically has to grow 10x more than Microsoft does in a year just to make a noticable difference in market share. That is a next to impossible feat. Apple's marketshare has dropped since 1997 yet their user base is up. I'm sure anyone can tell you it is a difficult thing competing with Microsoft. In fact, Apple is one of the only companies that has lasted for a resonable amount of time.
At 4% Apple is simply irrelevant.
Think about the waves Apple makes when they do anything. I think it is safe to say Apple is probably one of the most relevent, if not the most relevent company in the computer industry.
4% is all they have and think of the affect they have one everything. Microsoft is like 24x the size of Apple and they are struggling to get as much attention in the tech industry. That says a lot right there.