I upgraded the HD on my G4 mini last year. It's a simple laptop drive and fairly easy to swap out if you know what you're doing. Obviously, you can also use external drives using Firewire or USB2.
For DVD & Media file archives, you could also store things on an external server. The Ethernet port is easilly fast enough to play DVD images off network drives.
The Integrated video makes it kind of a dud for gaming, but from all reports the Dual Core can handle full-scale HDTV fine, and if you haven't jumped on the HD bandwagon yet, the cheaper model would do the job. So at least it's a good machine for PVR stuff, if computer gaming is not a priority.
(Exception: WoW scales down beautifully. I've even played it on a G4 iBook.)
I remember seeing the VP debate between Lieberman and Cheney and thinking, "holy shit, I wish these two were the real candidates instead of the two jokers on the top of each ticket. I'd take either one of these guys over either of them!"
Ventura sure got a lot accomplished too. What an amazing politician!
Actually he did. His budgets went though relatively unscathed, in spite of having a different party in each house fighting against him every step of the way.
He was far from perfect, but he was the best governor we had in Minnesota in my adult lifetime (which goes back to Rudy Perpich) and I wish he had stood for a second term. I'd be much happier with him still in office than with Pawlenty.
Why was this guy moderated as "Troll"? He's not far off. Both Lieberman and Clinton are more "tweeners" than true liberals. I think the republicans should trade a couple of RINOs for them. Say, Specter and Snowe in a straight-up trade? I think all four of them would be happier, except for Clinton, who would have to accuse herself of a "vast right wing conspiracy" against her campaign.
So what you're saying is that you're a religious conservative
So what you're saying is that you've made some wrong assumptions about me, and are going to base your response on that opinion.
If I were a "religious conservative", why would I want McCain over the other republicans... for that matter, why would I want Tim Penny over ANYBODY OUT THERE?
Gawd, I hate it when Republicans try to match up token candidates with the Democrats.
Picking a woman to run against Hillary, specifically because she would be running against Hillary, would be just like when they sent J.C. Watts to Illinois to run against Obama... and it would probably be about as successful.
Really? You really think Condi is going to lead the ticket?
I know she has a personality that reminds a lot of conservatives of Margret "The Iron Lady" Thatcher, but let's look at her for a moment:
- For most of her career, Dr. Rice was a Standford prof. - She worked in the first Bush admisitration. - She's never held an elected office, unless you count Vice President of the "Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula."
That doesn't really sound like somebody likely to come out of the Republican Primaries as the winner. The only thing she seems to have going for her, politically, is that most Democrats really, really detest her. Then again, in today's political climate, that might be enough.
If she really aspires to the White House, she ought to take a cue for Hillary, and run for something smaller first. (Ideally a governor's job somewhere. Senators don't have a very good track record running for President lately.)
it seems you took my tone to be aggressive, I am sorry about that.
Don't sweat it. My tone came off as too brash as well. It happens when you commuciate with text and disagree. It's not like I wouldn't drink with you if we meet in person or something.
If installing solar panels makes sense for you, that's great news for me. The more people like you there are, the sooner economies of scale will apply and bring the cost down to where I would also consider going that route. At the moment, it still doesn't make a whole lot of sense for me, though.
In the late 1990s Lieberman was vocal in lobbying for censorship against shock rocker Marilyn Manson, calling his group "one of the sickest" he had ever seen.
Okay, that criticism is fair.
If Manson should be censored for anything, it should be for making really horrible music. "Antichrist Superstar" had, like, ONE track on it which didn't utterly suck, and even that song becomes tiresome once you've heard it more than twice. Don't even get me started on "Smells Like Children." Yeesh! The dude should not be allowed near any object whch could be used to generate sound.
That's okay. Just about everything else in your post was wrong, too.
You began with the false assumption that I'm a Republican and all my opinions are motivated by loyalty to that batch of crooks (as opposed to your prefered batch of crooks, the Democrats.)
You then postulated that a Democrat is likely to step up in defense of civil liberties. I haven't seen that happen since... Hmm... Come to think of it, it hasn't happened in my lifetime. Going all the way back to the reconstruction era, they went from being a party of klansmen to a party of Big Government around the time of FDR, to a party of mushy-headed socialism during the LBJ and Carter years, then finally, to a sort of weird-assed "triangulism" during the Clinton era, which seemed to adapt the worst elements of both sides of the debate and call it the "third way."
Since the first President Clinton left office, they've been a party with no identity beyond hating George Bush, watching their support dwindle as fewer and fewer people can think of any reason to vote for their candidates.
Which I'm all for. The more one party crumbles while the other party pisses people off, the more likely it becomes that we might someday escape from the two-party lock-in.
Why do Republicans always resort to violence as the first response to anything?
Sorry to shatter your convenient theories, but I'm not a Republican. I usually vote thrid-party.
(And before you tell me that I'm wasting my vote, let me point out that I'm from the state where Ventura won in spite of two EXTREMELY well-known and relatively popular republicrat candidates running against him.)
You also like Lieberman because, like yourself, he's a coward.
You might want to re-evaluate your mind-reading skills there, chief.
I like Lieberman for a host of reasons, none of which my post mentioned; mostly fiscal policies and lobbying reform.
I'm losing a little respect for him over this Dubai port deal thing, and I'm certainly not crazy about his riding the anti-videogame bandwagon, but there are bigger issues to consider.
Every politician does something you don't like once in a while. It's just how it is. On balance, I'll take Lieberman over most of the front-runners for President in '08 any day... but crap like this makes it tough.
I mean, let's go down the line of possible contenders, shall we?
(D) Hillary Clinton - Hated by more than half the country... reminds me of our current President in that regard Edwards - HELL NO Obama - Yeah, right. Seems like a nice guy and all, but c'mon Kerry - As if Gore - Is he still alive? Really? Poke him with a stick to be sure. Lieberman - Not too shabby! Kucinich - *snicker* I just added that to be funny Sharpton - Nut-job. Got a free pass in the primaries last time because everybody knew he had no chance. Bayh - See Edwards Biden - Ted Kennedy's water boy.
(R) McCain - I could live with it Cheney - Won't run; would die on the campaign trail anyway Rice - Run for mayor or school board or something first, crazy lady. Giuliani - Can look "grim and determined" on demand, little else going for him. Frist - Actually makes Al Gore seem exciting Allen - Yeah. Okay. Maybe. Brownback - No way a social conservative from the state of Fred Phelps and anti-science schools is going to catch on outside of Kansas. Pawlenty - I'm from his state... The guy's kind of shifty, as the nation will learn if he runs.
(I) Pat Buchannan - EEEEEEK! Former Reagan spokesman turned batshit-fucking-loco! Tim Penny - DREAM CANDIDATE. Too bad he's not likely to run, nor likely to win if he does
Please, Senator Lieberman. You're one of the only active Democrats in power which I don't desperately want to punch in the throat. I was even a fan of your ill-fated White House bid.
Please, disconnect yourself from that shrill harpy of an ex-First Lady, and come back to sanity.
All/. comment so far have nothing to do with the news. *sigh* Always the same with astronomy items.
The news: The most simple and common combination of two extremely common elements might have been noticed on a large rock, very far away.
Like most astronomy news, it's incredibly boring unless you let your imagination run wild and start dreaming about colonies, alien life, or other flights of fancy... so it's no surprise that most of the/. posts are just people cracking stupid jokes.
Wow, you probably ruined your own father's placebo.
That's the funny thing. He acknowledges that he's probably suckering his own body into feeling well, but it's still working and it's not like keeping the magnets around cost him anything (beyond a little dignity... they look kind of foolish), so he's sticking with it.
"Apple should create a executive position to serve as a figurehead in charge of security. Doing so will create the perception that Apple's shit is not as secure as it used to be, but is needed to maintain the perception that it's still as secure as it used to be."
So, if they don't hire somebody like that, confidence in their security will erode.
But if they do hire somebody like that, confidence in their security will erode.
Here's a thought: Why not just keep putting out an OS which is vastly more secure than Windows? As a customer, I've been pretty happy with that strategy so far.
My father, who is a licensed psychologist and should know better, has been using magnets to treat his joint pain. He swears by it. Last time we spoke about it, this is how the conversation went.
Dad: It seems to work when nothing else has. Me: Yeah, but it's almost definately just a placebo effect. Dad: You're probably right. Me: Me: Me: Me: Okay, well, good luck with that.
So there you have it. Find a placebo effect that works for you, and stick with it. Who needs science when quackery can cure you? Truthiness at its finest!
Slashdot Mirror
That's for decompressing H.264 on the fly with Quicktime.
HDTV signals are typically basic MPEG streams, which requires less CPU power.
EyeTV reccomends any dual-CPU Mac for 1080 HDTV.
I upgraded the HD on my G4 mini last year. It's a simple laptop drive and fairly easy to swap out if you know what you're doing. Obviously, you can also use external drives using Firewire or USB2.
For DVD & Media file archives, you could also store things on an external server. The Ethernet port is easilly fast enough to play DVD images off network drives.
The Integrated video makes it kind of a dud for gaming, but from all reports the Dual Core can handle full-scale HDTV fine, and if you haven't jumped on the HD bandwagon yet, the cheaper model would do the job. So at least it's a good machine for PVR stuff, if computer gaming is not a priority.
(Exception: WoW scales down beautifully. I've even played it on a G4 iBook.)
Why in the world are they trying to compare a full blown PVR/Media Center (Windows Media Center) to a computer with a remote (Mac Mini)?
Because with a simple Firewire break-out box, that's exactly what a lot of people are using their minis for. Next question.
I remember seeing the VP debate between Lieberman and Cheney and thinking, "holy shit, I wish these two were the real candidates instead of the two jokers on the top of each ticket. I'd take either one of these guys over either of them!"
I often think that Republicans and Democrats are really secretly being controlled by the same perople.
Well, sure, Kang and Kodos may be alien invaders from the same planet, but what are you going to do? THROW YOUR VOTE AWAY???
Mwahahahahaha!!!
Ventura sure got a lot accomplished too. What an amazing politician!
Actually he did. His budgets went though relatively unscathed, in spite of having a different party in each house fighting against him every step of the way.
He was far from perfect, but he was the best governor we had in Minnesota in my adult lifetime (which goes back to Rudy Perpich) and I wish he had stood for a second term. I'd be much happier with him still in office than with Pawlenty.
Why was this guy moderated as "Troll"? He's not far off. Both Lieberman and Clinton are more "tweeners" than true liberals. I think the republicans should trade a couple of RINOs for them. Say, Specter and Snowe in a straight-up trade? I think all four of them would be happier, except for Clinton, who would have to accuse herself of a "vast right wing conspiracy" against her campaign.
So what you're saying is that you're a religious conservative
So what you're saying is that you've made some wrong assumptions about me, and are going to base your response on that opinion.
If I were a "religious conservative", why would I want McCain over the other republicans... for that matter, why would I want Tim Penny over ANYBODY OUT THERE?
Gawd, I hate it when Republicans try to match up token candidates with the Democrats.
Picking a woman to run against Hillary, specifically because she would be running against Hillary, would be just like when they sent J.C. Watts to Illinois to run against Obama... and it would probably be about as successful.
the individual pieces did not make much sense. The same can be said for Dark Side of the Moon
"Money" would stand alone quite well, if it didn't segue directly into the next track.
Why in the hell is this a "YRO" story???
Do I have a "right" to pass up on the newest lump of turd to come out of Britany Spears's ass at the CD store and buy it from iTunes instead?
Is it my "right" to not have to wait a few weeks to download it from an on-line music store?
I don't get it.
Really? You really think Condi is going to lead the ticket?
I know she has a personality that reminds a lot of conservatives of Margret "The Iron Lady" Thatcher, but let's look at her for a moment:
- For most of her career, Dr. Rice was a Standford prof.
- She worked in the first Bush admisitration.
- She's never held an elected office, unless you count Vice President of the "Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula."
That doesn't really sound like somebody likely to come out of the Republican Primaries as the winner. The only thing she seems to have going for her, politically, is that most Democrats really, really detest her. Then again, in today's political climate, that might be enough.
If she really aspires to the White House, she ought to take a cue for Hillary, and run for something smaller first. (Ideally a governor's job somewhere. Senators don't have a very good track record running for President lately.)
We'll never escape 2 party lockin, we may however(its happened before) trade one party for another.
You might be right, but I'd be more than happy to settle for an upgrade of only one of the two parties. It would be better than what we've got now.
it seems you took my tone to be aggressive, I am sorry about that.
Don't sweat it. My tone came off as too brash as well. It happens when you commuciate with text and disagree. It's not like I wouldn't drink with you if we meet in person or something.
If installing solar panels makes sense for you, that's great news for me. The more people like you there are, the sooner economies of scale will apply and bring the cost down to where I would also consider going that route. At the moment, it still doesn't make a whole lot of sense for me, though.
In the late 1990s Lieberman was vocal in lobbying for censorship against shock rocker Marilyn Manson, calling his group "one of the sickest" he had ever seen.
Okay, that criticism is fair.
If Manson should be censored for anything, it should be for making really horrible music. "Antichrist Superstar" had, like, ONE track on it which didn't utterly suck, and even that song becomes tiresome once you've heard it more than twice. Don't even get me started on "Smells Like Children." Yeesh! The dude should not be allowed near any object whch could be used to generate sound.
That's okay. Just about everything else in your post was wrong, too.
You began with the false assumption that I'm a Republican and all my opinions are motivated by loyalty to that batch of crooks (as opposed to your prefered batch of crooks, the Democrats.)
You then postulated that a Democrat is likely to step up in defense of civil liberties. I haven't seen that happen since... Hmm... Come to think of it, it hasn't happened in my lifetime. Going all the way back to the reconstruction era, they went from being a party of klansmen to a party of Big Government around the time of FDR, to a party of mushy-headed socialism during the LBJ and Carter years, then finally, to a sort of weird-assed "triangulism" during the Clinton era, which seemed to adapt the worst elements of both sides of the debate and call it the "third way."
Since the first President Clinton left office, they've been a party with no identity beyond hating George Bush, watching their support dwindle as fewer and fewer people can think of any reason to vote for their candidates.
Which I'm all for. The more one party crumbles while the other party pisses people off, the more likely it becomes that we might someday escape from the two-party lock-in.
Why do Republicans always resort to violence as the first response to anything?
Sorry to shatter your convenient theories, but I'm not a Republican. I usually vote thrid-party.
(And before you tell me that I'm wasting my vote, let me point out that I'm from the state where Ventura won in spite of two EXTREMELY well-known and relatively popular republicrat candidates running against him.)
You also like Lieberman because, like yourself, he's a coward.
You might want to re-evaluate your mind-reading skills there, chief.
I like Lieberman for a host of reasons, none of which my post mentioned; mostly fiscal policies and lobbying reform.
I'm losing a little respect for him over this Dubai port deal thing, and I'm certainly not crazy about his riding the anti-videogame bandwagon, but there are bigger issues to consider.
Every politician does something you don't like once in a while. It's just how it is. On balance, I'll take Lieberman over most of the front-runners for President in '08 any day... but crap like this makes it tough.
I mean, let's go down the line of possible contenders, shall we?
(D)
Hillary Clinton - Hated by more than half the country... reminds me of our current President in that regard
Edwards - HELL NO
Obama - Yeah, right. Seems like a nice guy and all, but c'mon
Kerry - As if
Gore - Is he still alive? Really? Poke him with a stick to be sure.
Lieberman - Not too shabby!
Kucinich - *snicker* I just added that to be funny
Sharpton - Nut-job. Got a free pass in the primaries last time because everybody knew he had no chance.
Bayh - See Edwards
Biden - Ted Kennedy's water boy.
(R)
McCain - I could live with it
Cheney - Won't run; would die on the campaign trail anyway
Rice - Run for mayor or school board or something first, crazy lady.
Giuliani - Can look "grim and determined" on demand, little else going for him.
Frist - Actually makes Al Gore seem exciting
Allen - Yeah. Okay. Maybe.
Brownback - No way a social conservative from the state of Fred Phelps and anti-science schools is going to catch on outside of Kansas.
Pawlenty - I'm from his state... The guy's kind of shifty, as the nation will learn if he runs.
(I)
Pat Buchannan - EEEEEEK! Former Reagan spokesman turned batshit-fucking-loco!
Tim Penny - DREAM CANDIDATE. Too bad he's not likely to run, nor likely to win if he does
Please, Senator Lieberman. You're one of the only active Democrats in power which I don't desperately want to punch in the throat. I was even a fan of your ill-fated White House bid.
Please, disconnect yourself from that shrill harpy of an ex-First Lady, and come back to sanity.
All /. comment so far have nothing to do with the news. *sigh* Always the same with astronomy items.
/. posts are just people cracking stupid jokes.
The news: The most simple and common combination of two extremely common elements might have been noticed on a large rock, very far away.
Like most astronomy news, it's incredibly boring unless you let your imagination run wild and start dreaming about colonies, alien life, or other flights of fancy... so it's no surprise that most of the
Wow, you probably ruined your own father's placebo.
That's the funny thing. He acknowledges that he's probably suckering his own body into feeling well, but it's still working and it's not like keeping the magnets around cost him anything (beyond a little dignity... they look kind of foolish), so he's sticking with it.
The whole idea makes no sense at all.
What they seemed to just say, in a nutshell:
"Apple should create a executive position to serve as a figurehead in charge of security. Doing so will create the perception that Apple's shit is not as secure as it used to be, but is needed to maintain the perception that it's still as secure as it used to be."
So, if they don't hire somebody like that, confidence in their security will erode.
But if they do hire somebody like that, confidence in their security will erode.
Here's a thought: Why not just keep putting out an OS which is vastly more secure than Windows? As a customer, I've been pretty happy with that strategy so far.
My father, who is a licensed psychologist and should know better, has been using magnets to treat his joint pain. He swears by it. Last time we spoke about it, this is how the conversation went.
Dad: It seems to work when nothing else has.
Me: Yeah, but it's almost definately just a placebo effect.
Dad: You're probably right.
Me:
Me:
Me:
Me: Okay, well, good luck with that.
So there you have it. Find a placebo effect that works for you, and stick with it. Who needs science when quackery can cure you? Truthiness at its finest!
Um, I hate to break it to you but that was two sentences.
Maybe he was counting in metric.