>It's a chance to read a whole bunch of responses by contributors who are absolutely >convinced that the values and beliefs they hold are the ones that should be universally >observed.
i find your beliefs are wrong, should not be observed and belive you should be silenced...
when you say that intolerant views should be quashed, you are intolerant youself.
you cannot simultanrously hold that value systems which silence opposition with threat of death are on a level playing field with those that allow diverse oppinions.
put another way - If you silence intolerant speech, then you are far worse than the one who speaks intolerantly.
By definition, you cannot speak ill of Chinese policies in China - which places it on equal ground or superior ground to other systems in China. In the US (and some Euro countries), the subject can be debated - therefore, by simple logic, whatever system the US has is better than what China has.
how can i say that?
I'm in the US.
Inheerently evil to use energy?
on
"H-Prize" Announced
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I'm not that old, but i just don't understand when morality became part of the equation when it comes to using energy? Is someone in Botswana that lives in a hut a better person than a bloke in Surrey who mows a lawn with an electric lawn mower? If so, i don't seem to understand it.
And honestly, I don't understand - well maybe i do - why it is that people get all flummoxed at the idea of removing human transport devices from the global warming equation. Yes, yes, for now, it is just pushing the problem up the chain, but is that the job of the car makers?
If a car is fairly efficient, and it is no longer spewing out global warming gasses - what the hell else do you expect car makers to do? Not everyone - some could - but not everyone could survive driving a euro golf cart around because it wouldn't hold kids or baggage, etc.
If the car manufacturers are going to make devices that can run 100% clean and are saleable to the public meeting demand, then if you ask me, its high time we start coming up with energy solutions that are not dependent upon unstable thocracies and kingdoms in the middle east, hockey playing blue-nosers in north america, or corrupt countires like Mexico and the rest of central America. The car makers hold up their end, its someone else's responsibility to hold up the other end.
And honestly, we see that China is - amazingly enough - going to lead the way with pebble-bed reactors... 1 for each city or more. It is utterly remarkable to me that a communist county has the stones to get this problem figured out while a country like the US is handcuffed by granola munching tree huggers... except for the founder of the Sierra Club... he gets it.
"build in" was the wrong terminology used by the poster.
"Included with" is what he should have said to be more accurate... and is exactly the termniology Apple uses when they talk about Mac OS X... as in..
Safari is included with Mac OS X - but you can delete the app in one step. iChat is included with mac OS x - but you can delete the app in one step.
The only "built in" things Apple has been doing lately are... building in cameras into their computers (you can't take them out - boo!) building in bluetooth (to the point where its nearly impossible to remove)
When Apple hands out software, you don't see anyone complaining... because you can get rid of/delete whatever you want like Widgets? Hell, i hate em - and therefore, i deleted them, and diabled Widgets with one System Preference.
Try doing that with Internet Explorer, ActiveX, and the billions of crappy services that cmoe running by default ni Windows.
I personally run 50 IP cameras (Axis) to 5 Xserve DP G5s.
They all dump their data to dual XServe RAIDs (located in separate parts of the building for physcial separation) using XSan (with 1 XServe as a XSan controller), page me via an email when a camera should not be going off at night of the picture, run scripts that write out formatted logs for motion activity.
It took about 4 months to get everything running smoothly - camera settings, getting enough machines to do the work, compression levels that were sufficient for us... but it works fine.
We can even control the PTZ cameras from anywhere when we tunnel into our network.
You need a lot of horsepower to make this happen - you need lots of ram and you need disk drives running plenty fast.
If you're going to use 640x480x30fps, you are going to only be doing 3 cameras per Mac. maybe you could get away with more if you were using a quad G5 desktop instead of an XServe, but we don't need that much horsepower because only a few cameras are set to high resolution - and even those are set to low FPS (for capturing faces at the doors).
If money is not the object - then you need someone that knows Applescript, you need some freaking hard drives, and you need a lot of computer power... Security Spy (Ben lives in England, he's not elusive, i get email from him all the time, and he's even called me a few times) is plenty industrial for what i need.
This is only good news, folks. Those people who were early adopters are going to raise such holy hell - first at Best Buy to the poor schmuck selling High Dev DVD players, then they will call the DVD player makers, then the DVD makers, then their congresscritters.
This will finally be the frist massive fuck you to the consumers by the tiny movie studio industry that will be so blatant and so obvious that even My Mom (tm) will understand that they are being fucked.
Something will have to give, and i guarantee you, it won't be My Dad (tm) buying a new plasma TV - he'll pay $500 for whatever box comes out to hack the problem, just like the descrambler box we had as kids.
Unfortunately, i won't need to, because i held off until that sweet ass Aquos 45" was under $4K.
Is it "about time" Apple transitioned to Intel... in mid 2005 at WWDC?
or will 2007 be "about time" when we'll see some Adobe products written to take advantage of the computers YOU SNARKLY demanded from Jobs with your little jab at him at WWDC last year?
I was ready to understand the difficulty in the undertaking - but you guys were first to Mac OS X, and now, you're going to be stupid late to Intel, despite your grumblings that Apple wasn't there all along... and i was even ready to forget that we saw Wolfram have their shit togther in short order...
or is this some play to get Mac users to run Codeweaver's stuff to run your stuff - saving you from having to make Mac OS X versions of things? Or some other random conspiracy.
no one on earth is forcing an IT, CIO, homemaker, graphic artist, gamer or anyone else to HAVE TO BUY Micro Soft's shit.
I have for the last two years officially told people - i cannot and will not help you if you are running Windows. I am too busy accomplishing things (photography, videographic analysis) to be bothered with tools that do not just work. I don't care that there are millions of Windows viruses, i don't care if your webpage doens't work with anything but IE and Active X, i just have stopped caring.
I am getting older - i have a family, and i want to create and do things which are special, and i no longer have the time nor the incination to either myself, or have to deal with others who's job it is to spend all day and night defending computers from themselves. I am the architect who doesn't want to deal with the knock-off cheap Chinese crap powertools and hear all the workers bitch about them, or hear about the foreman that tells me i have to keep taking apart all the power tools and putting them back together again... build the fscking house - go get the tools that WORK - and pay more for them if you have to.
The simple fact is - its totally irrelevant to me if a Mac costs $1000 or $3000. If it does what i need - and prevents me from having to fix my tool all day long - the $3000 tool will be far more vaulable in just a week or two. Theoretical, imaginary, or otherwise fantasmic notions that Macs are just as insecure as Windows are irrelevant to me - i work today, and i work now. (well, its saturday, i'm only working a few hours today).
But the flip side of that is - i no longer give a shit what anyone uses. I don't care. Do not bother me or hassle me or get in my way if you can't keep up with me. My friends and family no longer bother me - i bought my family Mac minis, and my friends are all switching.
The world uses Windows?? I'm fscking George Bush of the Mac - i don't give a shit if every person on earth said "jump off this cliff, its the industry standard"
i'm not a lemming - i have things to get done. Whatever you want to do is fine with me, you're out of my "circle of give a shit".
i'm completley convinced that for using email, web browser, iPhoto, etc.. that the new iiMacs wipe the floor with comparably priced PPC macs.
what i want to know - and what holds me back from moving to an iiMac from my DP g5 1.8 - is
1. how they will perform when rendering with Compressor 2. how much faster is FCP when hooked up to similar disk packs (like cheap desktop FW400 raids) 3. Will i still be able to run background processing tasks like Compressor and handbrake yet get good foreground performance so i can email, websurf and get on with life while waiting for those 30-1 hour long tasks, instead of walking away from the machine, lest i get tempted to use it and really slow down the renders. 4. Will Aperture stop sucking performance wise?
I've been asking people i know inside apple for YEARS to add this to Mac OS X Server. I don't see them doing it anytime soon.
however, there was a guy that came up with a way to do most everything.Mac did with a lot of work and hacking of end-user boxes inside your network.. tho, i think it was two or three revs of.Mac ago.
i want my new iiMac to be free as well.. but that's not bloody likely to happen either, is it>
Now, if they simply raised the price of every Mac computer $25, then i think that would be the best way to hide the costs of it, thereby making it free.
This computer is far closer to a PDA than an actual computer. Mac OS X is a desktop computer OS. If Apple made some kind of PDA-like device and acceptable OS UI to go with such a device, then that would have been fine.
But as it sits, it would have been fsck-all impossible to shoehorn Mac OS X 10.4.3 "just work" into a Negroponte laptop. They wouldn't get to adjust the UI themselves - the part of Mac OS X that is totally closed. With Linux - you can change whatever you want to fit your device. Its perfect.
Now, an Apple engineered open source OS for PDA sized devices - aw hells yeah. That would rock like Mac OS X and the iPod OS because they would design it to "Just Work".
or until DirecTV cancels MPEG-2 service, but i tell you what, i'm going to run my hacked DirecTiVo until the wheels fall off - screw everyone else and their lameastic ideas.
My Hacked DirecTiVo works 1 step simple to get any show i want with my iPod (now, with Video), doesn't cost me per play, works great with my Mac, and doesn't have any DRM.
These things are going to be insanely valuable in years to come because of their incredible feature set, lack of DRM, and compatibility with so many other devices.
meanwhile, newer systems are going to be less and less useful and less interesting to me. HDTV doesn't make my skirt fly up compared to a well written show or good coverage of a hockey game... neither of which requires higher resolution.
>A lot has come out since the vote on the authorization for Iraq. You already know it's not as simple an issue as you make it out to be, so I won't explain it again for you.
i also don't think its as complicated as you make it out to be.. I listed to both sides from 1998-2003, and it wasn't until 2003 that either side made mention that Saddam was NOT, in fact, developing WMDs.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
So, we already know that Bush "lied" when he said that Saddam was trying to build WMDs, it turns out that the Democrats, from ex presidents, senators, and presidential canidates for the Democrats lied as well - (seeing as both had the same intel in the Senate Intelligence Committee, they knew better that there were no WMDs.)
But like i said, i listened to both sides - and they were both saying he was making WMDs - so who was i supposed to believe?
As a libertarian, i would like to see a massive crash program on nuclear power, drive a hydrogen-powered A4, and let the arabs and jews go back to doing whatever it is that they do to each other out in the dirt of the middle east. I don't care if they hate each other - i just wish we didn't have to get dragged into it.
The Rs also control the senate, but there are 44 Dems in the Senate...
and while every single Democrat is against the war today - how was it that the authority to go to war went 99 to nothing in the senate?
I find it funny that on the War and the Patriot Act, the Dems VOTED lock-step with the Republicans, while a mere 2 years later, are violently opposed to the very things that they voted for?
Both parties suck in so many ways, its frightening.
isn't the whole point of Windows being better than the mac is that it runs on generic hardware?
So - if you were a Mac guy, then went to a pre-fabbed windows box that costs more than a mac (as most WMC computers do) how exactly did you save any money?...asks the guy running a Dual G5 with Front Row....
i would love to have a nuke plant in my backyard - but alas, the environmentalists prevent any form of nuclear power in the US from growing.
i would love to get hydrogen from that plant - but alas, the envrionmentalists refuse to take SUV's out of the equation - SUV's powered by hydrogen piss them off too.
please - put a nuclear power plant in my back yard - i'm in Southern California.
If you do not shoot 500 pictures or more at a family gathering "because you can" - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If you do not have a camera body that costs over $1200 or if you don't understand what "camera body" means - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If the idea of spending twice as much money on a single lens than what you paid for your camera body or your car seems totaly insane - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If you think 5000 pictures is a lot of pictures - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If you have absolutely no problem deleting pictures you've taken - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If you never take your memory card out of your camera - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If you don't piss your pants at the thought of panning and zooming 8 pictures simultaneously - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If you use AOL's webmail to send people pictures of your dog - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
Aperture is for photographers. Photoshop is for graphic artists.
It doesn't claim to replace Photoshop. It just means that you don't have to use that sucktastic horrble Photosop file browser any more, nor do YOU need to do all the organizing of your photos by hand any longer.
Apple's software - iPhoto, iTunes, and now, Aperture, do what computers should have done all along - organize your shit FOR you, not you have to do it for the computer. That's ass backwards.
I can now organize every single photo in one location, and have them all together, yet organized so it will be easy to separate...
Work, with sub-categories of each program i work on Family, with sub-cats by people, events, etc church, with sub-cats for groups, events, etc., for shots i could use for backgrounds, for stock photography - any of which i could use in any other project
now, i can find photos that will match various criteria from across all those major categories, including offline drives if i've got something backed up to another drive.
the basic color balancing, leveling, etc - that is old hat - you don't really need photoshop to do that any more... and what this does that Photoshop does pooooooorly is across multiple pictures... including across mulitple groups if necessary. also - there's no versioning in photoshop - you have to keep multiple files if you use them for multiple uses - that blows. And Aperture takes care of it.
If you want to do major retouching, cloning, do a lot of heavy masking and photo combining - that is NOT what Aperture is for at all - that's what Photoshop is for. But Photoshop does little to nothing to help a pro with hundreds of thousands of pictures get organized... we have to do all of that manually.. or poorly with the software out there.
now - with a RAID on my desk - i can deal with absolutely hundreds of thousands of pictures no problem. Aperture and Photoshop are a absolutely great combination
Aperture is NOT a photoshop killer - if anything, its going to make Photoshop get back to what its good at - editing photos - and let it NOT be a photo organizer.
Aperture is built for the prosumer to professional photographer that laughs at 25,000 photos. I can easily shoot 3000 (and want to keep 500) in a single week at work, but there has never been a good way to DO that.
Aperture helps guys like me because when i shoot, say, 20 shots of a single moment at an event (a la, a football tackle, a guy hoisting a flag, etc) i really don't NEED 20 shots - i just want to get as many as possible so i can look thru the 20, find the best, and then (for some unknown reason) never want to delete the 19 others. iPhoto is a joke for this, of course, because i often could have row after row of pictures that were all pretty identical. I was about to go layout some cache on something to replace my iPhotoBuddy multi-library self organization setup i'm using now.
Instead of manually organizing thousands of photos in dozens of groups, Aperture does it all for me. It also helps out with batch processing that iPhoto+Photoshop couldn't do (because iPhoto does all its organizing in a bunch of weird subfolders) without making mass exports, then deleting the non-edited photos, etc.
Photoshop is still The premiere photo editing tool, but for making my livelihood livable and organized, to be able to grade, select, and throw out pictures (without deleting), to help make simple and fast output for customers to view online or to build USEFUL contact sheets, Aperture will save me untold hours of my life. Photoshop has has some sad organization tools - and the built in browser is just this side of Finder or XP's thumbnail view...
there's no multi-image review with simultaneous panning, no UI benefits from dual screens, no loop zooms on both open images and previews... none of that.
this is serious software - this is probably even a larger, more important jump from iPhoto than Final Cut is from iMovie...
Its George Bush and Karl Rove's fault i tell you! Its all about the extreme right wing Republicans and their lust for power with George Bush! They're all bought off by the record executives - its a plot!
Slashdot Mirror
>It's a chance to read a whole bunch of responses by contributors who are absolutely
>convinced that the values and beliefs they hold are the ones that should be universally
>observed.
i find your beliefs are wrong, should not be observed and belive you should be silenced...
when you say that intolerant views should be quashed, you are intolerant youself.
you cannot simultanrously hold that value systems which silence opposition with threat of death are on a level playing field with those that allow diverse oppinions.
put another way - If you silence intolerant speech, then you are far worse than the one who speaks intolerantly.
By definition, you cannot speak ill of Chinese policies in China - which places it on equal ground or superior ground to other systems in China. In the US (and some Euro countries), the subject can be debated - therefore, by simple logic, whatever system the US has is better than what China has.
how can i say that?
I'm in the US.
I'm not that old, but i just don't understand when morality became part of the equation when it comes to using energy? Is someone in Botswana that lives in a hut a better person than a bloke in Surrey who mows a lawn with an electric lawn mower? If so, i don't seem to understand it.
And honestly, I don't understand - well maybe i do - why it is that people get all flummoxed at the idea of removing human transport devices from the global warming equation. Yes, yes, for now, it is just pushing the problem up the chain, but is that the job of the car makers?
If a car is fairly efficient, and it is no longer spewing out global warming gasses - what the hell else do you expect car makers to do? Not everyone - some could - but not everyone could survive driving a euro golf cart around because it wouldn't hold kids or baggage, etc.
If the car manufacturers are going to make devices that can run 100% clean and are saleable to the public meeting demand, then if you ask me, its high time we start coming up with energy solutions that are not dependent upon unstable thocracies and kingdoms in the middle east, hockey playing blue-nosers in north america, or corrupt countires like Mexico and the rest of central America. The car makers hold up their end, its someone else's responsibility to hold up the other end.
And honestly, we see that China is - amazingly enough - going to lead the way with pebble-bed reactors... 1 for each city or more. It is utterly remarkable to me that a communist county has the stones to get this problem figured out while a country like the US is handcuffed by granola munching tree huggers... except for the founder of the Sierra Club... he gets it.
"build in" was the wrong terminology used by the poster.
"Included with" is what he should have said to be more accurate... and is exactly the termniology Apple uses when they talk about Mac OS X... as in..
Safari is included with Mac OS X - but you can delete the app in one step.
iChat is included with mac OS x - but you can delete the app in one step.
The only "built in" things Apple has been doing lately are...
building in cameras into their computers (you can't take them out - boo!)
building in bluetooth (to the point where its nearly impossible to remove)
When Apple hands out software, you don't see anyone complaining... because you can get rid of/delete whatever you want
like Widgets? Hell, i hate em - and therefore, i deleted them, and diabled Widgets with one System Preference.
Try doing that with Internet Explorer, ActiveX, and the billions of crappy services that cmoe running by default ni Windows.
I personally run 50 IP cameras (Axis) to 5 Xserve DP G5s.
They all dump their data to dual XServe RAIDs (located in separate parts of the building for physcial separation) using XSan (with 1 XServe as a XSan controller), page me via an email when a camera should not be going off at night of the picture, run scripts that write out formatted logs for motion activity.
It took about 4 months to get everything running smoothly - camera settings, getting enough machines to do the work, compression levels that were sufficient for us... but it works fine.
We can even control the PTZ cameras from anywhere when we tunnel into our network.
You need a lot of horsepower to make this happen - you need lots of ram and you need disk drives running plenty fast.
If you're going to use 640x480x30fps, you are going to only be doing 3 cameras per Mac. maybe you could get away with more if you were using a quad G5 desktop instead of an XServe, but we don't need that much horsepower because only a few cameras are set to high resolution - and even those are set to low FPS (for capturing faces at the doors).
If money is not the object - then you need someone that knows Applescript, you need some freaking hard drives, and you need a lot of computer power... Security Spy (Ben lives in England, he's not elusive, i get email from him all the time, and he's even called me a few times) is plenty industrial for what i need.
yeah, that's stopped a lot of other people from making software to put things on my iPod i'm "not supposed to".
This is only good news, folks. Those people who were early adopters are going to raise such holy hell - first at Best Buy to the poor schmuck selling High Dev DVD players, then they will call the DVD player makers, then the DVD makers, then their congresscritters.
This will finally be the frist massive fuck you to the consumers by the tiny movie studio industry that will be so blatant and so obvious that even My Mom (tm) will understand that they are being fucked.
Something will have to give, and i guarantee you, it won't be My Dad (tm) buying a new plasma TV - he'll pay $500 for whatever box comes out to hack the problem, just like the descrambler box we had as kids.
Unfortunately, i won't need to, because i held off until that sweet ass Aquos 45" was under $4K.
Is it "about time" Apple transitioned to Intel... in mid 2005 at WWDC?
or will 2007 be "about time" when we'll see some Adobe products written to take advantage of the computers YOU SNARKLY demanded from Jobs with your little jab at him at WWDC last year?
I was ready to understand the difficulty in the undertaking - but you guys were first to Mac OS X, and now, you're going to be stupid late to Intel, despite your grumblings that Apple wasn't there all along... and i was even ready to forget that we saw Wolfram have their shit togther in short order...
or is this some play to get Mac users to run Codeweaver's stuff to run your stuff - saving you from having to make Mac OS X versions of things? Or some other random conspiracy.
Don't be snotty AND late... be one or the other.
no one on earth is forcing an IT, CIO, homemaker, graphic artist, gamer or anyone else to HAVE TO BUY Micro Soft's shit.
I have for the last two years officially told people - i cannot and will not help you if you are running Windows. I am too busy accomplishing things (photography, videographic analysis) to be bothered with tools that do not just work. I don't care that there are millions of Windows viruses, i don't care if your webpage doens't work with anything but IE and Active X, i just have stopped caring.
I am getting older - i have a family, and i want to create and do things which are special, and i no longer have the time nor the incination to either myself, or have to deal with others who's job it is to spend all day and night defending computers from themselves. I am the architect who doesn't want to deal with the knock-off cheap Chinese crap powertools and hear all the workers bitch about them, or hear about the foreman that tells me i have to keep taking apart all the power tools and putting them back together again... build the fscking house - go get the tools that WORK - and pay more for them if you have to.
The simple fact is - its totally irrelevant to me if a Mac costs $1000 or $3000. If it does what i need - and prevents me from having to fix my tool all day long - the $3000 tool will be far more vaulable in just a week or two. Theoretical, imaginary, or otherwise fantasmic notions that Macs are just as insecure as Windows are irrelevant to me - i work today, and i work now. (well, its saturday, i'm only working a few hours today).
But the flip side of that is - i no longer give a shit what anyone uses. I don't care. Do not bother me or hassle me or get in my way if you can't keep up with me. My friends and family no longer bother me - i bought my family Mac minis, and my friends are all switching.
The world uses Windows?? I'm fscking George Bush of the Mac - i don't give a shit if every person on earth said "jump off this cliff, its the industry standard"
i'm not a lemming - i have things to get done. Whatever you want to do is fine with me, you're out of my "circle of give a shit".
You run Windows. I'm getting things done.
i'm completley convinced that for using email, web browser, iPhoto, etc.. that the new iiMacs wipe the floor with comparably priced PPC macs.
what i want to know - and what holds me back from moving to an iiMac from my DP g5 1.8 - is
1. how they will perform when rendering with Compressor
2. how much faster is FCP when hooked up to similar disk packs (like cheap desktop FW400 raids)
3. Will i still be able to run background processing tasks like Compressor and handbrake yet get good foreground performance so i can email, websurf and get on with life while waiting for those 30-1 hour long tasks, instead of walking away from the machine, lest i get tempted to use it and really slow down the renders.
4. Will Aperture stop sucking performance wise?
I've been asking people i know inside apple for YEARS to add this to Mac OS X Server. I don't see them doing it anytime soon.
.Mac did with a lot of work and hacking of end-user boxes inside your network.. tho, i think it was two or three revs of .Mac ago.
however, there was a guy that came up with a way to do most everything
i want my new iiMac to be free as well.. but that's not bloody likely to happen either, is it>
Now, if they simply raised the price of every Mac computer $25, then i think that would be the best way to hide the costs of it, thereby making it free.
I actually had someone use the data from my domain registration to stalk me and my wife...
thank God i set the address to an old address where i used to live. How do i know that he used that data?
in his emails to us, he talked about how he was watching our apartment and described the old apartment i used to work at perfectly.
so - get fscked if you think i'll ever use my real personal data for my domains.
This computer is far closer to a PDA than an actual computer. Mac OS X is a desktop computer OS. If Apple made some kind of PDA-like device and acceptable OS UI to go with such a device, then that would have been fine.
But as it sits, it would have been fsck-all impossible to shoehorn Mac OS X 10.4.3 "just work" into a Negroponte laptop. They wouldn't get to adjust the UI themselves - the part of Mac OS X that is totally closed. With Linux - you can change whatever you want to fit your device. Its perfect.
Now, an Apple engineered open source OS for PDA sized devices - aw hells yeah. That would rock like Mac OS X and the iPod OS because they would design it to "Just Work".
or until DirecTV cancels MPEG-2 service, but i tell you what, i'm going to run my hacked DirecTiVo until the wheels fall off - screw everyone else and their lameastic ideas.
My Hacked DirecTiVo works 1 step simple to get any show i want with my iPod (now, with Video), doesn't cost me per play, works great with my Mac, and doesn't have any DRM.
These things are going to be insanely valuable in years to come because of their incredible feature set, lack of DRM, and compatibility with so many other devices.
meanwhile, newer systems are going to be less and less useful and less interesting to me. HDTV doesn't make my skirt fly up compared to a well written show or good coverage of a hockey game... neither of which requires higher resolution.
no, its moveon.org
>A lot has come out since the vote on the authorization for Iraq. You already know it's not as simple an issue as you make it out to be, so I won't explain it again for you.
i also don't think its as complicated as you make it out to be.. I listed to both sides from 1998-2003, and it wasn't until 2003 that either side made mention that Saddam was NOT, in fact, developing WMDs.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.
We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
So, we already know that Bush "lied" when he said that Saddam was trying to build WMDs, it turns out that the Democrats, from ex presidents, senators, and presidential canidates for the Democrats lied as well - (seeing as both had the same intel in the Senate Intelligence Committee, they knew better that there were no WMDs.)
But like i said, i listened to both sides - and they were both saying he was making WMDs - so who was i supposed to believe?
As a libertarian, i would like to see a massive crash program on nuclear power, drive a hydrogen-powered A4, and let the arabs and jews go back to doing whatever it is that they do to each other out in the dirt of the middle east. I don't care if they hate each other - i just wish we didn't have to get dragged into it.
The Rs also control the senate, but there are 44 Dems in the Senate...
and while every single Democrat is against the war today - how was it that the authority to go to war went 99 to nothing in the senate?
I find it funny that on the War and the Patriot Act, the Dems VOTED lock-step with the Republicans, while a mere 2 years later, are violently opposed to the very things that they voted for?
Both parties suck in so many ways, its frightening.
Adults Vote Libertarian.
isn't the whole point of Windows being better than the mac is that it runs on generic hardware?
...asks the guy running a Dual G5 with Front Row....
So - if you were a Mac guy, then went to a pre-fabbed windows box that costs more than a mac (as most WMC computers do) how exactly did you save any money?
Lawyers and the lawyer's IT geek.
i mean - there's not going to be anything else to do by that time. If you're not getting sued, the only way to make money will be to sue someone else.
i would love to have a nuke plant in my backyard - but alas, the environmentalists prevent any form of nuclear power in the US from growing.
i would love to get hydrogen from that plant - but alas, the envrionmentalists refuse to take SUV's out of the equation - SUV's powered by hydrogen piss them off too.
please - put a nuclear power plant in my back yard - i'm in Southern California.
If you do not shoot 500 pictures or more at a family gathering "because you can" - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If you do not have a camera body that costs over $1200 or if you don't understand what "camera body" means - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If the idea of spending twice as much money on a single lens than what you paid for your camera body or your car seems totaly insane - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If you think 5000 pictures is a lot of pictures - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If you have absolutely no problem deleting pictures you've taken - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If you never take your memory card out of your camera - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If you don't piss your pants at the thought of panning and zooming 8 pictures simultaneously - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
If you use AOL's webmail to send people pictures of your dog - then you can't understand the difference between Aperture and Photoshop.
Aperture is for photographers. Photoshop is for graphic artists.
It doesn't claim to replace Photoshop. It just means that you don't have to use that sucktastic horrble Photosop file browser any more, nor do YOU need to do all the organizing of your photos by hand any longer.
Apple's software - iPhoto, iTunes, and now, Aperture, do what computers should have done all along - organize your shit FOR you, not you have to do it for the computer. That's ass backwards.
I can now organize every single photo in one location, and have them all together, yet organized so it will be easy to separate...
Work, with sub-categories of each program i work on
Family, with sub-cats by people, events, etc
church, with sub-cats for groups, events,
etc., for shots i could use for backgrounds, for stock photography - any of which i could use in any other project
now, i can find photos that will match various criteria from across all those major categories, including offline drives if i've got something backed up to another drive.
the basic color balancing, leveling, etc - that is old hat - you don't really need photoshop to do that any more... and what this does that Photoshop does pooooooorly is across multiple pictures... including across mulitple groups if necessary. also - there's no versioning in photoshop - you have to keep multiple files if you use them for multiple uses - that blows. And Aperture takes care of it.
If you want to do major retouching, cloning, do a lot of heavy masking and photo combining - that is NOT what Aperture is for at all - that's what Photoshop is for. But Photoshop does little to nothing to help a pro with hundreds of thousands of pictures get organized... we have to do all of that manually.. or poorly with the software out there.
now - with a RAID on my desk - i can deal with absolutely hundreds of thousands of pictures no problem. Aperture and Photoshop are a absolutely great combination
Aperture is NOT a photoshop killer - if anything, its going to make Photoshop get back to what its good at - editing photos - and let it NOT be a photo organizer.
Aperture is built for the prosumer to professional photographer that laughs at 25,000 photos. I can easily shoot 3000 (and want to keep 500) in a single week at work, but there has never been a good way to DO that.
Aperture helps guys like me because when i shoot, say, 20 shots of a single moment at an event (a la, a football tackle, a guy hoisting a flag, etc) i really don't NEED 20 shots - i just want to get as many as possible so i can look thru the 20, find the best, and then (for some unknown reason) never want to delete the 19 others. iPhoto is a joke for this, of course, because i often could have row after row of pictures that were all pretty identical. I was about to go layout some cache on something to replace my iPhotoBuddy multi-library self organization setup i'm using now.
Instead of manually organizing thousands of photos in dozens of groups, Aperture does it all for me. It also helps out with batch processing that iPhoto+Photoshop couldn't do (because iPhoto does all its organizing in a bunch of weird subfolders) without making mass exports, then deleting the non-edited photos, etc.
Photoshop is still The premiere photo editing tool, but for making my livelihood livable and organized, to be able to grade, select, and throw out pictures (without deleting), to help make simple and fast output for customers to view online or to build USEFUL contact sheets, Aperture will save me untold hours of my life. Photoshop has has some sad organization tools - and the built in browser is just this side of Finder or XP's thumbnail view...
there's no multi-image review with simultaneous panning, no UI benefits from dual screens, no loop zooms on both open images and previews... none of that.
this is serious software - this is probably even a larger, more important jump from iPhoto than Final Cut is from iMovie...
Its George Bush and Karl Rove's fault i tell you! Its all about the extreme right wing Republicans and their lust for power with George Bush! They're all bought off by the record executives - its a plot!
oh wait - did you say Canada?
Hey, I own the intellectual property to Blackberry's you insensitive clod!
- useless US IP whore