Apple crap is as much luxury as a high end Casio. It's no rolex.
Heh, when I first read that, I thought you wrote "high end Casino" and I couldn't figure out exactly what you meant. Anyway...
If you want to see what's real luxury in computing, search for the toughbooks. Panasonic toughbook are much more durable, undestructible than any apple computer ever made.
And they are PCs.
Why do you say that durable and "undestructible" == luxury? I'm not necessarily saying that Apple products are luxury, but what you're saying is like saying that a Bentley Continental GT isn't real luxury, an Army Humvee is luxury. Not that a Mac is the same as an Bentley, but you get the idea.
FYI, Maine is one of the largest moocher states, taking in $1.40 in Federal benefits for every dollar paid in Federal Taxes.
Which, of course, makes it all the more impressive that they're (apparently) willing to forgo those monies in favor of not complying with the Fed's ID card scheme.
It would be incredibly cool if OS X developers could use xcode to compile small widget-like iPhone extensions with sync capabilities for their apps! Buy such an app, one-click install the extension to your phone. You could take your delicious DVD library with you on your phone, have Cookbook create and sync a shopping list automatically for the recipes you chose for the week, have your OmniOutliner task lists handy on the go etc etc.
Yes!! I can't understand why Jobs doesn't see this potential. This is the kind of thing that could even help them sell more Macs... "Well, I already have an iPhone... and look at how well Mac software integrates with it!"
This closed-system attitude is why cell phones are so boring today. Free or low cost development tools are the reason why there are so many cool things we can do on our computers today. If the internet had been managed the same way the cellular companies manage their network, we'd all still be using Gopher (that is to say, Slashdot types might be using Gopher--your average guy on the street would have no idea all these tubes even existed).
I'm not sure that you're right, though, about the category into which the small apps that could interface with Delicious Library or your cookbook software actually fit. My impression is that widgets don't access any data locally, but rather get their data from the network (be it WiFi or EDGE). So if you're going to sync with your desktop, the apps would be much better off as full-blown apps on the phone, accessing local data.
I was going to order one on the first day of availability, but now I'm leaning towards either a Treo (which I was going to buy a couple months ago, but thought, hey, maybe I should wait until MacWorld to see if Apple announces anything amazing) or waiting until someone cracks the iPhone. One can get Treos pretty cheap these days; maybe I'll just buy one and then if someone cracks the iPhone I'll re-evaluate.
I have been developing apps that run on Cingular's network for some time now. I write J2ME apps that run on most phones sold by Cingular. I don't need anybody's permission and so far nobody from Cingular has contacted me to say that I'm using too much bandwidth.
Yeah, but you probably can't access many of the features on the phone without Cingular or the phone manufacturer's digital signature on your code. For example, I tried to write a program for my Sony Ericsson W600i phone (Cingular branded) but I ran into restrictions on which J2ME profiles I was actually able to use. Without the digital signing, I couldn't access the file system, could only send data over certain TCP ports, etc. There weren't any SSH clients that worked on that phone, for example. (The phone's screen broke about 3 months ago so I gave up; apparently I could have flashed the firmware with the unbranded version to allow access to these features but that's hardly the same as being able to access them by default since very few users will want to do it. Never mind that it voids any chance of getting support from Cingular, and the manufacturers won't support phones originally sold through a telco.
I was really, really excited about this, but now I think I'm just going to get a Treo. Disappointing; I have a Mac, converted the rest of my family to Macs, own an iPod, etc, but I'm not going to spend $500 on something that won't have the ability for independents to write innovative software. As it sounds now, I'm not sure I'd even be able to install Salling Clicker on the iPhone. I waited for MacWorld to buy a replacement for my current (broken) phone on the off chance that Apple might announce something really cool (which I thought they had!), but this is really a let-down.
Jobs, you're making a mistake here. For me it isn't about the ability (or lack thereof) to install Skype or Ogg Vorbis. It's about the innovative ideas that might come from random small-time developers.
You did say that, but I have not had good experiences with the type of system you're suggesting. My parents tried two or three different systems in that price range and you really could hardly tell that the surround speakers were even on. Maybe we just had bad experiences. I guess that's what I meant when I said that the stuff I like to watch takes advantage of the surround sound system--when the difference between the $200 system and the built-in speakers is almost unnoticeable, I can hardly count it as providing that advantage. Now they're using a legitimate receiver I gave them with some older speakers and the difference is significant. This isn't audiophile equipment by any means... ~$300 receiver when I bought it 4 years ago and speakers my dad has had for 20 years (and weren't particularly good to begin with).
I will agree that if you have a 20" SDTV, there is no reason to worry about spending more on the audio equipment, at least not if you're going to be using it with your TV. My point is that if you're going to be spending thousands of dollars on a TV (which is what the original poster was talking about), you should at least consider spending a descent amount on the audio system you're going to be using with the TV. Maybe you think I just have too much money to spend (and you'd probably be right) but that same argument can be made when you start talking about why anyone would spend that much on their TV to begin with.
(Of course, I might also argue that there isn't really such a thing as a $200 surround sound system with "good" bass, but that just boils down to what definition of good one wants to use, and that's an argument with no end.)
Many people might not be able to immediately tell the difference between the $200 system and a higher-end system, at least not without an A/B type comparison. It's really hard to "remember" what something sounded like, and things like volume can also have a huge effect on perceived quality. That doesn't mean that they think the higher-end system is actually worth the extra cash, which may be what you're trying to say.
Not a lot of people can tell the difference between a good EDTV 480p signal and an HD signal. All things considered, there's a huge step-up in quality going from 480i on a flickery CRT to 480p on a steady LCD. From there, it's a bit of an incremental step up going to 720p.
So, put her in front of a 480p signal and she may very well think that's the improvement, not the HD.
You're probably right. I imagine that the size of the TV was also a big part, since she's used to her 32" 4:3 TV and mine is 58".
Presumably, both the cheap and expensive audio setup are being driven by a good uncompressed, digital signal and not a cassette tape! Audio made their equivalent huge step years ago with CDs and DVDs, and that's where normal people could hear a difference.
Your expensive speakers are matter to geeks like us, who can recognize compression artifacts and scaled pixels.
Excellent point. I sometimes wish no one had ever pointed out to me how to recognize those sort of errors--I might have a lot more money in my checking account...;-)
I have a cheap home stereo system myself. Sony + Bose, terrible I know, but it's better than nothing and nobody besides me cares. But, it's better than the TV speakers and I really don't use it. I'd rather have the good stuff like MB Quart in my car where it's used hours each day.
Hey, whatever makes you happy. I try not to knock other people's systems... It doesn't change anything and I can enjoy what I have without having to knock other people down. ('Course, I might invite them to my place to enjoy a movie rather than the other way around, but...)
I think there is a pretty big difference between "perfectly acceptable" and sounding as good as it can, especially with shows broadcast in HD with a Dolby Digital soundtrack. Sporting events come to mind. I think that Arrested Development had a 5.1 track as well. I guess as far as movies go, you are correct that your average romatic comedy might not take advantage of a surround sound system, but I would say that more than 10% of the movies I tend to watch do take advantage of the extra "feel" associated with the surround sound.
It's trivial, but for example, in the Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy movie, when the bowl of petunias finally smashes into the ground the sound actually comes from behind you, since the characters have moved on. In stereo, you don't really notice that kind of thing (it's just glass breaking) but in surround sound I find that sort of thing to be entertaining. So it's not just your action movies with their loud explosions that can use this sort of thing, but the folks mixing the movie do have to know what they're doing.
For most people, for most sources, a cheap sound system is all you need.
Yeah, but for most people, a newspaper would be good enough. This stuff is for entertainment, and when you're talking about that, do what makes you happy. Most of my friends would duplicate my system if they could afford it. It all depends on priorities and available resources.
I've often wondered why they bother putting speakers on every TV. If you're going to spend $5000 on a TV, you'd probably have a good sound system, so why even bother with the TV speakers.
You know, I agree, but you'd be surprised how many posts I've seen on an AV forum (like AVS Forum where someone posts "I just bought a 72 inch HDTV. Can anyone recommend a good surround sound system for under $200?"
I'm not sure that the difference between a descent set of TV speakers and a mid-range surround system is necessarily as obvious as the difference between SDTV and HDTV. For example, when I installed my new HDTV last January, my mom commented on how good the picture looked, but she tells us that she can't really tell the difference between my sound system (Paradigm speakers with Marantz AVR) and her sub-$200 5.1-in-a-box system at her place. Maybe she just has mud in her ears?
As far as your comment about watching the morning news in surround sound, for me it's not the surround sound that makes it worth turning on the AVR. The quality of the sound is much higher than from the TV's speakers (which are actually supposed to be fairly good). If we're going to talk about saving money, I'm sure the sound system (speakers, amps, processors, etc) adds up to a couple hundred bucks in the cost of a TV like mine... and yet the first thing I did when I hooked the TV up was to disable the sound system in the TV menu. Oh well.
Have you given a thought to what discharging a firearm on an airplane at 30,000 feet might do if you puncture the hull of the plain and depressurize the cabin?
I wonder if you're not actually just a troll, given that you misspelled "plane", but MythBusters did an episode about gunshots causing explosize depressurization. IIRC, it's not really a legitimate risk. Further, see Wikipedia's article on cabin pressurization.
Assuming MicroSoft's XBox360 maintains its current rates of shipment of ~567K units last November (generous since this is pre-holiday), then they will have added ~1.5-2 million units to bring their worldwide shipped units to ~10 million.
He received an honorary phd (Fine Arts maybe?) from Sandburg College in Galesburg, Illinois this summer for giving the speech at their graduation ceremony.
Knox College. Carl Sandburg College is the local community college, and does not grant doctorates, honorary or not.
I believe you're correct about it being Fine Arts though. And he gave a pretty good talk. Better than the guy who spoke at my graduation, that's for sure.
Will ESPN broadcast NASCAR in HD starting next year?
I'm not a NASCAR fan, but I do know that there are often HD NASCAR broadcasts. I'm not sure if it's ESPN, but I'm pretty sure TNT does so, and I think HDNet does as well. I use Dish Network, but I think those channels are available on DirecTV and cable too.
However the Samsung 42" LCD screen that was showing it cost AU$4,500, for the same price (depending on brand, less even) you could get a 50" 1080i plasma.
I picked up my 58" 1080p DLP for about US$3000, which I think is slightly less than AU$4500. This was about a year ago. You folks down under are getting hosed. (No surprise there, though, eh?)
It's an HP MD5880n, if you're interested. I've heard that they've been discontinued, though. Unsurprising since I never saw one in an actual store... I had to order mine directly from HP, and I only did that because they told me I could keep it for 3 weeks and if I didn't like it they'd pay to ship it back. Looks like they only have the 65" model available on their website now, although the price has dropped to US$3500.
In addition, it's better to be seen taking some kind of measures than to just sit back and say "See, we're doing our jobs. This one didn't succeed." Even if it's true.
Better for whom? Certainly not me, if those measures are completely ineffectual in that they don't increase actual security, but only the appearance of security. I'm surprised that no terrorists have attacked the ridiculous lines of people waiting to go through security. How are you going to prevent that, have security checkpoints before you can queue for the security checkpoints?
The whole thing is ridiculous. They do things merely to be seen doing something, which is often worse than doing nothing at all.
I use HP's MD5880n 1080p 58" TV as the primary display for my home computer (which happens to be a Mac). It works spectacularly well, with the exception that if your eyes aren't quite good the 1080p resolution can be hard to read from 10-15 ft (fonts, especially on the web and particularly in web images, can be too small). I bought it for about $3000 shipped, but I think prices are coming down. HP also makes a 65" version, the MD6580n.
These TVs accept a 1080p signal over HDMI. I currently run ADC->DVI and then DVI->HDMI to get the signal from my Mac's ADC (Apple Display Connector, Apple's mix of DVI and power in one cable) output to the HDMI input on the TV. This works with the standard resolutions between 800x600 up to 1920x1080. The TV knows that it's getting its signal from a computer and has a special PC aspect mode, which makes the pixel mapping 1:1 and eliminates overscan. This means that there is a slight area of the screen that doesn't get illuminated, but it's hardly noticable. Apparently you can use one of the other aspect modes and a custom resolution to fix this, but it's not worth the trouble to me.
While it is undoubtedly impressive that you would go out of your way to provide service like that, what was your customer thinking calling his ISP's tech support about a problem with his mouse? I mean, give me a break, did he really think that his Internet provider was responsible for his inability to move the mouse pointer around the screen?
because if you would sit and wait to download all the episodes it means that you at least like it to some extent... I would say that about 40-50% of the people who download all the episodes would have bought the dvds legally had they not have downloaded it. If you would not have done then fair enough... but if you watch it at least twice a week I would say chances are you would have paid up.
Perhaps if you watch it at least twice a week, but in my experience downloading definitely leads to sales. I caught Dead Like Me, an excellent show that was originally on Showtime, on HDNet recently, and I liked it enough that I downloaded the two seasons. After watching them, I bought the DVDs. There is no way I would have invested $90 on a show I had only seen once, and HDNet doesn't seem to show them in order so the continuity of the show (which is important for this series) would have been thrown off if I had tried to watch them on TV. The irony of the situation was not lost on me when I skipped over the MPAA's anti-piracy ad on the DVDs.
Also note there is no real 1080P DLP right now because all consumer 1080P DLPs woblerate and thus don't actually display all 1920x1080 pixels at once like a true progressive display would. I just don't find consumer DLP very pleasing.
I have the HP MD5880n which is 1080p and uses wobulation. I've actually been using it as my primary display for my PowerMac for about a month now and I have no issues with it. 58" for about $3000, and now you can find it cheaper (shipped) online. I know that it's only my opinion but unless you've actually seen the MD5880n I wouldn't discount all the 1080p TVs just because they use wobulation.
But if privacy is irrelevant, why not have the NSA open-up the CDR's to everyone? Why should only the NSA be allowed to access that information. More to the point, if the Bush administration isn't doing anything illegal or anything (that it considers) immoral, why are they preventing the rest of us from finding out what's going on?
And while many objected to the U. S. goverment knowing about the activities of U. S. citizens through this program, the Constitution does not prohibit the government from purchasing information about activities which occur on foreign soil, even if those activities involve Americans, because Americans are not protected by U. S. law while on foreign soil.
That's a great double standard. The government can do anything it wants to US citizens on foreign soil, but if US citizens violate US law while on foreign soil, when they return home they can be prosecuted. (This may not be true for all crimes, but it is certainly true with regards to drug and sex tourism laws.) So Americans outside the US aren't protected by US law, but are still bound by it? That's ridiculous.
Can you provide a source for this? While I certainly agree that guilt by association is never good, I'm not familiar with its constitutional prohibition.
Right, because a subtle hint like that makes it perfectly clear that the command is in fact
tar xzf <filename>
And I'm sure the first thing a frustrated noob needs is someone acting like they should already know the answers to the questions they're asking. They've probably been trying to figure out for an hour or so what they're supposed to do before going out to the IRC channel where they're hoping someone will take a couple of minutes to explain what this means.
But no, you're too wrapped up in your own superiority to bother actually trying to help anyone. Why do you even bother hanging out in these types of channels at all?
Not to mention that a lot of the documentation out there is written with experienced UNIX types in mind. For someone new to the UNIX paradigm, reading man pages and trying to decipher what everything means can be quite difficult, and so it's not hard to imagine someone reading the FM three or four times and still not understanding what it's trying to tell them.
And before you flame me, note that I was using Linux in the mid-90s with great success, but I can still remember when I was new to UNIX altogether and it was quite a lot to get my head around.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh, when I first read that, I thought you wrote "high end Casino" and I couldn't figure out exactly what you meant. Anyway...
Why do you say that durable and "undestructible" == luxury? I'm not necessarily saying that Apple products are luxury, but what you're saying is like saying that a Bentley Continental GT isn't real luxury, an Army Humvee is luxury. Not that a Mac is the same as an Bentley, but you get the idea.
It doesn't just appear on Westinghouse TVs. See this discussion on AVS Forum. Even Sony TVs are having issues with the PS3...
Yes!! I can't understand why Jobs doesn't see this potential. This is the kind of thing that could even help them sell more Macs... "Well, I already have an iPhone... and look at how well Mac software integrates with it!"
This closed-system attitude is why cell phones are so boring today. Free or low cost development tools are the reason why there are so many cool things we can do on our computers today. If the internet had been managed the same way the cellular companies manage their network, we'd all still be using Gopher (that is to say, Slashdot types might be using Gopher--your average guy on the street would have no idea all these tubes even existed).
I'm not sure that you're right, though, about the category into which the small apps that could interface with Delicious Library or your cookbook software actually fit. My impression is that widgets don't access any data locally, but rather get their data from the network (be it WiFi or EDGE). So if you're going to sync with your desktop, the apps would be much better off as full-blown apps on the phone, accessing local data.
I was going to order one on the first day of availability, but now I'm leaning towards either a Treo (which I was going to buy a couple months ago, but thought, hey, maybe I should wait until MacWorld to see if Apple announces anything amazing) or waiting until someone cracks the iPhone. One can get Treos pretty cheap these days; maybe I'll just buy one and then if someone cracks the iPhone I'll re-evaluate.
Yeah, but you probably can't access many of the features on the phone without Cingular or the phone manufacturer's digital signature on your code. For example, I tried to write a program for my Sony Ericsson W600i phone (Cingular branded) but I ran into restrictions on which J2ME profiles I was actually able to use. Without the digital signing, I couldn't access the file system, could only send data over certain TCP ports, etc. There weren't any SSH clients that worked on that phone, for example. (The phone's screen broke about 3 months ago so I gave up; apparently I could have flashed the firmware with the unbranded version to allow access to these features but that's hardly the same as being able to access them by default since very few users will want to do it. Never mind that it voids any chance of getting support from Cingular, and the manufacturers won't support phones originally sold through a telco.
I was really, really excited about this, but now I think I'm just going to get a Treo. Disappointing; I have a Mac, converted the rest of my family to Macs, own an iPod, etc, but I'm not going to spend $500 on something that won't have the ability for independents to write innovative software. As it sounds now, I'm not sure I'd even be able to install Salling Clicker on the iPhone. I waited for MacWorld to buy a replacement for my current (broken) phone on the off chance that Apple might announce something really cool (which I thought they had!), but this is really a let-down.
Jobs, you're making a mistake here. For me it isn't about the ability (or lack thereof) to install Skype or Ogg Vorbis. It's about the innovative ideas that might come from random small-time developers.
You did say that, but I have not had good experiences with the type of system you're suggesting. My parents tried two or three different systems in that price range and you really could hardly tell that the surround speakers were even on. Maybe we just had bad experiences. I guess that's what I meant when I said that the stuff I like to watch takes advantage of the surround sound system--when the difference between the $200 system and the built-in speakers is almost unnoticeable, I can hardly count it as providing that advantage. Now they're using a legitimate receiver I gave them with some older speakers and the difference is significant. This isn't audiophile equipment by any means... ~$300 receiver when I bought it 4 years ago and speakers my dad has had for 20 years (and weren't particularly good to begin with).
I will agree that if you have a 20" SDTV, there is no reason to worry about spending more on the audio equipment, at least not if you're going to be using it with your TV. My point is that if you're going to be spending thousands of dollars on a TV (which is what the original poster was talking about), you should at least consider spending a descent amount on the audio system you're going to be using with the TV. Maybe you think I just have too much money to spend (and you'd probably be right) but that same argument can be made when you start talking about why anyone would spend that much on their TV to begin with.
(Of course, I might also argue that there isn't really such a thing as a $200 surround sound system with "good" bass, but that just boils down to what definition of good one wants to use, and that's an argument with no end.)
Many people might not be able to immediately tell the difference between the $200 system and a higher-end system, at least not without an A/B type comparison. It's really hard to "remember" what something sounded like, and things like volume can also have a huge effect on perceived quality. That doesn't mean that they think the higher-end system is actually worth the extra cash, which may be what you're trying to say.
You're probably right. I imagine that the size of the TV was also a big part, since she's used to her 32" 4:3 TV and mine is 58".
Excellent point. I sometimes wish no one had ever pointed out to me how to recognize those sort of errors--I might have a lot more money in my checking account... ;-)
Hey, whatever makes you happy. I try not to knock other people's systems... It doesn't change anything and I can enjoy what I have without having to knock other people down. ('Course, I might invite them to my place to enjoy a movie rather than the other way around, but...)
I think there is a pretty big difference between "perfectly acceptable" and sounding as good as it can, especially with shows broadcast in HD with a Dolby Digital soundtrack. Sporting events come to mind. I think that Arrested Development had a 5.1 track as well. I guess as far as movies go, you are correct that your average romatic comedy might not take advantage of a surround sound system, but I would say that more than 10% of the movies I tend to watch do take advantage of the extra "feel" associated with the surround sound.
It's trivial, but for example, in the Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy movie, when the bowl of petunias finally smashes into the ground the sound actually comes from behind you, since the characters have moved on. In stereo, you don't really notice that kind of thing (it's just glass breaking) but in surround sound I find that sort of thing to be entertaining. So it's not just your action movies with their loud explosions that can use this sort of thing, but the folks mixing the movie do have to know what they're doing.
Yeah, but for most people, a newspaper would be good enough. This stuff is for entertainment, and when you're talking about that, do what makes you happy. Most of my friends would duplicate my system if they could afford it. It all depends on priorities and available resources.
You know, I agree, but you'd be surprised how many posts I've seen on an AV forum (like AVS Forum where someone posts "I just bought a 72 inch HDTV. Can anyone recommend a good surround sound system for under $200?"
I'm not sure that the difference between a descent set of TV speakers and a mid-range surround system is necessarily as obvious as the difference between SDTV and HDTV. For example, when I installed my new HDTV last January, my mom commented on how good the picture looked, but she tells us that she can't really tell the difference between my sound system (Paradigm speakers with Marantz AVR) and her sub-$200 5.1-in-a-box system at her place. Maybe she just has mud in her ears?
As far as your comment about watching the morning news in surround sound, for me it's not the surround sound that makes it worth turning on the AVR. The quality of the sound is much higher than from the TV's speakers (which are actually supposed to be fairly good). If we're going to talk about saving money, I'm sure the sound system (speakers, amps, processors, etc) adds up to a couple hundred bucks in the cost of a TV like mine... and yet the first thing I did when I hooked the TV up was to disable the sound system in the TV menu. Oh well.
I wonder if you're not actually just a troll, given that you misspelled "plane", but MythBusters did an episode about gunshots causing explosize depressurization. IIRC, it's not really a legitimate risk. Further, see Wikipedia's article on cabin pressurization.
The 360 has already shipped 10 million units... Bill Gates announced at CES that they've already crossed that mark.
Knox College. Carl Sandburg College is the local community college, and does not grant doctorates, honorary or not.
I believe you're correct about it being Fine Arts though. And he gave a pretty good talk. Better than the guy who spoke at my graduation, that's for sure.
I'm not a NASCAR fan, but I do know that there are often HD NASCAR broadcasts. I'm not sure if it's ESPN, but I'm pretty sure TNT does so, and I think HDNet does as well. I use Dish Network, but I think those channels are available on DirecTV and cable too.
I picked up my 58" 1080p DLP for about US$3000, which I think is slightly less than AU$4500. This was about a year ago. You folks down under are getting hosed. (No surprise there, though, eh?)
It's an HP MD5880n, if you're interested. I've heard that they've been discontinued, though. Unsurprising since I never saw one in an actual store... I had to order mine directly from HP, and I only did that because they told me I could keep it for 3 weeks and if I didn't like it they'd pay to ship it back. Looks like they only have the 65" model available on their website now, although the price has dropped to US$3500.
Better for whom? Certainly not me, if those measures are completely ineffectual in that they don't increase actual security, but only the appearance of security. I'm surprised that no terrorists have attacked the ridiculous lines of people waiting to go through security. How are you going to prevent that, have security checkpoints before you can queue for the security checkpoints?
The whole thing is ridiculous. They do things merely to be seen doing something, which is often worse than doing nothing at all.
I use HP's MD5880n 1080p 58" TV as the primary display for my home computer (which happens to be a Mac). It works spectacularly well, with the exception that if your eyes aren't quite good the 1080p resolution can be hard to read from 10-15 ft (fonts, especially on the web and particularly in web images, can be too small). I bought it for about $3000 shipped, but I think prices are coming down. HP also makes a 65" version, the MD6580n.
These TVs accept a 1080p signal over HDMI. I currently run ADC->DVI and then DVI->HDMI to get the signal from my Mac's ADC (Apple Display Connector, Apple's mix of DVI and power in one cable) output to the HDMI input on the TV. This works with the standard resolutions between 800x600 up to 1920x1080. The TV knows that it's getting its signal from a computer and has a special PC aspect mode, which makes the pixel mapping 1:1 and eliminates overscan. This means that there is a slight area of the screen that doesn't get illuminated, but it's hardly noticable. Apparently you can use one of the other aspect modes and a custom resolution to fix this, but it's not worth the trouble to me.
The HTPC forums at AVSForum.com (this is the Mac forum) and the HP 1080p DLP forum have been particularly good resources for me.
Good luck!
While it is undoubtedly impressive that you would go out of your way to provide service like that, what was your customer thinking calling his ISP's tech support about a problem with his mouse? I mean, give me a break, did he really think that his Internet provider was responsible for his inability to move the mouse pointer around the screen?
Perhaps if you watch it at least twice a week, but in my experience downloading definitely leads to sales. I caught Dead Like Me, an excellent show that was originally on Showtime, on HDNet recently, and I liked it enough that I downloaded the two seasons. After watching them, I bought the DVDs. There is no way I would have invested $90 on a show I had only seen once, and HDNet doesn't seem to show them in order so the continuity of the show (which is important for this series) would have been thrown off if I had tried to watch them on TV. The irony of the situation was not lost on me when I skipped over the MPAA's anti-piracy ad on the DVDs.
I have the HP MD5880n which is 1080p and uses wobulation. I've actually been using it as my primary display for my PowerMac for about a month now and I have no issues with it. 58" for about $3000, and now you can find it cheaper (shipped) online. I know that it's only my opinion but unless you've actually seen the MD5880n I wouldn't discount all the 1080p TVs just because they use wobulation.
Ok, then go "to the store to buy the fucking CD." I don't see the problem. What makes you think you have to buy this content from iTunes Music Store?
That's a great double standard. The government can do anything it wants to US citizens on foreign soil, but if US citizens violate US law while on foreign soil, when they return home they can be prosecuted. (This may not be true for all crimes, but it is certainly true with regards to drug and sex tourism laws.) So Americans outside the US aren't protected by US law, but are still bound by it? That's ridiculous.
Can you provide a source for this? While I certainly agree that guilt by association is never good, I'm not familiar with its constitutional prohibition.
Right, because a subtle hint like that makes it perfectly clear that the command is in fact
And I'm sure the first thing a frustrated noob needs is someone acting like they should already know the answers to the questions they're asking. They've probably been trying to figure out for an hour or so what they're supposed to do before going out to the IRC channel where they're hoping someone will take a couple of minutes to explain what this means.
But no, you're too wrapped up in your own superiority to bother actually trying to help anyone. Why do you even bother hanging out in these types of channels at all?
Not to mention that a lot of the documentation out there is written with experienced UNIX types in mind. For someone new to the UNIX paradigm, reading man pages and trying to decipher what everything means can be quite difficult, and so it's not hard to imagine someone reading the FM three or four times and still not understanding what it's trying to tell them.
And before you flame me, note that I was using Linux in the mid-90s with great success, but I can still remember when I was new to UNIX altogether and it was quite a lot to get my head around.
I would tend to agree with this.