Evangelion
Sep 9, 11:23 AM
http://www.cdrinfo.com/Forum/tm.asp?m=126194&mpage=1&key=𞳲
[INDENT]"Santa Rosa is currently developed by Intel as successor of the current "Napa" platform. Napa will receive a 64-bit refresh in September of this year ("Napa64") to support the launch of the Merom processor. Napa64 will be replaced by Santa Rosa in the first or second quarter of 2007.
Wanna bet that Napa64 is 100% identical to ordinary Napa, apart from the fact that the CPU is Merom, instead of Yonah? Since Napa is a platform, just chaning the CPU to something else would mean that the platform has been refreshed.
[INDENT]"Santa Rosa is currently developed by Intel as successor of the current "Napa" platform. Napa will receive a 64-bit refresh in September of this year ("Napa64") to support the launch of the Merom processor. Napa64 will be replaced by Santa Rosa in the first or second quarter of 2007.
Wanna bet that Napa64 is 100% identical to ordinary Napa, apart from the fact that the CPU is Merom, instead of Yonah? Since Napa is a platform, just chaning the CPU to something else would mean that the platform has been refreshed.
jav6454
Apr 25, 12:52 AM
I cannot even begin to describe how much i hate these idiotic people. They just enrage me. Anyone who has been doing 85mph+ on the highway and then has to slow down to under 70 knows what I mean.
Today I was doing 90mph+ in the far left lane, for miles everyone moved out of the way for me. Then all the sudden I come up on this minivan with "Baby on Board, "I Love Children," "Being Nice is the #1 Rule," etc. bumper stickers and magnets. The woman was doing under 65mph would not move out of my way (and there was plenty of space). When I tried to push her, flash brights, honk, etc. she decided to brake check me. Now, not moving over is one thing, but trying to teach me a lesson when I tell you that you're in my way and that you can move over, is just asking me to screw you over.
I drove behind her for a few miles, and then when the opportunity stuck, I shot a gap to pass her, made sure she couldn't move over to another lane (besides the service lane) and I slammed off my brakes (I swear I saw a squirrel run across the highway;)), she had to veer off of the road to avoid hitting me. I guarantee she'll never try to brake check someone or force the speed limit on them again. I seriously hope she or her damn baby got whiplash. (NO LECTURES PLEASE, THEY WILL ALL BE IGNORED)
I seriously wish that .50 cal guns would be options on cars so that I could just blow up people like her.
-Don
1. You are not Speed Racer
2. Going over 80Mi/hr is already fast enough.
3. I have patience on the road, I wait until there is enough clearance to pass. Your road rage will get you killed.
4. There is a reason for speed limits.
5. I hope a cop catches you and takes your license away. Also your mom should be ashamed of you for being reckless driver. Hell, if I'd be that woman you forced of road, I'd have your plate number and dial 911 and acuse you of reckless driving. Then I'd be laughing
Today I was doing 90mph+ in the far left lane, for miles everyone moved out of the way for me. Then all the sudden I come up on this minivan with "Baby on Board, "I Love Children," "Being Nice is the #1 Rule," etc. bumper stickers and magnets. The woman was doing under 65mph would not move out of my way (and there was plenty of space). When I tried to push her, flash brights, honk, etc. she decided to brake check me. Now, not moving over is one thing, but trying to teach me a lesson when I tell you that you're in my way and that you can move over, is just asking me to screw you over.
I drove behind her for a few miles, and then when the opportunity stuck, I shot a gap to pass her, made sure she couldn't move over to another lane (besides the service lane) and I slammed off my brakes (I swear I saw a squirrel run across the highway;)), she had to veer off of the road to avoid hitting me. I guarantee she'll never try to brake check someone or force the speed limit on them again. I seriously hope she or her damn baby got whiplash. (NO LECTURES PLEASE, THEY WILL ALL BE IGNORED)
I seriously wish that .50 cal guns would be options on cars so that I could just blow up people like her.
-Don
1. You are not Speed Racer
2. Going over 80Mi/hr is already fast enough.
3. I have patience on the road, I wait until there is enough clearance to pass. Your road rage will get you killed.
4. There is a reason for speed limits.
5. I hope a cop catches you and takes your license away. Also your mom should be ashamed of you for being reckless driver. Hell, if I'd be that woman you forced of road, I'd have your plate number and dial 911 and acuse you of reckless driving. Then I'd be laughing
AppleScruff1
Apr 25, 05:57 PM
Hopefully they get rid of the sharp needle points where you open the cover. I know a guy who slashed his wrist open on the sharp point.
chasemac
Aug 24, 02:52 AM
This is true I read this a while back and it was brought up today on a d.a.p site i frequent. Creatives TravelDock 900 speakers have an ipod shuffle connected to it on the box.
Kind of an interesting history note of digital audio players made back in 2004.
http://dapreview.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.90
:) Beyond that my friend. Heard of Sound Blaster?
Kind of an interesting history note of digital audio players made back in 2004.
http://dapreview.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.90
:) Beyond that my friend. Heard of Sound Blaster?
DJMastaWes
Aug 28, 12:11 PM
This Tuesday! This Tuesday!
x2! Danm it! if they annouce it tomorrow, im gonna be in school (first day) from untill like 3:00PM. Unless they are annouced by 10AM Eastern.
x2! Danm it! if they annouce it tomorrow, im gonna be in school (first day) from untill like 3:00PM. Unless they are annouced by 10AM Eastern.
Macginger
Mar 22, 01:33 PM
Yep this is what I've been patiently saving and waiting for, think I've now actually saved enough to buy a car with the change :cool:
Ieo
Apr 4, 11:55 AM
Eh....While I make a terrible liberal because I believe gun control isn't a big issue, there IS such a thing as a lost cause, and that people usually get what they deserve.... I also make a terrible conservative in that I don't think a mall cop should be carrying a ****ing firearm, nor should he be going for a killing shot- shoulder/leg at MOST. And anyway, from the sound of it, they weren't even in the store yet- they were still in the process of breaking in. REAL police are hesitant to fire upon a fleeing suspect, why the **** is a mall cop shooting people in the head who are running away without any stolen property? Answer: Because he's not a real police officer and he shouldn't be carrying a ****ing firearm. Sounds like this will be hitting the courtrooms.
*Edit*
They've updated the post since I posted that...The suspects were armed and firing, so I retract the bit about shooting a fleeing suspect. I'm still not comfortable with a mall cop carrying lethal force....there are plenty of less-than-lethal options out there.
*Edit*
They've updated the post since I posted that...The suspects were armed and firing, so I retract the bit about shooting a fleeing suspect. I'm still not comfortable with a mall cop carrying lethal force....there are plenty of less-than-lethal options out there.
Kingsly
Oct 27, 12:09 PM
Grrr. Doesn't greenpeace have something better to deal with, like all these diesel Semi-turcks driving up and down the 5 freeway? Doesn't greenpeace have private jets? Boats? Cars, trucks, etc? Those all pollute the environment far more than a MacBook.
I think something should be done for the environment. I care deeply for the children in china who get to dismantle toxic products (notice my location? You're speaking to a big human rights activist here). I just think the changes should be made by someone who is sane.
People don't understand what freedoms truly are. It doesn't mean you get to say and do whatever you want wherever you want - that's anarchy, and anarchy is bad... unless you're the biggest, strongest and most brutal. Freedom of speech really means you can't be jailed or otherwise punished by the government for saying what you want in a pulic arena.
... even then there are instances where you can be jailed or cited for saying something outrageously obscene or otherwise dangerous to public health/safety.
People need to read the constitution (http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html) more. The rights guaranteed are surprisingly few, and none of them are absolute.
I think something should be done for the environment. I care deeply for the children in china who get to dismantle toxic products (notice my location? You're speaking to a big human rights activist here). I just think the changes should be made by someone who is sane.
People don't understand what freedoms truly are. It doesn't mean you get to say and do whatever you want wherever you want - that's anarchy, and anarchy is bad... unless you're the biggest, strongest and most brutal. Freedom of speech really means you can't be jailed or otherwise punished by the government for saying what you want in a pulic arena.
... even then there are instances where you can be jailed or cited for saying something outrageously obscene or otherwise dangerous to public health/safety.
People need to read the constitution (http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html) more. The rights guaranteed are surprisingly few, and none of them are absolute.
twostep665
Apr 4, 12:21 PM
Interesting how a security guard is allowed to have a gun. Interesting to see what happens to him.
He is gonna get a medal for bravery and service.
He is gonna get a medal for bravery and service.
Maxx Power
Oct 27, 09:36 AM
But this particular crap from Greenpeace has already been debunked.
They have gone from a respectable environmentalist group to a militant anti-business lobby.
I am Green, but I am not Greenpeace!
link at /. where this has been gone over a while ago, what a bogus Greenpeace report: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=198431&cid=16258305
I don't know if you can call that debunking. I see a lot of greenpeace arguments as well that are valid. If anything, I'd say the author and the posts go so far as to trivialize what greenpeace had to point out, but not invalidating it. You can't invalidate environmental risks that occur sometime down the road by purely using data from now.
Same thing with global warming, which should be renamed into a non-misleading term "global weather change" since strictly speaking some regions will warm up, others will cool down (like europe, right now, with the gulf stream cut short, they've been getting snow in Germany and France for example, consistently over the last few years where there wasn't any before), we know for a fact we can affect our weather, we know for a fact that in many regions (mine for example), the weather has been consistently warming up and gradually changing on the yearly scale (last year the temp record in winter was broken again by 1 degree, and has been since the beginning of records), so it's not a debate about whether or not global warming is an observable fact, it should be a debate about how much it is caused by us and to what extent it'll affect us and what can we actively do about it. Anymore debate into its existence is a stall of time and a waste of effort.
I think that any argument against greenpeace implying that "artificial chemicals, when dumped into our ecosystem, will not do harm as long as we don't observe it" can be safely ignored. If you put it this way, the scientific industry that does this kind of environmental research doesn't even close to the funding that R&D gets, and that it isn't revenue generating. There isn't nearly as big of a chance that the eco-scientists will catch problems as fast as they are made.
They have gone from a respectable environmentalist group to a militant anti-business lobby.
I am Green, but I am not Greenpeace!
link at /. where this has been gone over a while ago, what a bogus Greenpeace report: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=198431&cid=16258305
I don't know if you can call that debunking. I see a lot of greenpeace arguments as well that are valid. If anything, I'd say the author and the posts go so far as to trivialize what greenpeace had to point out, but not invalidating it. You can't invalidate environmental risks that occur sometime down the road by purely using data from now.
Same thing with global warming, which should be renamed into a non-misleading term "global weather change" since strictly speaking some regions will warm up, others will cool down (like europe, right now, with the gulf stream cut short, they've been getting snow in Germany and France for example, consistently over the last few years where there wasn't any before), we know for a fact we can affect our weather, we know for a fact that in many regions (mine for example), the weather has been consistently warming up and gradually changing on the yearly scale (last year the temp record in winter was broken again by 1 degree, and has been since the beginning of records), so it's not a debate about whether or not global warming is an observable fact, it should be a debate about how much it is caused by us and to what extent it'll affect us and what can we actively do about it. Anymore debate into its existence is a stall of time and a waste of effort.
I think that any argument against greenpeace implying that "artificial chemicals, when dumped into our ecosystem, will not do harm as long as we don't observe it" can be safely ignored. If you put it this way, the scientific industry that does this kind of environmental research doesn't even close to the funding that R&D gets, and that it isn't revenue generating. There isn't nearly as big of a chance that the eco-scientists will catch problems as fast as they are made.
braddouglass
Mar 30, 12:40 PM
Apple should chime back and argue that Internet Explorer is too generic. The term internet needs no explanation, and the term Explorer already existed as well as to represent searching and discovering things.
I mean, if App Store and it's common connotation between mobile users as referring to APPLE's App Store isn't enough proof for Apple, how could MS make a rebuttal to the above claims?
Exactly what needs to happen ^^^^
Down with Windows and it's viruses, crashing, terrible OS's and general disposable nature.
I mean, if App Store and it's common connotation between mobile users as referring to APPLE's App Store isn't enough proof for Apple, how could MS make a rebuttal to the above claims?
Exactly what needs to happen ^^^^
Down with Windows and it's viruses, crashing, terrible OS's and general disposable nature.
vega07
Aug 28, 03:49 PM
The new MBPs will be announced on 6th with the free 2-3 day shipping, so MBPs would arrive sooner than the PCs inspite of announcing a week later!
where'd you get that info...or is that your wishful thinking out loud?:rolleyes:
where'd you get that info...or is that your wishful thinking out loud?:rolleyes:
mwayne85
Apr 25, 01:19 PM
I think it's almost a given that they'll do away with the superdrive. There's no need for it. And if they move to flash storage, they could make it a bit thinner and lighter. It would be like a Macbook air, but with powerful mobile processors.
What do you mean, "you people"
ROFL
What do you mean, "you people"
ROFL
blacktape242
Mar 30, 11:43 AM
I want my 5 mins back from reading this article and writing this post......
:apple:
:apple:
rmhop81
Apr 22, 09:09 AM
Ok, I will complain. ;) I stopped using Pandora on my iPhone when AT&T began offering incentives to decrease 3G bandwidth usage (i.e. lower monthly bills).
Delivery of Pandora's stream also comes with the tradeoff of reduced fidelity and network interruptions, which I found barely acceptable for mobile application sans the bandwidth concerns above.
I also tired of the playlists that repeated with the free Pandora service and did not find it of enough value to myself personally to pay, especially if I was not guaranteed more variety of music.
That said, if you find Pandora useful, then good for you!
IMO, the new price structure for AT&T was not worth it to downgrade from the unlimited plan. wow, you save $5 to drop to only 2gb of data? or save $15/month and can only send a few emails a month?
we stream pandora around the house all the time and even wireless to airport expresses around the house...which u have to be connected to wifi to do that. only time use it is when going to/from work in the car so don't really use that much data on our phones with it.
if sound quality is an issue, i bet you are someone who also doesn't use appletv to watch movies bc it isn't of the highest quality?
Delivery of Pandora's stream also comes with the tradeoff of reduced fidelity and network interruptions, which I found barely acceptable for mobile application sans the bandwidth concerns above.
I also tired of the playlists that repeated with the free Pandora service and did not find it of enough value to myself personally to pay, especially if I was not guaranteed more variety of music.
That said, if you find Pandora useful, then good for you!
IMO, the new price structure for AT&T was not worth it to downgrade from the unlimited plan. wow, you save $5 to drop to only 2gb of data? or save $15/month and can only send a few emails a month?
we stream pandora around the house all the time and even wireless to airport expresses around the house...which u have to be connected to wifi to do that. only time use it is when going to/from work in the car so don't really use that much data on our phones with it.
if sound quality is an issue, i bet you are someone who also doesn't use appletv to watch movies bc it isn't of the highest quality?
Multimedia
Sep 12, 04:47 PM
Educated guess would be "big" iPod sales will slump whilst the Nanos & Shuffles will skyrocket.At these new lower price points that reads pretty UN-educated to me. On secopnd thought though since many of US - not the general public - are waiting for the 640x360 widescreen video iPod, this would be a miss.
I htink it's pretty lousy of Apple not to provide the firmware update to allow original 5G Video iPods to load and play Baseline H.264 640x480 self-encoded video. I'm mad about it.
I htink it's pretty lousy of Apple not to provide the firmware update to allow original 5G Video iPods to load and play Baseline H.264 640x480 self-encoded video. I'm mad about it.
twoodcc
Aug 31, 01:27 PM
all we can do is hope and pray
![charlie chaplin hitler. Michael Jordan#39;s Hitler mustache, or Charlie Chaplin patch, in new Hanes commercial [YouTube.com] - Worldnews.com](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vFDxSB9LHQCvecqGgvJYrJVOp0NNS4T-V1YDNU7Zq8GiKb_z08gsmWPx_-Ebs2mijNZqRIccEqII1GyAv-JJQpsOhv3tSXljwAVA=s0-d "Michael Jordan#39;s Hitler mustache, or Charlie Chaplin patch, in new Hanes commercial [YouTube.com] - Worldnews.com")
Rodimus Prime
Apr 19, 03:03 PM
I'm pretty sure there will countless companies willing to take on Apple as a new customer.
just because countless are willing does not mean they have the ablity to produce the output demands at the quality Apple wants.
Also when a company gets the reputations of distrust with its partners prices are generally raised and they are less willing to work with them. It is a bad idea to chew up and spit out companies. Remember everyone talks. I have seen enough of the deals that go on that one one really knows about.
just because countless are willing does not mean they have the ablity to produce the output demands at the quality Apple wants.
Also when a company gets the reputations of distrust with its partners prices are generally raised and they are less willing to work with them. It is a bad idea to chew up and spit out companies. Remember everyone talks. I have seen enough of the deals that go on that one one really knows about.
Willis
Sep 10, 05:39 AM
Well at least people who have brought MacPros can breathe easy now for a while. Basically because these Kentsfield's arent pin compatable with Woodcrest.
However, trying to find a product that can take conroe is sort of pointless. There's no proof or rumours that Apple are working on a Midrange tower. AND even if Apple did release one with just a Conroe chip in it, it would eat iMac sales.
It'd be nice to see one, but not likely
However, trying to find a product that can take conroe is sort of pointless. There's no proof or rumours that Apple are working on a Midrange tower. AND even if Apple did release one with just a Conroe chip in it, it would eat iMac sales.
It'd be nice to see one, but not likely
puckhead193
Sep 19, 01:34 PM
I wonder if these people are buying one to "test it out" or are buying multiple movies.
Pravius
Apr 22, 09:50 AM
LMAO...are you serious? You find another carrier in the US that has unlimited data and has the iPhone?. Don't say Verizon because Verizon has already stated the unlimited plans were TEMP and only to draw in new customers at the launch of their iPhone. They made clear, those plans will be going away.
That statement is pure speculation and I have not seen that anywhere *official*. Until it actually happens, it hasn't happened.
That statement is pure speculation and I have not seen that anywhere *official*. Until it actually happens, it hasn't happened.
iProd
Sep 13, 11:18 PM
I am holding out on getting a new phone in hopes this will be a universal service phone so I can get it for free from Verizon :)
Bern
Aug 23, 05:14 PM
Well for a company that's almost bankrupt I guess this was a worthwhile event for them. Now Creative can continue to make "adapted copies" of the iPod and lose money all over again.
Judging by their past business practices it's only a matter of time before they teeter on the edge of insolvency then I guess they'll have to come up with another reason to sue Apple all over again.
Judging by their past business practices it's only a matter of time before they teeter on the edge of insolvency then I guess they'll have to come up with another reason to sue Apple all over again.
fblack
Sep 10, 12:25 PM
I agree that the expandability of the 24inch imac is impressive, but until I see ease of upgradability as well Im all for a mid range. Its also about the CPU, the C2D's are nice, but their not really a match for their desktop counterparts, there are some of us that want the power of a desktop but dont have the budget for the xeon range...
I'm right with you when you say "that some of us want the power of a desktop but dont have the budget for the xeon range." Also I dont like all in one solutions. However, the 24" might be apple's way of saying that's close enough. Plus looking at what Macworld had to say about the 2.16 C2D and the potential for the 24" 2.33 it sure does narrow the performance some what and this might be what apple is thinking.
More significant, the 2.16GHz system narrowed the performance gap between iMac and Mac Pro product lines. With twice the number of processor cores, all running faster than the iMac, the Mac Pro had a definite advantage in this match up. But because not all applications and tasks take full advantage of the Mac multiprocessing capabilities, most results showed the Mac Pro between 20 and 30 percent faster than the 2.16GHz iMac. I expect that test results of the new 24-inch model�with its faster graphics and the optional 2.33GHz processor upgrade�could close this performance gap even further.
http://www.macworld.com/2006/09/firstlooks/imacbench/index.php
I cant wait to see the benchmarks on the 24". :)
But dont get me wrong I would still prefer a headless tower. :cool:
I'm right with you when you say "that some of us want the power of a desktop but dont have the budget for the xeon range." Also I dont like all in one solutions. However, the 24" might be apple's way of saying that's close enough. Plus looking at what Macworld had to say about the 2.16 C2D and the potential for the 24" 2.33 it sure does narrow the performance some what and this might be what apple is thinking.
More significant, the 2.16GHz system narrowed the performance gap between iMac and Mac Pro product lines. With twice the number of processor cores, all running faster than the iMac, the Mac Pro had a definite advantage in this match up. But because not all applications and tasks take full advantage of the Mac multiprocessing capabilities, most results showed the Mac Pro between 20 and 30 percent faster than the 2.16GHz iMac. I expect that test results of the new 24-inch model�with its faster graphics and the optional 2.33GHz processor upgrade�could close this performance gap even further.
http://www.macworld.com/2006/09/firstlooks/imacbench/index.php
I cant wait to see the benchmarks on the 24". :)
But dont get me wrong I would still prefer a headless tower. :cool:
No comments:
Post a Comment