suMMx
Mar 17, 01:26 AM
$3.90 for regular today, I paid $50 to fill my scion tc
0815
Apr 12, 01:04 PM
WTF? Why does the MS Office updater force me to quit chrome ????
randallking
Jan 8, 04:37 PM
Oooh, what sound does it make? I'm always intrigued by new push notifications. I hope it's the noise the website makes. Pop!
I think it was the same sound that is used for SMS and MMS alerts. It has stopped working today for some reason.
I think it was the same sound that is used for SMS and MMS alerts. It has stopped working today for some reason.
ftaok
Apr 1, 02:01 PM
I'd gladly pay $5 per channel knowing those channels are supported and any funding is stripped from the others. That'd half my monthly bill, and $5 a channel is more than fair, right?Then perhaps you'd be one of the ones that would end up paying less. However, if you think the channels you keep would remain unchanged, I think you'd be disappointed. Get ready for sitcoms, reality shows, and political pundits 24/7.
If the others can't appeal to their subscribers, bye bye crap channels.Just because a channel can't garner enough subscribers doesn't mean it's crap. Look at the stuff these days that get the ratings. This is what cable TV may be reduced to if forced to go ALC.
But PS - All of the above is utterly irrelevant. These cable channels are ADVERTISEMENT supported, like newspapers, NOT subscription supported.... so they'd fail because they could no longer sell false numbers of "potential viewers" anymore, so they'd fail because they suck, not because they don't make money from subscribers.You're right that it's irrelevant, but not because of where the money comes from. It's irrelevant because it won't happen any time soon. There's no support for ALC from any group other than consumers. The Democrats don't want ALC because it will hurt diversity in programming. The Republicans don't want ALC because they see it as interfering with a free market. The cable companies don't want ALC because it involves change and may hurt their bottom line. The networks don't want ALC because it would mean fewer channels/less profits. People who work in the TV industry don't want ALC because they may lose their jobs.
Yeah because being hard headed and refusing to change with the times has done so well for us as a country (Car Industry, housing market, manufacturing process, infrastructure improvements, etc)....I'm not saying that ALC is bad; some days, I'm on your side. I flip flop on this all the time because there are such goodsides and downsides to this. Change can be good, but there are always unintended consequences to change. In the end, it's just TV, so there's nothing earth shattering. Just good, honest debate.
BTW, this has gotten way off topic. Sorry.
If the others can't appeal to their subscribers, bye bye crap channels.Just because a channel can't garner enough subscribers doesn't mean it's crap. Look at the stuff these days that get the ratings. This is what cable TV may be reduced to if forced to go ALC.
But PS - All of the above is utterly irrelevant. These cable channels are ADVERTISEMENT supported, like newspapers, NOT subscription supported.... so they'd fail because they could no longer sell false numbers of "potential viewers" anymore, so they'd fail because they suck, not because they don't make money from subscribers.You're right that it's irrelevant, but not because of where the money comes from. It's irrelevant because it won't happen any time soon. There's no support for ALC from any group other than consumers. The Democrats don't want ALC because it will hurt diversity in programming. The Republicans don't want ALC because they see it as interfering with a free market. The cable companies don't want ALC because it involves change and may hurt their bottom line. The networks don't want ALC because it would mean fewer channels/less profits. People who work in the TV industry don't want ALC because they may lose their jobs.
Yeah because being hard headed and refusing to change with the times has done so well for us as a country (Car Industry, housing market, manufacturing process, infrastructure improvements, etc)....I'm not saying that ALC is bad; some days, I'm on your side. I flip flop on this all the time because there are such goodsides and downsides to this. Change can be good, but there are always unintended consequences to change. In the end, it's just TV, so there's nothing earth shattering. Just good, honest debate.
BTW, this has gotten way off topic. Sorry.
more...
lordonuthin
Apr 17, 04:00 PM
yeah the more the better right now. and i finally got my other system up!
Great! I look forward to you chasing me down ;)
Great! I look forward to you chasing me down ;)
kingdonk
Mar 1, 10:36 PM
more options
more...
chuckles:)
Oct 16, 10:19 PM
does sum1 take accountability for this stuff?
to me these iPhone rumors sound kida like whoever said that thiss would be the worst hurricane season ever.
to me these iPhone rumors sound kida like whoever said that thiss would be the worst hurricane season ever.
talmy
Mar 14, 10:53 AM
Ah, right. In the developer site there is an implication that the server version would be separate. But I'm still expecting some sort of gimmick. With the Mac Store one could end up paying for each little feature as an option.
more...
Electro Funk
Sep 19, 09:03 PM
You can't boot XP from CD on a Mac. You can't you can't you can't. The Mac boots using EFI, which XP doesn't support.
You need to use Boot Camp to install it, as legacy BIOS emulation has to be loaded specifically for XP.
if i am not mistaken the bios emulator (or whatever allows xp and the new vista build to boot from BIOS) is in the last firmware update 1.0 or 1.1, cant remeber the number... you dont need boot camp to install xp or vista, but you do need BC if you want an easy way to create a drivers disc for windows...
You need to use Boot Camp to install it, as legacy BIOS emulation has to be loaded specifically for XP.
if i am not mistaken the bios emulator (or whatever allows xp and the new vista build to boot from BIOS) is in the last firmware update 1.0 or 1.1, cant remeber the number... you dont need boot camp to install xp or vista, but you do need BC if you want an easy way to create a drivers disc for windows...
zombitronic
Mar 26, 04:05 PM
Ya, actually one of the first things that popped into my mind about this is that it was planned to help both companies images and relationship seem better in the press!
Judging by the body language I'd venture to guess whatever it was they were talking about Jobs had the upper hand.
Just because their demeanor is civil does not mean their exchange is.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/03/26/160022-jobs_schmidt_coffee.jpg
STEVE: Do you have any idea how badly I wanna kill you?
ERIC: Yes.
Judging by the body language I'd venture to guess whatever it was they were talking about Jobs had the upper hand.
Just because their demeanor is civil does not mean their exchange is.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/03/26/160022-jobs_schmidt_coffee.jpg
STEVE: Do you have any idea how badly I wanna kill you?
ERIC: Yes.
more...
Earendil
Oct 10, 10:01 AM
Who rates this negative?
Unless I misread the report, basically all Target did was remind the studios that the DVD format is in jeopardy and they better get with the times or Target will. And if studios need Target and Wal-Mart to tell them that, they're in more trouble than I ever thought.
My understanding was different. I take it that they are taking the same stance that Wal-Mart is, and that is that if the movie industry allows iTunes to sell movies, they will make the record companies pay for it (in a negative way). The retailers aren't ready to take on iTunes and the online market, so they are going to use their power to stall the transition to digital downloads as long as they possibly can.
What Target is doing is anti Apple, and more importantly, anti the progression of technology and lifestyle.
Unless I misread the report, basically all Target did was remind the studios that the DVD format is in jeopardy and they better get with the times or Target will. And if studios need Target and Wal-Mart to tell them that, they're in more trouble than I ever thought.
My understanding was different. I take it that they are taking the same stance that Wal-Mart is, and that is that if the movie industry allows iTunes to sell movies, they will make the record companies pay for it (in a negative way). The retailers aren't ready to take on iTunes and the online market, so they are going to use their power to stall the transition to digital downloads as long as they possibly can.
What Target is doing is anti Apple, and more importantly, anti the progression of technology and lifestyle.
Sal510
Aug 21, 05:52 PM
so are they trying to run "FourSquare" out of business haha
more...
chabig
Sep 25, 10:18 AM
If the MBP's or other hardware is not updated at this event, then when is the next public event to have this happen?
Apple doesn't have to have a public event to update the machines. They'll just appear on the website someday.
Apple doesn't have to have a public event to update the machines. They'll just appear on the website someday.
anti-microsoft
Mar 23, 01:15 PM
It's the obvious way forward. Don't be tight and implement that ****!
Ams.
Ams.
more...
Glideslope
Mar 28, 10:47 AM
COOL Logo. :apple:
davidjearly
Dec 21, 05:56 AM
Time enough to post about it though ;) Merryxmas
I have no time for the 'campaign'. I have a limited amount of time for debate over the logic behind it.
I have no time for the 'campaign'. I have a limited amount of time for debate over the logic behind it.
more...
NewGenAdam
Apr 12, 02:30 PM
I think what the OP really means to talk about is discrimination, not racism.
yeah - to clarify, I mean racism in practice should be illegal. Holding racist views, however distasteful, should be legal as we should be free to hold our own opinions as long as we don't harm others by them.
It is the distinction between prejudice and discrimination.
I am not racist in mind or practice, for the record, and personally argue against anybody who is either!
yeah - to clarify, I mean racism in practice should be illegal. Holding racist views, however distasteful, should be legal as we should be free to hold our own opinions as long as we don't harm others by them.
It is the distinction between prejudice and discrimination.
I am not racist in mind or practice, for the record, and personally argue against anybody who is either!
Brometheus
Apr 19, 03:09 PM
What does ANY of this have to do to Apple rejecting a Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist from the App Store?
Nothing, directly. I was responding to a previous comment as you can see. There is an indirect connection to the cartoonist issue. My feeling is that there's a general failure to understand why Apple has a restrictive policy regarding what types of apps can appear in the app store. My post addressed the issue regarding the prohibition of pornography, instead of the issue of what defines an app with defamatory content as was the case with the cartoonist. There's also, in my opinion, a failure to appreciate that the lack of consistency in the app approval process is a result of Apple being unable to anticipate every scenario and nuance that is presented by certain apps, and the fact that Apple hires people to review apps. You can't realistically expect different people to always agree on situations that are slightly different. In order to respond to the explosion of submitted apps, Apple must have had to hire a lot of new reviewers. That means that you may have less control over the quality and experience level of the people that you have working as reviewers.
Nothing, directly. I was responding to a previous comment as you can see. There is an indirect connection to the cartoonist issue. My feeling is that there's a general failure to understand why Apple has a restrictive policy regarding what types of apps can appear in the app store. My post addressed the issue regarding the prohibition of pornography, instead of the issue of what defines an app with defamatory content as was the case with the cartoonist. There's also, in my opinion, a failure to appreciate that the lack of consistency in the app approval process is a result of Apple being unable to anticipate every scenario and nuance that is presented by certain apps, and the fact that Apple hires people to review apps. You can't realistically expect different people to always agree on situations that are slightly different. In order to respond to the explosion of submitted apps, Apple must have had to hire a lot of new reviewers. That means that you may have less control over the quality and experience level of the people that you have working as reviewers.
Skika
Dec 14, 07:54 AM
Anyone thinks thats why they went a little overkill with the current resolution? So they can keep the same resolution on a 4 inch screen and still looks good plus no problems for apps and developers?
Eraserhead
Jun 11, 04:41 PM
Right its just the Guides category to go, so I'm going to stop for today.
codo
Oct 26, 06:09 PM
Why such a negative response? The software out there sucks... more competition means more quality. Sound design needs some major upgrades. It needs to more innovate.
There is absolutely nothing new or innovative about this software. Adobe have pulled a small portion out of a superior program, Audition, and slapped a bit of marketing chat on top to produce a half arsed application that's market is already saturated with adequate basic audio editors - Particularly on the Windows side, which lets remember, will probably make the most profit for Adobe anyway.
I'm complaining because I don't just want this small portion, I want Audition in full for OS X, as many others clearly do. If they can port the original code base for SoundBooth, then certainly can for Audition.
If it is an entirely new application.
It's not. Read above.
FWIW, I discovered today that HairerSoft is working on a pro version of Amadeus. It is only available as a beta at this point, but I have downloaded it for experimentation. Apparently, they have added multitrack support. You can learn more here: http://www.hairersoft.com/AmadeusPro/AmadeusPro.html
I haven't had a chance to install it yet, but I am hoping it works...
Awesome, ill check that out. Thanks.
There is absolutely nothing new or innovative about this software. Adobe have pulled a small portion out of a superior program, Audition, and slapped a bit of marketing chat on top to produce a half arsed application that's market is already saturated with adequate basic audio editors - Particularly on the Windows side, which lets remember, will probably make the most profit for Adobe anyway.
I'm complaining because I don't just want this small portion, I want Audition in full for OS X, as many others clearly do. If they can port the original code base for SoundBooth, then certainly can for Audition.
If it is an entirely new application.
It's not. Read above.
FWIW, I discovered today that HairerSoft is working on a pro version of Amadeus. It is only available as a beta at this point, but I have downloaded it for experimentation. Apparently, they have added multitrack support. You can learn more here: http://www.hairersoft.com/AmadeusPro/AmadeusPro.html
I haven't had a chance to install it yet, but I am hoping it works...
Awesome, ill check that out. Thanks.
toddybody
Apr 19, 02:59 PM
white 4 inch iPhone 5 FTW
illegalprelude
Apr 22, 07:40 PM
Hey everybody, I'm curious if anybody knows of any programs on the Mac that can edit 3D video. I know iMovie is a no go and I'm doubtful that the FCX will support it, seeing how we barely support Blu-ray as it is :mad:
I'm open to all programs and price ranges, though for my own personal need, I'm not talking shooting with an EPIC RED or something, more consumer, $1,500 camera's which really are just filmed in 3D (not giving you actual control like Pro camera's).
Reason I say is, I would love to transition to that format or offer the option, even if it means saving the 3D footage for now on a server and eventually getting back to it (that is if the camera hopefully shoots in both formats at the same time...)
So any thoughts would be awesome.
I'm open to all programs and price ranges, though for my own personal need, I'm not talking shooting with an EPIC RED or something, more consumer, $1,500 camera's which really are just filmed in 3D (not giving you actual control like Pro camera's).
Reason I say is, I would love to transition to that format or offer the option, even if it means saving the 3D footage for now on a server and eventually getting back to it (that is if the camera hopefully shoots in both formats at the same time...)
So any thoughts would be awesome.
Freecity88
Jan 4, 04:08 PM
I like Garmin GPS but I have to say, this one is not comparable to the tomtom or navigon one.