
CalBoy
Apr 25, 01:54 AM
And then there's a thing called the speed limit. Doesn't matter if she did 45, 55, or 65. She's still in the right.
Well that's not entirely right either. Driving too slowly, especially in the fast lane, can get you a ticket as well.
It all comes down to reasonableness and safety. I don't think most posters in this thread object to drivers who go faster than the posted limit when they are cautious, calm, and experienced.
The OP's attitude is shocking because it is full of youthful arrogance of the type that usually ends up in a Red Asphalt video.
Well that's not entirely right either. Driving too slowly, especially in the fast lane, can get you a ticket as well.
It all comes down to reasonableness and safety. I don't think most posters in this thread object to drivers who go faster than the posted limit when they are cautious, calm, and experienced.
The OP's attitude is shocking because it is full of youthful arrogance of the type that usually ends up in a Red Asphalt video.

steviem
Apr 25, 10:33 AM
Holy crap. I just finished reading the thread. Please stay off the road. You did this **** in your moms E60 M5 with 500 HP? I know where this story is heading. Soon you will take that car to an abandoned airport with 3 of your friends which then you will flip it and kill you and your friends. Or you will do that 155 MPH in a neighborhood. These two examples are true stories of 16-18 year olds kids with an E60 M5 who shared the exact same attitude as you and did those stunts. Please do not drive, learn to fly, etc until you gain the maturity to handle these machines.
You will respond to my post saying that you will never do what those people did. That you're a safe driver and claim you will never do that. Guess what pal? Those kids also claimed the exact same thing. Now four people are dead and the other is screwed.
I don't even want him on a pedal bike!
You will respond to my post saying that you will never do what those people did. That you're a safe driver and claim you will never do that. Guess what pal? Those kids also claimed the exact same thing. Now four people are dead and the other is screwed.
I don't even want him on a pedal bike!

fblack
Sep 10, 06:11 PM
Do you really want to use a monitor from 10 years ago in everyday use? Not likely. I've a 15" CRT from about a decade ago too but it's sitting on a shelf as a spare in case my newer monitor dies.
Most times I've bought a new computer, I've also bought a new monitor. A widescreen 17" monitor back when I bought my iMac was extortionately expensive. I generally figure on spending about �15-1800 every three years on a computer and about 5-6 years of useful life. It's been going up from a G3 iBook to a 17" G5 Mac to a fully kitted out 24" iMac for that money. I can't imagine what it will be in 3 - 6 years time but I guess it'll make a 24" iMac feel just as obsolete as the 500Mhz G3 iBook with a 1024x768 screen feels.
I have to conclude that people who want to use their 10 year old CRT are just incredibly cheap and don't value their screens as much as being able to claim how fast their CPU is. I've been programming for 20+ years professionally and your screen isn't something to skimp on. It's THE most important thing if you value your eyes.
I think you mistook the slant of my post. Notice the big grin face at the end of my sentence in the previous post? I meant it half in jest. It does not mean that as I type I am staring at a 14" screen. As far as my 6 yr old CRT that died it was a 19inch not a tiny screen and certainly hefty at about 60lbs. My 10yr old CRT that has been permanently retired now was in fact used as a backup monitor for my old beige G3. I've had more than one monitor go before and having a backup even if it has small screen real estate can save your bacon if you've got work to do. :p
I would love to have the budget to replace all of my equipment every 3 years like you can but I dont have that luxury. If I can have a piece of equipment last a little longer you may call it cheap from your fancy perch, but I call it frugal. Good budgeting should never be sneered at...:D
Most times I've bought a new computer, I've also bought a new monitor. A widescreen 17" monitor back when I bought my iMac was extortionately expensive. I generally figure on spending about �15-1800 every three years on a computer and about 5-6 years of useful life. It's been going up from a G3 iBook to a 17" G5 Mac to a fully kitted out 24" iMac for that money. I can't imagine what it will be in 3 - 6 years time but I guess it'll make a 24" iMac feel just as obsolete as the 500Mhz G3 iBook with a 1024x768 screen feels.
I have to conclude that people who want to use their 10 year old CRT are just incredibly cheap and don't value their screens as much as being able to claim how fast their CPU is. I've been programming for 20+ years professionally and your screen isn't something to skimp on. It's THE most important thing if you value your eyes.
I think you mistook the slant of my post. Notice the big grin face at the end of my sentence in the previous post? I meant it half in jest. It does not mean that as I type I am staring at a 14" screen. As far as my 6 yr old CRT that died it was a 19inch not a tiny screen and certainly hefty at about 60lbs. My 10yr old CRT that has been permanently retired now was in fact used as a backup monitor for my old beige G3. I've had more than one monitor go before and having a backup even if it has small screen real estate can save your bacon if you've got work to do. :p
I would love to have the budget to replace all of my equipment every 3 years like you can but I dont have that luxury. If I can have a piece of equipment last a little longer you may call it cheap from your fancy perch, but I call it frugal. Good budgeting should never be sneered at...:D

meb91
Mar 22, 03:05 PM
Please bring back the 24"! 21" - too small. 27" - too big. 24" - just right!
I'm sticking with my 24" Core2Duo until a new 24" model is released.
I use a 24" Dell monitor alongside my 27" iMac, and physically the 27" is hardly any bigger. The main difference is that the 27" is much higher resolution, but that's a useful for fitting more on the screen.
I'm sticking with my 24" Core2Duo until a new 24" model is released.
I use a 24" Dell monitor alongside my 27" iMac, and physically the 27" is hardly any bigger. The main difference is that the 27" is much higher resolution, but that's a useful for fitting more on the screen.

Fukui
Sep 19, 04:07 PM
You might be right, I am not going to discuss specifics. but the truth of the matter is that the quality of a DVD is better than the 640x480. Even Apple stats that on their site.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/movies.html
That's what I was trying to convey.
Cheers
Yea, I understand. I too would neverthless have liked 720x480p....
http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/movies.html
That's what I was trying to convey.
Cheers
Yea, I understand. I too would neverthless have liked 720x480p....

thworple
Oct 27, 09:52 AM
Dude, it's a MacWorld convention, not an environmental love-in. GP needs to get their own convention. They were on private property - the conf organizers have the right to do what they want. Never mind their rights, huh?
Hmmmm, so what you're saying is that a quiet protest (which as an eye-witness I can say this was!!) about a subject they feel strongly about isn't allowed at certain conventions because of the political orientation of the people in charge.
The whole point of the MacExpo is to show the services that Apple and its Third-Party agents can supply to the public. I don't see what the harm is in advertising what they DON'T offer (ie:- in the opinion of Greenpeace - a sound environmental agenda) at the same time.
I'm not going to side with any particular viewpoint about Apple's "green policy" here, as I simply have not read enough about it to convey an honest and balanced opinion. however I do feel that it is within Greenpeace's right to advertise the issues they feel strongly about in an orderly manner (which as far as I'm concerned they did on Thursday!).
Hmmmm, so what you're saying is that a quiet protest (which as an eye-witness I can say this was!!) about a subject they feel strongly about isn't allowed at certain conventions because of the political orientation of the people in charge.
The whole point of the MacExpo is to show the services that Apple and its Third-Party agents can supply to the public. I don't see what the harm is in advertising what they DON'T offer (ie:- in the opinion of Greenpeace - a sound environmental agenda) at the same time.
I'm not going to side with any particular viewpoint about Apple's "green policy" here, as I simply have not read enough about it to convey an honest and balanced opinion. however I do feel that it is within Greenpeace's right to advertise the issues they feel strongly about in an orderly manner (which as far as I'm concerned they did on Thursday!).

Mattsasa
Apr 25, 03:31 PM
last three macbook pro updates were:
june of 2009
april of 2010
february of 2011
so... next is december of 2012... or if it takes even longer it would be jan-feb 2012
though i don't think that it will take longer than 10 months
because before the last three updates they were updated even more often than 10 months.
getting the back to school deal with a free ipod touch is really tempting... but.... so is a redesign
june of 2009
april of 2010
february of 2011
so... next is december of 2012... or if it takes even longer it would be jan-feb 2012
though i don't think that it will take longer than 10 months
because before the last three updates they were updated even more often than 10 months.
getting the back to school deal with a free ipod touch is really tempting... but.... so is a redesign

Wang Foolio
May 3, 10:54 AM
What I want to know is whether the 27" will play nice with 1080p input from an HDMI adaptor. BD player/PS3 hooked up to a 27" iMac without need for an expensive upscaler would be nice.

moxxey
Mar 22, 05:25 PM
And if you are looking for specs from unannounced products from Apple, you are going to quickly get used to being disappointed.
Mate I've been following MacRumors for many years. I don't need a description of the website.
You miss the point entirely. The site is all about speculation, fact or fiction, about forthcoming products. However, there's nothing in this "news" piece that's worth speculating. Nothing we can't figure ourselves.
It's still news whether it's classed as a rumor or not. However, there's no substance of worth in this news. That was the point.
Mate I've been following MacRumors for many years. I don't need a description of the website.
You miss the point entirely. The site is all about speculation, fact or fiction, about forthcoming products. However, there's nothing in this "news" piece that's worth speculating. Nothing we can't figure ourselves.
It's still news whether it's classed as a rumor or not. However, there's no substance of worth in this news. That was the point.

aafuss1
Sep 9, 08:49 PM
Nice Core 2 performance-just what we need.

DRewPi
Sep 2, 03:52 PM
MacBook for 999$ with some up features would be the deal for me !!!!!
Otherwise just throw in some of that C2D chips and let it rock !!!! :D
Otherwise just throw in some of that C2D chips and let it rock !!!! :D

afields
Sep 12, 02:21 PM
let the whining begin

AvSRoCkCO1067
Aug 23, 10:24 PM
I hope you're joking about that. iTunes is not about making money for apple
Apple makes money off of iTunes Music Store - they won't tell us how much, but it is a money maker (all be it insignificant compared to the iPod)
Apple makes money off of iTunes Music Store - they won't tell us how much, but it is a money maker (all be it insignificant compared to the iPod)

gnasher729
Jul 14, 09:33 AM
Why does the high-end Conroe cost more than the high-end Woodcrest?
Because Intel is trying to maximise their profit.
Conroes will be in relatively affordable computers, and there will be some people who spend hundreds of dollars extra for the fastest graphics card possible, and hundreds for the fastest processor possible. It will be sold to people who are willing to pay over the top for highest performance.
Woodcrest will be sold in expensive servers to businesses, who will _not_ pay for bragging rights, but only as much as the extra performance is worth.
Two relatively slow Woodcrests could be used to build a system that is faster and possibly cheaper than the Conroe Extreme Edition.
Because Intel is trying to maximise their profit.
Conroes will be in relatively affordable computers, and there will be some people who spend hundreds of dollars extra for the fastest graphics card possible, and hundreds for the fastest processor possible. It will be sold to people who are willing to pay over the top for highest performance.
Woodcrest will be sold in expensive servers to businesses, who will _not_ pay for bragging rights, but only as much as the extra performance is worth.
Two relatively slow Woodcrests could be used to build a system that is faster and possibly cheaper than the Conroe Extreme Edition.

PlutoPrime
Apr 28, 03:26 PM
I hope there are extra expensive chairs lying around Ballmer's office today

gugy
Sep 12, 03:22 PM
Good updates,
But I rather wait for the widescreen 120gb video ipod.
But I rather wait for the widescreen 120gb video ipod.

dmelgar
Mar 23, 05:19 PM
You counter point is just as silly.
He makes a wonderful counterpoint.
People are willing to give up freedoms one inch at a time. But when you realize how much you stand to lose, or how much you've already lost, it takes on a different perspective. What is going on now, with Apple's control over what applications you can run on your general computing device, would have been deemed silly just a few years ago. But somehow its different because this computer is an iPad and not a Windows PC.
He makes a wonderful counterpoint.
People are willing to give up freedoms one inch at a time. But when you realize how much you stand to lose, or how much you've already lost, it takes on a different perspective. What is going on now, with Apple's control over what applications you can run on your general computing device, would have been deemed silly just a few years ago. But somehow its different because this computer is an iPad and not a Windows PC.

D4F
Apr 19, 07:01 AM
Apple is pathetic.

jemmX
Sep 10, 09:15 AM
Predictions ...
MBP 20" inch (1920 x 1200)
Quad-core
4gb ram
Dual HD = 250gb 7200rpm Raid 0
Superdrive HD w/lightscribe
iSight HD
Audio Digital & analog in/out
Vram 512MB GDDR 4 (PCI Xpress, HDMI + DVI + TV)
3 - USB 2 / 2 - FW 400 / 2 - FW 800 / 1 - Sata
Dual Ethernet
PCMCIA
Leopard
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
MBP 20" inch (1920 x 1200)
Quad-core
4gb ram
Dual HD = 250gb 7200rpm Raid 0
Superdrive HD w/lightscribe
iSight HD
Audio Digital & analog in/out
Vram 512MB GDDR 4 (PCI Xpress, HDMI + DVI + TV)
3 - USB 2 / 2 - FW 400 / 2 - FW 800 / 1 - Sata
Dual Ethernet
PCMCIA
Leopard
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
retrorichie
Apr 22, 11:55 AM
maybe i can get a 500gb ssd in there by the time it's released, then i'll have all i want (for now).
+1
+1
designgeek
Mar 29, 11:33 AM
Are they smoking crack? Don't you need developers developers developers to get a platform going?
shecky
Sep 14, 10:14 AM
Not happening on the 24th fo any reason - photo, computer, or other wise.
you can feel free to go ahead and explain yourself in your next post instead of just mindlessly making statements with nothing to back them up. thanks.
you can feel free to go ahead and explain yourself in your next post instead of just mindlessly making statements with nothing to back them up. thanks.
agmaster
Apr 14, 02:59 PM
I really hope Intel delays USB 3. I have a mid 2007 MBP, even though I use FW800, I have resorted to using my ExpressCard slot with an eSata adapter which is even faster than FW800. If anything, the difference will be made with the companies who make the external HDD to implement thunderbolt technology into their products. I just hate usb in general, I only use it for flash drives and my mouse.
cube
Mar 29, 12:22 PM
Seems believable...all those people that bought Nokia phones obviously did not care that Symbian was outdated. Why will they not buy Nokia with a much modern OS under the hood?
I bought a Symbian Nokia because I wanted a cheap 3G phone which was open and with an acceptable OS.
Obviously, that's going to be my first and last Nokia now.
I want a phone with real Java, so my most likely candidate next time is QNX, if RIM makes a good inexpensive smartphone.
I bought a Symbian Nokia because I wanted a cheap 3G phone which was open and with an acceptable OS.
Obviously, that's going to be my first and last Nokia now.
I want a phone with real Java, so my most likely candidate next time is QNX, if RIM makes a good inexpensive smartphone.
No comments:
Post a Comment