tjsdaname
Dec 4, 10:58 AM
Why not .223?
My choice for a 22LR would be the GSG-5. And for the AR platform... the DPMS LR-308 :cool: hell of a gun.
well, im only 17 and .223 is just to expensive for me to shoot...
and I dont know why I like the sig so much, I was at gander mountain the other day, and was feeling out all of the other .22's and it just feels the best to me...
it's going to be ether the sig, or the smith and wesson M&P 15-22. that is a nice gun also...
My choice for a 22LR would be the GSG-5. And for the AR platform... the DPMS LR-308 :cool: hell of a gun.
well, im only 17 and .223 is just to expensive for me to shoot...
and I dont know why I like the sig so much, I was at gander mountain the other day, and was feeling out all of the other .22's and it just feels the best to me...
it's going to be ether the sig, or the smith and wesson M&P 15-22. that is a nice gun also...
chrmjenkins
Apr 30, 04:31 PM
Not going to vote until we hear from aggie.
netdog
Jul 12, 03:34 AM
I think that some of us may be overestimating the coolness of the player as the factor. While that worked in the early days, it may not now.
Apple has in their favor the fact that many people now have ripped CDs and bought protected music in Apple formats. If that base is solid enough, Urge won't fly, and hence there won't be a large installed base of protected WMA files in search of a player. If a significant number of Vista users are just starting their collection, or building on existing MP3s, there is a very strong chance that they will do the easiest thing and buy protected WMA files from Urge. This could spell disaster for Apple, particularly if Microsoft is willing to replace any protected AAC files in people's collections free of charge.
Finally, while in the early days of online music sales, it was the players and not the music downloads that drove the market, we are inevitably going to find that the players become the razor and the downloadable music the blades. Microsoft will probably price their player based on that model.
Apple has in their favor the fact that many people now have ripped CDs and bought protected music in Apple formats. If that base is solid enough, Urge won't fly, and hence there won't be a large installed base of protected WMA files in search of a player. If a significant number of Vista users are just starting their collection, or building on existing MP3s, there is a very strong chance that they will do the easiest thing and buy protected WMA files from Urge. This could spell disaster for Apple, particularly if Microsoft is willing to replace any protected AAC files in people's collections free of charge.
Finally, while in the early days of online music sales, it was the players and not the music downloads that drove the market, we are inevitably going to find that the players become the razor and the downloadable music the blades. Microsoft will probably price their player based on that model.
ChrisA
Apr 25, 05:58 PM
Wake me when iMacs have matte screens again.
I have the last model of 24" iMac that had an anti-glare screen. I just had to make the first repair, replaced the hard drive.
My fear is that I will be forced to build a Hackintosh or get an iMac with one of these new cheaper screens.
I have the last model of 24" iMac that had an anti-glare screen. I just had to make the first repair, replaced the hard drive.
My fear is that I will be forced to build a Hackintosh or get an iMac with one of these new cheaper screens.
more...
Moyank24
Apr 17, 05:56 AM
I'm in.
Millionaire2K
Apr 29, 03:41 PM
it is not against the law in any way to give a different deal to someone else. Amazon bring more to the table than Apple and to add to it Apple strong arming has pissed a lot of people off and they want to break Apple strong hold.
Exactly. Apple says they will pay 70% to the music companies. They worked out their deals with them at that rate. If another company wants to sell music, they by no means have to get the same deal as every other company selling music. It�s just nuts to think that way.
All companies go and negotiate their own deals. Wal-Mart negotiates for most products they sell. They never say �What�s Target paying you?, we have to match that� but they might say �What�s Target paying you?, we have to BEAT that� They could end up paying more or less depending on how good the company is at negotiating. Also bigger companies with more products sold normally will get a better deal. A lot of companies would be screwed if Wal-Mart stopped carrying their products. This leverage allows Wal-Mart to work out great deals.
Nothing is preventing Apple from reworking their deals. However no company has to change any deal unless they both agree to terms.
Stop feeling �poor Apple� just because another company �may� have a better deal. It�s just business.
Exactly. Apple says they will pay 70% to the music companies. They worked out their deals with them at that rate. If another company wants to sell music, they by no means have to get the same deal as every other company selling music. It�s just nuts to think that way.
All companies go and negotiate their own deals. Wal-Mart negotiates for most products they sell. They never say �What�s Target paying you?, we have to match that� but they might say �What�s Target paying you?, we have to BEAT that� They could end up paying more or less depending on how good the company is at negotiating. Also bigger companies with more products sold normally will get a better deal. A lot of companies would be screwed if Wal-Mart stopped carrying their products. This leverage allows Wal-Mart to work out great deals.
Nothing is preventing Apple from reworking their deals. However no company has to change any deal unless they both agree to terms.
Stop feeling �poor Apple� just because another company �may� have a better deal. It�s just business.
more...
Liquorpuki
Feb 25, 04:13 PM
And the train wreck continues....
http://blogs.forbes.com/dorothypomerantz/2011/02/25/two-and-a-half-men-canceled-after-charlie-sheens-latest-rants/
Dude that's hilarious. Here's the difference between Mel Gibson and Charlie Sheen. When Mel Gibson has a meltdown, he turns into a racist a-hole. When Charlie Sheen has a meltdown, he sounds like he just high.
http://blogs.forbes.com/dorothypomerantz/2011/02/25/two-and-a-half-men-canceled-after-charlie-sheens-latest-rants/
Dude that's hilarious. Here's the difference between Mel Gibson and Charlie Sheen. When Mel Gibson has a meltdown, he turns into a racist a-hole. When Charlie Sheen has a meltdown, he sounds like he just high.
citi
Apr 28, 04:17 PM
That's probably why the white iPhone 4 looks fatter on the box.
Black is slimming.
Black is slimming.
more...
Squire
Jul 13, 12:40 AM
Those of you who have used both versions of Pages, do you find the '06 version to be significantly quicker? Someone a few pages ago commented on its sluggish performance. I have to admit that I've had sort of a delayed reaction (in terms of the time it takes for a sentence to appear after I've finished typing it) in my limited Pages experience. (Mind you, I do have an older machine.) A performance increase alone would be a worthy upgrade in my book.
-Squire
-Squire
NEvolution
Sep 15, 07:14 PM
OCZ Vertex 2E 60gb to replace the Momentus XT 500GB in my uMBP.
more...
zync
Aug 1, 10:20 AM
Yep. I got that; I was saying that the reason you don't see it is not because they've hidden it; it's because XP is actually a lot more stable. Crashes these days are pretty rare, and are usually caused by attempts to access strange areas of memory, or driver problems. I have an XP box running a couple of web containers, and a few app servers; aside from a driver hiccup, never had a crash or secret reboot (and I would know, because I would still need to log back in when I got back from the water cooler).
... and it took Apple just as long to create a stable version of OSX; the only real difference was that MS didn't charge for the interim versions. Again, just additional info.
I only clarified because it didn't seem like you got it. If you did, then my apologies.
As for the time it took Apple to create a stable version I disagree...the first desktop version that was available came out in March 2001. I would say that Jaguar was the first completely stable version, which came out in August 2002. Even if you disagree my PowerBook has been completely stable since I got it (it shipped with 10.2.7) in September 2003. Just over two years. My XP boxes have been far less stable.
Also, Apple charges because they offer new things to the operating system, not just stability fixes. OS X updates are also cheaper.
Timepass,
It's still called the Blue Screen of Death. If OS X had one, it'd be called the same thing. The point is that it's Blue, not that it's caused by .dll errors or incorrect memory addressing.
... and it took Apple just as long to create a stable version of OSX; the only real difference was that MS didn't charge for the interim versions. Again, just additional info.
I only clarified because it didn't seem like you got it. If you did, then my apologies.
As for the time it took Apple to create a stable version I disagree...the first desktop version that was available came out in March 2001. I would say that Jaguar was the first completely stable version, which came out in August 2002. Even if you disagree my PowerBook has been completely stable since I got it (it shipped with 10.2.7) in September 2003. Just over two years. My XP boxes have been far less stable.
Also, Apple charges because they offer new things to the operating system, not just stability fixes. OS X updates are also cheaper.
Timepass,
It's still called the Blue Screen of Death. If OS X had one, it'd be called the same thing. The point is that it's Blue, not that it's caused by .dll errors or incorrect memory addressing.
applefanDrew
Apr 12, 09:26 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I believe this b/c Darlymple and Gruber belies this.
I believe this b/c Darlymple and Gruber belies this.
more...
WeegieMac
Apr 14, 03:50 PM
Okay, I just reproduced this problem. After which I rolled my eyes and said "What's the big deal?"
I mean really, this is BEYOND picky. No wonder us Apple users have a reputation for being douchebags.
I hadn't even NOTICED this until now, and now that I have, I'm not really sure why I'm supposed to care. Honestly, if it's a choice between fixing this and putting more development resources into iOS 5, I much prefer the latter.
-Z
EDIT: I wanted to add that I'd rather my app launch faster than for time to be wasted playing a silly animation. Based on how fast the app comes up, that may be what's going on here.
Calling people "douchebags"? Seriously, get some grown up patter ... honestly to God, what is this? US TV Stereotypes Vol.1?
It's not "beyond picky" based on two FACTS.
1. It wasn't present or an issue in iOS 4.0 to 4.2.
2. The stock Apple apps don't do it, so to say it's Apple making the apps launch quicker would require 0.0002 seconds of brain power to realise, "Oh wait, if they were making apps load quicker, it'd be across the ENTIRE operating system".
Think. Think some more. Then consider typing ...
I mean really, this is BEYOND picky. No wonder us Apple users have a reputation for being douchebags.
I hadn't even NOTICED this until now, and now that I have, I'm not really sure why I'm supposed to care. Honestly, if it's a choice between fixing this and putting more development resources into iOS 5, I much prefer the latter.
-Z
EDIT: I wanted to add that I'd rather my app launch faster than for time to be wasted playing a silly animation. Based on how fast the app comes up, that may be what's going on here.
Calling people "douchebags"? Seriously, get some grown up patter ... honestly to God, what is this? US TV Stereotypes Vol.1?
It's not "beyond picky" based on two FACTS.
1. It wasn't present or an issue in iOS 4.0 to 4.2.
2. The stock Apple apps don't do it, so to say it's Apple making the apps launch quicker would require 0.0002 seconds of brain power to realise, "Oh wait, if they were making apps load quicker, it'd be across the ENTIRE operating system".
Think. Think some more. Then consider typing ...
Silencio
Apr 11, 02:28 PM
USB 2.0 is definitely not fast enough to saturate a hard drives speed, it's very limiting.
Firewire 800 isn't fast enough to saturate multi-drive RAIDs, either.
I'm really looking forward to Mac minis with Thunderbolt. Hook them up to some nice 4+ drive external RAIDs with Thunderbolt and I can replace a bunch of aging Xserves and PowerMac G5 servers with much smaller and much faster replacements.
Firewire 800 isn't fast enough to saturate multi-drive RAIDs, either.
I'm really looking forward to Mac minis with Thunderbolt. Hook them up to some nice 4+ drive external RAIDs with Thunderbolt and I can replace a bunch of aging Xserves and PowerMac G5 servers with much smaller and much faster replacements.
more...
blipmusic
Apr 19, 04:33 PM
Games. Don't tell me you want to play WoW on a 11" monitor.
I want to. Stop projecting. The 11" MBA will become my only computer when I get it in a few months and that includes playing the odd game, possibly including WoW.
Heck, the *iPad* could probably be my only computer with a keyboard dock if it did untethered OS updates and could compile LaTeX documents natively. But you're probably about to burst now so I'll stop.
I want to. Stop projecting. The 11" MBA will become my only computer when I get it in a few months and that includes playing the odd game, possibly including WoW.
Heck, the *iPad* could probably be my only computer with a keyboard dock if it did untethered OS updates and could compile LaTeX documents natively. But you're probably about to burst now so I'll stop.
ArchaicRevival
Apr 14, 04:57 AM
I'll see it when I believe it. :rolleyes:
more...
DakotaGuy
Apr 13, 07:52 PM
Why won't this rumor die?! Seriously. It makes MUCH more sense to make a set top box that is compatible with any tv, and thus have wider appeal and adoption than to make a TV that has to compete with every other TV manufacturer out there. This is not Apple's game. Their game it to look at a market that is not currently being exploited to its full extent, figure out what people may want, then come in and redefine that niche. Worked with the iPod, iPhone, and iPad. There were predecessor in each of these markets but Apple came in and completely dominated it because they redefined it and tied it into a (relatively) easy to use ecosystem. Ok, it a really easy to use ecosystem, just slow and bloated. :D
I agree this is a silly idea. Who in the world would want the Apple TV integrated into a TV? What happens when an updated Apple TV is released the next year? Toss out the TV and buy another? Most people going in and buying a new large screen HDTV are planning to keep it a lot longer then the peripherals attached to it. If some new device comes out, no problem, just plug it into your TV. The other thing is that the TV market is very a very mature and saturated market with some big well known brands behind it.
I suppose they could make the content device separate like the current Apple TV which can be attached with an HDMI cable. If they do that what is the point of an Apple branded TV which would likely be built by another company like Samsung, LG or Sharp? Styling and a logo with a higher price? Nonsense.
I agree this is a silly idea. Who in the world would want the Apple TV integrated into a TV? What happens when an updated Apple TV is released the next year? Toss out the TV and buy another? Most people going in and buying a new large screen HDTV are planning to keep it a lot longer then the peripherals attached to it. If some new device comes out, no problem, just plug it into your TV. The other thing is that the TV market is very a very mature and saturated market with some big well known brands behind it.
I suppose they could make the content device separate like the current Apple TV which can be attached with an HDMI cable. If they do that what is the point of an Apple branded TV which would likely be built by another company like Samsung, LG or Sharp? Styling and a logo with a higher price? Nonsense.
gwangung
Jul 21, 07:44 PM
By definition, having alternatives makes Apple NOT a monopoly.
Really. We have an awful lot of ill-educated people around here who think they know economics....Wayyyyyyy too many people are saying that with a straight face.
Really. We have an awful lot of ill-educated people around here who think they know economics....Wayyyyyyy too many people are saying that with a straight face.
cjgonzales1900
Apr 28, 05:10 PM
How on earth could you feel the difference in your hand? I'd like to see a photo with calipers.
Actually I could feel that it was slightly heavier as well. I weighed both the black and white model and indeed the white is a little heavier but I really dont care, all my cases that I love (SGP) still work fine so its a "Who Cares" kinda thing as said before.
Actually I could feel that it was slightly heavier as well. I weighed both the black and white model and indeed the white is a little heavier but I really dont care, all my cases that I love (SGP) still work fine so its a "Who Cares" kinda thing as said before.
res1233
Apr 23, 01:13 AM
What do you don't seem to understand is that every individual person does not care what most people need/want. I want to be able to buy the phone I need. If you go with what "most people" need it would be a dumb phone then (with great battery life BTW)
Then leave these forums. Clearly apple-related news is not for you. Clearly you want a phone that apple does not provide. Why are you even here? The truth is, nobody is stopping you from buying that android with 4 hours of battery life if it is more suited to your tastes. You are not entitled in any way to force Apple to make a device that suits your needs. Go buy the Thunderbolt. Enjoy it.
Then leave these forums. Clearly apple-related news is not for you. Clearly you want a phone that apple does not provide. Why are you even here? The truth is, nobody is stopping you from buying that android with 4 hours of battery life if it is more suited to your tastes. You are not entitled in any way to force Apple to make a device that suits your needs. Go buy the Thunderbolt. Enjoy it.
quigleybc
Jul 28, 12:18 PM
Now is really the time for Apple to go all out and move in on MS....
If I were Steve, I would be cranking out products, and really pushing hard to get stuff like a full on Mac media center, next gen iPods, iPhones, iTablets ect. ect..
Just because MS is kind of in limbo right now, not really doing anything big, Gates just stepped down...now is the time to really move in on their territory.
Maybe that's exactly what they're doing, but it seems like the big product announcements have dropped off completley....the last big announcement was the Macbook, which was a no brainer...high fi ect....
Hopefully they are all going mad scientist in the Apple labs cooking something really special up, and are just going to unload them all at once....we'll see...
If I were Steve, I would be cranking out products, and really pushing hard to get stuff like a full on Mac media center, next gen iPods, iPhones, iTablets ect. ect..
Just because MS is kind of in limbo right now, not really doing anything big, Gates just stepped down...now is the time to really move in on their territory.
Maybe that's exactly what they're doing, but it seems like the big product announcements have dropped off completley....the last big announcement was the Macbook, which was a no brainer...high fi ect....
Hopefully they are all going mad scientist in the Apple labs cooking something really special up, and are just going to unload them all at once....we'll see...
SMM
Dec 3, 01:35 PM
People, the single worst thing that the Mac community faces in the area of security is upon us right now...
Little security experts who cry exploit.
Thanks to the media jumping at anything that looks like it could be a security problem with Mac OS X, we now have security experts who are willing to make half-baked claims to draw attention to themselves. But even more frightening is the fact that the Mac community isn't a target because it is a good target or an easy target... no, we are a target because it is the most notable target these days.
So, how do we fix this?
Frankly, I don't know.
...........<text omitted>............
The only thing I can suggest (which I doubt anyone will follow) is to avoid the hysteria. When a real threat emerges, you'll most likely hear about it long before you are actually in any danger from it.
I am with you 100%. Every time one of these 'expert reports' comes out, I see a plethora of panic posts following it. The common theme is; 'we're screwed, someone save us, why doesn't Apple do something! :eek:
I think the majority of the security reports are motivated by ego, or most likely, profit. When companies like Network Associates funds a security vulnerability study, it is not done because they are a concerned, benevolent member of the technical community. They are out to make a buck. What they promote is fear. What they sell is reassurance. Nice gig.
Little security experts who cry exploit.
Thanks to the media jumping at anything that looks like it could be a security problem with Mac OS X, we now have security experts who are willing to make half-baked claims to draw attention to themselves. But even more frightening is the fact that the Mac community isn't a target because it is a good target or an easy target... no, we are a target because it is the most notable target these days.
So, how do we fix this?
Frankly, I don't know.
...........<text omitted>............
The only thing I can suggest (which I doubt anyone will follow) is to avoid the hysteria. When a real threat emerges, you'll most likely hear about it long before you are actually in any danger from it.
I am with you 100%. Every time one of these 'expert reports' comes out, I see a plethora of panic posts following it. The common theme is; 'we're screwed, someone save us, why doesn't Apple do something! :eek:
I think the majority of the security reports are motivated by ego, or most likely, profit. When companies like Network Associates funds a security vulnerability study, it is not done because they are a concerned, benevolent member of the technical community. They are out to make a buck. What they promote is fear. What they sell is reassurance. Nice gig.
louispavlo
Oct 24, 08:52 AM
Video iPod on thanksgiving. I would bet money on it.
That'll really knock the wind out of Zune.
That'll really knock the wind out of Zune.
taxiapple
May 3, 11:47 PM
OMG....I would NEVER take information as fact from an "ATT customer service agent". I have received so much wrong info or even been dare I say lied to, I would never trust what a random ATT rep said.
Not to mention, the service reps are so far down the chain of command, they would not have info on when the next iphone is being released.
Not to mention, the service reps are so far down the chain of command, they would not have info on when the next iphone is being released.
No comments:
Post a Comment