rdowns
Apr 8, 11:39 AM
the hill (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/151205-scott-brown-gops-planned-parenthood-cuts-go-too-far)
I think maybe if you're cutting 4 trillion from the budget, every single item would be effected. If we cut defense spending does that mean we want to be attacked?
What are you talking about, 4 trillion? This is an argument over the CURRENT budget (we are half way through this budget year without one). The Tea Party Republicans are holding America hostage over ideology.
I think maybe if you're cutting 4 trillion from the budget, every single item would be effected. If we cut defense spending does that mean we want to be attacked?
What are you talking about, 4 trillion? This is an argument over the CURRENT budget (we are half way through this budget year without one). The Tea Party Republicans are holding America hostage over ideology.
antman2x2
Apr 13, 10:57 PM
I was planning to have guns blazing indiscriminately but I guess I can silently hover if that's the game plan :mad:
This is a stealth mission.. but I gave you some guns just incase :D
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e259/Antman2x2/STING-5.png
This is a stealth mission.. but I gave you some guns just incase :D
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e259/Antman2x2/STING-5.png
MorphingDragon
Apr 15, 08:36 AM
still cheaper than a lot of the competition. before we went to sql 2005 we looked at Oracle. by the time you bought the add on packs it was almost $1 million for our installation. SQL was 1/4 that.
AD might be a bit expensive but the AD forests people created in Windows 2000 can be upgraded every version with minimal issues and it works out of the box. with other products you first have to spend months creating your schema, pray it doesn't break when used with other products and upgrading can be a big PITA. AD is the apple of corporate IT. you don't need a team of geeks toiling away for months to code a ldap schema, it just works out of the box
1. You aren't looking very hard if your choices became MSSQL vs OracleDB.
2. If you spend months creating your LDAP or even AD schema/map, you need to go back to your clients/customer/contractee/er and do some proper planning.
3. AD was quickly dumped by the likes of Wall Street and Cox Industries. AD is a solution, not the Apple of Corporate IT.
AD might be a bit expensive but the AD forests people created in Windows 2000 can be upgraded every version with minimal issues and it works out of the box. with other products you first have to spend months creating your schema, pray it doesn't break when used with other products and upgrading can be a big PITA. AD is the apple of corporate IT. you don't need a team of geeks toiling away for months to code a ldap schema, it just works out of the box
1. You aren't looking very hard if your choices became MSSQL vs OracleDB.
2. If you spend months creating your LDAP or even AD schema/map, you need to go back to your clients/customer/contractee/er and do some proper planning.
3. AD was quickly dumped by the likes of Wall Street and Cox Industries. AD is a solution, not the Apple of Corporate IT.
benthewraith
Nov 11, 12:36 PM
I find it sad that some people know the freakin actor's names of the Apple ads.......
To be fair, Justin Long's name was known before the Apple ads. As well as John Hodgman's. Justin for Dodgeball, and John for his stints on the Daily Show.
To be fair, Justin Long's name was known before the Apple ads. As well as John Hodgman's. Justin for Dodgeball, and John for his stints on the Daily Show.
imahawki
May 5, 01:40 PM
I didn't read the whole thread so maybe someone already said it but if they put 30 crapware and trial programs on Macs they could probably drop the price... but they don't want to. The Windows machines should say $1200 - $400 from crapware vendors to be more fair.
As far as why people buy Macs? Windows has gotten a TON better but a lot of the same problems still apply. I got tired of trying to make backup rotation work on my Win7 machine (it won't do it you can only backup to ONE destination. If you want to change that you edit your ONE allowed backup policy but you can't even have multiple policies to allow for not changing the policy every time you rotate your disk), I got tired of driver problems with my Wacom Intuous (certain apps wouldn't let you click buttons with the mouse but worked with the pen [random crap like that]) I got tired of all the registry trash that every program you want to demo leaves behind, I enjoyed the alleged openness but honestly got tired of the lack of real-world compatibility (the esata card I bought "worked" but not in AHCI mode so I couldn't hot swap. And even just leaving it in IDE mode I got a BIOS error every time I booted).
I could go on. I'm pretty objective and there are areas where Windows and generic hardware provide advantages but its not that cut and dried and people aren't suckers for paying more for a mac.
As far as why people buy Macs? Windows has gotten a TON better but a lot of the same problems still apply. I got tired of trying to make backup rotation work on my Win7 machine (it won't do it you can only backup to ONE destination. If you want to change that you edit your ONE allowed backup policy but you can't even have multiple policies to allow for not changing the policy every time you rotate your disk), I got tired of driver problems with my Wacom Intuous (certain apps wouldn't let you click buttons with the mouse but worked with the pen [random crap like that]) I got tired of all the registry trash that every program you want to demo leaves behind, I enjoyed the alleged openness but honestly got tired of the lack of real-world compatibility (the esata card I bought "worked" but not in AHCI mode so I couldn't hot swap. And even just leaving it in IDE mode I got a BIOS error every time I booted).
I could go on. I'm pretty objective and there are areas where Windows and generic hardware provide advantages but its not that cut and dried and people aren't suckers for paying more for a mac.
nonameowns
Apr 12, 12:43 PM
don't care
page and keynote still rock
page and keynote still rock
skellener
Apr 5, 08:00 PM
Frankly Apple should just commit to Thunderbolt and put those ports right on there. There is really no need for any other port.The main reason Apple sticks with the 30pin Dock Connector is size. Thin wise. Displayport is much too thick. One of the reasons they bailed on firewire on the First Gen iPod was the size. Micro USB is probably the thinnest connector out there I would imagine, but does that allow data syncing and at speeds faster than USB 2.0 ??? I don't know. The dock connector must allow for more flexibility on Apple's part I would imagine.
RobBookPro
Apr 16, 12:29 AM
This article led me to believe that the Army was after Apples's skills rather then their products. For example, creating intuitive platforms that do not require training.
PlaceofDis
Apr 27, 06:43 PM
I'm embarrassed for him at the moment, for the way he's acting like a spolit 10 year old kid, going on about Obama's birth certificate and college degrees. Has he got nothing better to do?
no, he doesn't. and thankfully it should mean that he'll have no chance of getting anywhere near being President.
no, he doesn't. and thankfully it should mean that he'll have no chance of getting anywhere near being President.
Tilpots
Jan 4, 09:59 AM
Whoever advised them to now put the maps onboard and download as needed, needs to be fired- poor decision.
Agreed. Downloading anything on Edge is awful, but downloading mission critical graphical maps and directions when you get lost? Just dumb.
Agreed. Downloading anything on Edge is awful, but downloading mission critical graphical maps and directions when you get lost? Just dumb.
jwong3854
Mar 12, 09:11 AM
delete post please
kingdonk
Feb 28, 07:11 PM
Thanks for the pics kingdonk. It looks like the Open Directory service is there in the pictures, although maybe it's unconfigurable at the moment. I do not see NFS which is surprising.
Overall, with the killing of the Xserve and Apple catering OS X Server more to the SOHO, it will be a tough sell since a lot of 2-10 person shops that don't require more than 500GB can probably have most of their infrastructure on the cloud.
If they need massive amounts of storage and not a lot of physical space then an XServe would fit better with a RAID attached and backup unit.
NFS is there, just keep your eyes peeled and you will see it some where in the screen shots along with samba and ipad file sharing.
Overall, with the killing of the Xserve and Apple catering OS X Server more to the SOHO, it will be a tough sell since a lot of 2-10 person shops that don't require more than 500GB can probably have most of their infrastructure on the cloud.
If they need massive amounts of storage and not a lot of physical space then an XServe would fit better with a RAID attached and backup unit.
NFS is there, just keep your eyes peeled and you will see it some where in the screen shots along with samba and ipad file sharing.
VicMacs
Apr 21, 12:58 PM
I just got mine! Going to a bar now to show it off...
sebastianlewis
May 28, 03:51 PM
I don't have much time right now (I'm kind of in class at the moment) but I think I figured out how to edit categories, just edit the category page like any normal page, I'm going to test it out with a new category later when I have more time to figure out how to delete my test category after creating it (yes I'm very new to wiki editing).
Anybody care to confirm this before 4:30 PM Pacific time and save me some trouble?
Sebastian
Anybody care to confirm this before 4:30 PM Pacific time and save me some trouble?
Sebastian
alamein
Nov 22, 11:09 PM
seeing the success of these kids i'm sure apple will start selling them too (only better quality)
convergent
Nov 18, 09:06 AM
There is no way this is legal, and he is now going to have the wrath of Apple's legal department coming at him... and probably also the FBI since this is an international deal. If Foxconn sold him the parts, then they are likely violating all kinds of things with Apple.... so they would never do it legitimately. Had he designed and manufactured his OWN white panels and design, he'd be fine... but this is a young kid that doesn't have the maturity to realize he's into something that he shouldn't be and he's probably going to be paying dearly for it. His best move would be to disappear as quickly as possible.
Just for those who thing this is a hand-slap kind of thing, I worked on a project where someone leaked an industrial design on a product and the FBI arrested them and they were facing 75 years in federal prison for it. This kind of stuff can get you more years than killing someone.
Just for those who thing this is a hand-slap kind of thing, I worked on a project where someone leaked an industrial design on a product and the FBI arrested them and they were facing 75 years in federal prison for it. This kind of stuff can get you more years than killing someone.
blackpeter
Sep 19, 03:29 PM
nice...
tCruzin4lyfe
Mar 28, 09:11 AM
I'm ready for anything, just can't wait to see what the next iPhone will look like (same or bigger screen) and I want to see the iOS 5, should be some big improvements. Can't wait for a sneak peak.
DeSnousa
Apr 15, 10:13 PM
i don't think we can do 'pass it on' thing on this forum. but we do need more involvement.
i know a lot of people on this forum have some very nice computer power. and i'm sure they do use them 24/7 either. we could be a great team. i'm doing all i can already
Thats great, I'm doing all I can to at the moment. Might not be able to cope with all that PPD as it is a laptop doing it all :D My goal is to get to 100k in points then to get into the top 100 :)
Remember all those who join, team number is 3446.
i know a lot of people on this forum have some very nice computer power. and i'm sure they do use them 24/7 either. we could be a great team. i'm doing all i can already
Thats great, I'm doing all I can to at the moment. Might not be able to cope with all that PPD as it is a laptop doing it all :D My goal is to get to 100k in points then to get into the top 100 :)
Remember all those who join, team number is 3446.
MacCoaster
Sep 22, 07:29 AM
Originally posted by avkills
Ok, so Intel has the Itanium, well they have the Itanium2 I guess if you want to get super current, so what! The Itanium is based on a brand new design that looks good on paper, but Intel will be the first to admit it has not performed as good as they hoped.
I simply meant the Itanium family, including both the original Itanium and the current Intamium 2.
Sun, IBM and SGI have had 64bit processors way before Intel. So if you say the Itanium is ok for the high-end consumer, then It's safe to say that a Sun Ultra10 or a SGI Octane would also be a high-end consumer machine.
Sure, okay. Compare the prices. The Itanium solution is much cheaper.
What makes you so sure that a 16 processor G4 machine would not perform, because of the bus speed. What about super high-end servers like the CM5 or the Cray T3D. I seriously doubt those machines have 500Mhz bus speeds, or DDR memory. I know for a fact that the CM5 had dedicated memory for each processor node, and each node had 2 vector units. If you want, I can find out specifics from my brother, who has actually programmed code for it, when he worked at Las Alamos. Whether a 16 processor G4 machine is relevant or not, it could be built and if built right, would be very fast.
Very irrevelant. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the G4 wasn't designed to be run in anything more than a dual configuration.
So the .NET family is limited to 32 processors huh....Weak, very weak. You can say what you want, UNIX still scales better than Windows, no matter what the flavor.
Windows isn't designed nor targeted at customers with more than 32 processors. If anyone wanted a 2048-way server, they'd either custom build it and load UNIX on it or have some large corporation develop the computer. It's a lot cheaper clustering 32 high-availablity servers than buying that one 2048-way server. Duh, Windows isn't scalable. It was NEVER designed primarily to be used on 2048-way supercomputers. That's way out of Microsoft's scope and market.
In my opinion, Microsoft is beginning to die a slow painful death. Everyone is tired of their ************ and half-assed attempts of secure computing. Everyone always complains that Macs are not open enough, well I think the opposite is true. Apple embraces open standards and even invents and shares them when none exist, while Microsoft shuns and sometimes even steals others work, in a attempt to push their own proprietary formats and stifle progress.
Funny that Microsoft pushed the ever-so-slow W3C to standardize further dynamic HTML/etc. technologies to become standard. Of course, W3C can't keep current to allow people to innovate in the web presentation standards. Microsoft is even pushing XML very hard with .NET Web Services. And yes, Macs are closed. Not in software, but in hardware. Maybe you were confused by the definition of Macs being closed. The older Macintosh hardware is so proprietary it's not funny. Recent Macs adopt technology that had been in PCs before, except FireWire of course, because Apple invented that. But the hardware is still proprietary. I don't see that we are able to take off-the-shelf high quality components and build our own PowerPC computers then slap Mac OS X on it. Also, Microsoft indeed is "against" open source, and yet they maintain a "shared source" implementation of .NET for FreeBSD. In fact, it's a very well done implementation -- not that most-feeble-possible-implementation that we thought could possible be.
I find it funny that Intel invented USB, but it was Apple that took the leap of faith and pushed it into the mainstream. Apple, in my opinion is the only company thinking "outside the box" and in the end, they will win because of it.
-mark
Maybe it was Apple and Microsoft (Windows 98) who popularized USB, but you've got to realize this. PCs have had USB a few years before Apple. It wasn't until iMac/Windows 98 (note, same year: 1998) that USB got popular.
Ok, so Intel has the Itanium, well they have the Itanium2 I guess if you want to get super current, so what! The Itanium is based on a brand new design that looks good on paper, but Intel will be the first to admit it has not performed as good as they hoped.
I simply meant the Itanium family, including both the original Itanium and the current Intamium 2.
Sun, IBM and SGI have had 64bit processors way before Intel. So if you say the Itanium is ok for the high-end consumer, then It's safe to say that a Sun Ultra10 or a SGI Octane would also be a high-end consumer machine.
Sure, okay. Compare the prices. The Itanium solution is much cheaper.
What makes you so sure that a 16 processor G4 machine would not perform, because of the bus speed. What about super high-end servers like the CM5 or the Cray T3D. I seriously doubt those machines have 500Mhz bus speeds, or DDR memory. I know for a fact that the CM5 had dedicated memory for each processor node, and each node had 2 vector units. If you want, I can find out specifics from my brother, who has actually programmed code for it, when he worked at Las Alamos. Whether a 16 processor G4 machine is relevant or not, it could be built and if built right, would be very fast.
Very irrevelant. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the G4 wasn't designed to be run in anything more than a dual configuration.
So the .NET family is limited to 32 processors huh....Weak, very weak. You can say what you want, UNIX still scales better than Windows, no matter what the flavor.
Windows isn't designed nor targeted at customers with more than 32 processors. If anyone wanted a 2048-way server, they'd either custom build it and load UNIX on it or have some large corporation develop the computer. It's a lot cheaper clustering 32 high-availablity servers than buying that one 2048-way server. Duh, Windows isn't scalable. It was NEVER designed primarily to be used on 2048-way supercomputers. That's way out of Microsoft's scope and market.
In my opinion, Microsoft is beginning to die a slow painful death. Everyone is tired of their ************ and half-assed attempts of secure computing. Everyone always complains that Macs are not open enough, well I think the opposite is true. Apple embraces open standards and even invents and shares them when none exist, while Microsoft shuns and sometimes even steals others work, in a attempt to push their own proprietary formats and stifle progress.
Funny that Microsoft pushed the ever-so-slow W3C to standardize further dynamic HTML/etc. technologies to become standard. Of course, W3C can't keep current to allow people to innovate in the web presentation standards. Microsoft is even pushing XML very hard with .NET Web Services. And yes, Macs are closed. Not in software, but in hardware. Maybe you were confused by the definition of Macs being closed. The older Macintosh hardware is so proprietary it's not funny. Recent Macs adopt technology that had been in PCs before, except FireWire of course, because Apple invented that. But the hardware is still proprietary. I don't see that we are able to take off-the-shelf high quality components and build our own PowerPC computers then slap Mac OS X on it. Also, Microsoft indeed is "against" open source, and yet they maintain a "shared source" implementation of .NET for FreeBSD. In fact, it's a very well done implementation -- not that most-feeble-possible-implementation that we thought could possible be.
I find it funny that Intel invented USB, but it was Apple that took the leap of faith and pushed it into the mainstream. Apple, in my opinion is the only company thinking "outside the box" and in the end, they will win because of it.
-mark
Maybe it was Apple and Microsoft (Windows 98) who popularized USB, but you've got to realize this. PCs have had USB a few years before Apple. It wasn't until iMac/Windows 98 (note, same year: 1998) that USB got popular.
belovedmonster
Apr 12, 11:08 AM
According to IGNs Wii podcast the first 6 or so hours are pretty easy and then it ramps up to being really rather quite hard come the end.
twoodcc
Oct 9, 04:38 PM
Ah shut up you bastards...
well that's one way to put it :p
but i agree.
well that's one way to put it :p
but i agree.
bluedevil14
Nov 14, 07:41 PM
its a great idea all around
fragiledreams
Sep 15, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by King Cobra
At Pascack Hills, I have been on computers running NT4 and Windoze 2000, and both have *rarely* crashed on me. However, it's not common for me to see OS X crash on me. Even when I had 10.1 on my iMac 233 for a short time, it did not crash one time.
My point is that as stable as the Windoze OS is, as you point out, OS X, simply put, is even more stable. Although there are some issues with hardware, usually, that's with upgraded hardware, the OS performs very well under the power of the G4.
I have also heard about XP not crashing as much as the previous OSs. So I'll say it as it is: The Windoze OS is improving, but incremently closer to perfect. If an error pops up, at least explain what should be done about.
Ok.. you're right too.... I just don't like the fact that in some threads mac people use the "crapy OS" as a point in order for example to overcome the speed differences. If you like say that you prefer better the GUI in OSX, I don't have any problem with that. But saying that it is crap, bugy or unstable is untrue to say the least.
At Pascack Hills, I have been on computers running NT4 and Windoze 2000, and both have *rarely* crashed on me. However, it's not common for me to see OS X crash on me. Even when I had 10.1 on my iMac 233 for a short time, it did not crash one time.
My point is that as stable as the Windoze OS is, as you point out, OS X, simply put, is even more stable. Although there are some issues with hardware, usually, that's with upgraded hardware, the OS performs very well under the power of the G4.
I have also heard about XP not crashing as much as the previous OSs. So I'll say it as it is: The Windoze OS is improving, but incremently closer to perfect. If an error pops up, at least explain what should be done about.
Ok.. you're right too.... I just don't like the fact that in some threads mac people use the "crapy OS" as a point in order for example to overcome the speed differences. If you like say that you prefer better the GUI in OSX, I don't have any problem with that. But saying that it is crap, bugy or unstable is untrue to say the least.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar