uNext
Nov 24, 10:14 AM
what a pitiful thanksgiving sale apple provided.
nothing to wow about.
nothing to wow about.
Reasec
Apr 20, 04:23 AM
Windows are purely OS for "work enviroment". OSX is for casual stuff.
Cant imagine using freakin Miranda/ICQ/Trillian/Digsby piece of crap with MS Movie Maker and so on.
Same as i cant imagine using Outlook/Excel on Mac OS.
Windows is like Semi, gigantic ugly looking utility vehicle. Mac OS is like convertible ferrari - nice pus.sy magnet for everyday casual use.
Cant imagine using freakin Miranda/ICQ/Trillian/Digsby piece of crap with MS Movie Maker and so on.
Same as i cant imagine using Outlook/Excel on Mac OS.
Windows is like Semi, gigantic ugly looking utility vehicle. Mac OS is like convertible ferrari - nice pus.sy magnet for everyday casual use.
Lara F
Oct 17, 06:40 PM
If the Apple targetting wasn't obvious enough...
http://www.droiddoes.com :p
I really hope this one can actually live up to the hype - Verizon needs it and Apple could use the competition.
http://www.droiddoes.com :p
I really hope this one can actually live up to the hype - Verizon needs it and Apple could use the competition.
Clive At Five
Oct 3, 01:44 PM
Steve Jobs says "iRetire" and walks off.
hahahahahahahahah!
That's classic!
-Clive
hahahahahahahahah!
That's classic!
-Clive
more...
SevenInchScrew
Nov 28, 09:56 PM
Hardline lets you get killstreaks a kill earlier. Hardline Pro lets you double tap X on a killstreak crate to switch out what's inside.
So, with this setup you can enable: SAM Turret for 3 kills, Care Package for 4, and Sentry Gun for 5. You can then switch out every single one of those for something random, which is usually Napalm Strike, B-52, or Valkyrie Rockets.
It's so overpowered.
Not really. I've been using that setup for a couple weeks now (See post #39). Much more often than not, I get boring stuff. I've only had them swap for Chopper Gunner, Gunship, or Dogs on about 5 times, with the occasional SR71. This is out of probably 250 or so packages. But either way, Treyarch have said that this for sure will be patched in the next update. It will then only work on actual Care Packages, and not the SAM or Sentry drops.
... i have been trying to get ghost to pro for a while now and ironically i'm stuck on destroying an enemy turrent.
Just set one of your killstreaks as Sentry, and then throw it in the middle of the map when you get it. Then just wait for the enemy to get it, and kill it once they've deployed it.
So, with this setup you can enable: SAM Turret for 3 kills, Care Package for 4, and Sentry Gun for 5. You can then switch out every single one of those for something random, which is usually Napalm Strike, B-52, or Valkyrie Rockets.
It's so overpowered.
Not really. I've been using that setup for a couple weeks now (See post #39). Much more often than not, I get boring stuff. I've only had them swap for Chopper Gunner, Gunship, or Dogs on about 5 times, with the occasional SR71. This is out of probably 250 or so packages. But either way, Treyarch have said that this for sure will be patched in the next update. It will then only work on actual Care Packages, and not the SAM or Sentry drops.
... i have been trying to get ghost to pro for a while now and ironically i'm stuck on destroying an enemy turrent.
Just set one of your killstreaks as Sentry, and then throw it in the middle of the map when you get it. Then just wait for the enemy to get it, and kill it once they've deployed it.
snberk103
Apr 13, 12:03 PM
I would prefer the cheaper and more effective way; profiling.
Also, you can't say security has been working well-- look at the number of incidences of things going through security accidentally via negligence (knives, guns, etc)-- while there's no official numbers, the anecdotal evidence is quite moving.
Actually, there is documented evidence (which I'm not going to look up, because it supports your contention). The TSA does publish numbers (though buried deep in their reports) on the number of times undercover agents are able to slip weapons through security on training/testing runs. The number is quite high, if you look at it in a "Sky is falling way". But that is the incomplete picture.
Suppose, just for argument's sake, you actually have a 50/50 chance of slipping something through security. Is that "good enough" to mount an operation? Consider that there are at least a dozen people involved, to support just one operative. You can try to separate them into cells - but that doesn't mean that they are entirely hidden... it just gives them time to try to escape while their links are followed. Plus, there is a lot of money involved.
Do you risk those 12 people, plus a large chunk of scarce resources, on a venture that only has a 50/50 chance of getting something onto the plane. (we haven't even considered that most bombs on planes lately have not gone off properly, eg. shoe bomber and underwear bomber)... or that if the intent is to forcibly take over the plane there might be sky marshall - or just a plane load of passengers who are not going to sit idly by.
So you try and reduce that risk by making the plan more "fool proof" and sophisticated - but this adds complexity ...and complex things/plans breakdown and require more resources and more people. More people means adding people with doubts, and the chances of leaking. Plus more resources, which brings attention to the operation. And as you add more people and resources, the "downside" to being caught gets bigger, so you try to reduce that risk by making it even more "foolproof".
If you are one of the 12+ people supporting the operative, and you have a 50/50 chance of being caught and spending a very long and nasty session in jail - even before you get your day in court - and you have no chance of the "ultimate reward" .... don't you think you might start having doubts, and talking to people? Sometimes the wrong people?
I don't buy for a minute all of the stories of traffic cops stopping a car for a routine check and finding "bad things" that were going to be used. The intelligence services have, imho, a pretty good idea of what is happening in these groups, and use these innocent looking traffic stops (and other coincidental discoveries) so that their undercover agents aren't suspected.
That is the value, imo, of the security checks. The barriers are are high enough to get the "bad" operations big and cumbersome, and to make the plans too complex to escape notice by the authorities. It's the planning and organization of getting past the security checks that the authorities are looking for. Once that "bad thing" is in the airport, the authorities have already lost most of the game. Then the security screening is just a last ditch attempt to catch something.
The real danger is the single lone-wolf person with a grudge, who hasn't planned in advance, and doesn't really care if they get caught. They have a 50/50 chance of getting through because the only security layer at that point is the security checkpoint. The intelligence services will not have picked them up, nor will the no-fly list incidentally.
.... all of this is just mho, of course..... read the later john lecarre though, for more chilling details....
Also, you can't say security has been working well-- look at the number of incidences of things going through security accidentally via negligence (knives, guns, etc)-- while there's no official numbers, the anecdotal evidence is quite moving.
Actually, there is documented evidence (which I'm not going to look up, because it supports your contention). The TSA does publish numbers (though buried deep in their reports) on the number of times undercover agents are able to slip weapons through security on training/testing runs. The number is quite high, if you look at it in a "Sky is falling way". But that is the incomplete picture.
Suppose, just for argument's sake, you actually have a 50/50 chance of slipping something through security. Is that "good enough" to mount an operation? Consider that there are at least a dozen people involved, to support just one operative. You can try to separate them into cells - but that doesn't mean that they are entirely hidden... it just gives them time to try to escape while their links are followed. Plus, there is a lot of money involved.
Do you risk those 12 people, plus a large chunk of scarce resources, on a venture that only has a 50/50 chance of getting something onto the plane. (we haven't even considered that most bombs on planes lately have not gone off properly, eg. shoe bomber and underwear bomber)... or that if the intent is to forcibly take over the plane there might be sky marshall - or just a plane load of passengers who are not going to sit idly by.
So you try and reduce that risk by making the plan more "fool proof" and sophisticated - but this adds complexity ...and complex things/plans breakdown and require more resources and more people. More people means adding people with doubts, and the chances of leaking. Plus more resources, which brings attention to the operation. And as you add more people and resources, the "downside" to being caught gets bigger, so you try to reduce that risk by making it even more "foolproof".
If you are one of the 12+ people supporting the operative, and you have a 50/50 chance of being caught and spending a very long and nasty session in jail - even before you get your day in court - and you have no chance of the "ultimate reward" .... don't you think you might start having doubts, and talking to people? Sometimes the wrong people?
I don't buy for a minute all of the stories of traffic cops stopping a car for a routine check and finding "bad things" that were going to be used. The intelligence services have, imho, a pretty good idea of what is happening in these groups, and use these innocent looking traffic stops (and other coincidental discoveries) so that their undercover agents aren't suspected.
That is the value, imo, of the security checks. The barriers are are high enough to get the "bad" operations big and cumbersome, and to make the plans too complex to escape notice by the authorities. It's the planning and organization of getting past the security checks that the authorities are looking for. Once that "bad thing" is in the airport, the authorities have already lost most of the game. Then the security screening is just a last ditch attempt to catch something.
The real danger is the single lone-wolf person with a grudge, who hasn't planned in advance, and doesn't really care if they get caught. They have a 50/50 chance of getting through because the only security layer at that point is the security checkpoint. The intelligence services will not have picked them up, nor will the no-fly list incidentally.
.... all of this is just mho, of course..... read the later john lecarre though, for more chilling details....
more...
Piggie
May 4, 01:24 AM
Ummmm incorrect. I have a major surgery coming up and the only way me and my doctor could sit down together and review the CT Scan was with my iPad 2 since all CT Scans are done on digital now instead of film. I simply stopped by the hospital and snagged the cd the night before my appointment and loaded it before I left the next day.
My doctor said this was on his wish list, but he couldn't find anywhere in stock.
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d5/audiogodz1/dc1cacec.jpg
The "Only way" ?
What, you could not use a laptop?
And how would an iPad only owner read the CD in the 1st place?
Yes the iPad made a nice easy to use picture viewer once you had put the images on it from your real computer at home is what you are saying.
You could just of easy taken a laptop which read the CD images off directly onto the screen and no needed this new device whatsoever.
My doctor said this was on his wish list, but he couldn't find anywhere in stock.
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d5/audiogodz1/dc1cacec.jpg
The "Only way" ?
What, you could not use a laptop?
And how would an iPad only owner read the CD in the 1st place?
Yes the iPad made a nice easy to use picture viewer once you had put the images on it from your real computer at home is what you are saying.
You could just of easy taken a laptop which read the CD images off directly onto the screen and no needed this new device whatsoever.
z4n3
Mar 24, 04:46 PM
I think that's Audion.
http://www.panic.com/audion/
Thanks... :D
I wish it was still around.
Found this link (https://www.panic.com/extras/audionstory) that is quite interesting regarding iTunes beginnings
http://www.panic.com/audion/
Thanks... :D
I wish it was still around.
Found this link (https://www.panic.com/extras/audionstory) that is quite interesting regarding iTunes beginnings
more...
stoid
Aug 7, 06:58 PM
The cinema display's didn't change, all that changed was the price. So there isn't any "previous generation model" from what I understand.
Did you miss the part about brighter and greater contrast ratio? :confused:
Did you miss the part about brighter and greater contrast ratio? :confused:
Tymmz
Sep 12, 05:56 AM
Call me na�ve, but aren't they supposed to receive you?
hehe, good one!
hehe, good one!
more...
Geckotek
Dec 14, 03:13 PM
But the fact remains how are they going to exactly implement two separate phones for carriers that use different cell tech, and implement them properly
You act like this is some impossible task that's never been done before. Or is Apple just not as capable as every other cell phone manufacturer in the world?
You act like this is some impossible task that's never been done before. Or is Apple just not as capable as every other cell phone manufacturer in the world?
nemaslov
Oct 11, 11:07 AM
we all know this was (is) coming so if you just bought an new updated iPod so what? I just bought an 80GB which is already full of music. I don't want a wide screen TV Movie version. For me "it's the music stupid." *
I for one feel that this wide screen video pod should be just another great option but please keep the other ones too.
* the last time i wrote this line, someone in the UK got pissed that I was calling people here stupid. Those in the US should recall the Clinton 92 campain..."it's the economy stupid."
:D
I for one feel that this wide screen video pod should be just another great option but please keep the other ones too.
* the last time i wrote this line, someone in the UK got pissed that I was calling people here stupid. Those in the US should recall the Clinton 92 campain..."it's the economy stupid."
:D
more...
gnasher729
Oct 2, 05:06 PM
This isn't a consumer-end hack, it is a retailer-end re-implementation of Fairplay (presumably clean room) for interoperability purposes (legal in Europe, I don't know about the USoA since the DMCA etc).
The DMCA would have nothing to do with this. This doesn't remove any copy prevention, it adds it. I just can't see what anyone would want to do with this technology. The only scenario that makes sense: If you are a music band without any record contract, and the iTunes Music Store refuses to sell your music, you could use software like this to add Fairplay DRM to your music, and you could offer the music on your webpage and sell it to anyone who uses iTunes - which would be about 90 percent of all people who are interested in music and computers at all. Of course you could sell the music without any DRM.
The DMCA would have nothing to do with this. This doesn't remove any copy prevention, it adds it. I just can't see what anyone would want to do with this technology. The only scenario that makes sense: If you are a music band without any record contract, and the iTunes Music Store refuses to sell your music, you could use software like this to add Fairplay DRM to your music, and you could offer the music on your webpage and sell it to anyone who uses iTunes - which would be about 90 percent of all people who are interested in music and computers at all. Of course you could sell the music without any DRM.
jgurbisz
Nov 16, 04:43 PM
You will have better luck following your Fart than what Dig Times says!
more...
johnny depp tattoos 2010. Actor Johnny Depp has a flying; Actor Johnny Depp has a flying. ucfgrad93. Apr 30, 10:30 PM. Ucfgrad93 -aggie- is so called seer.
Tatto Very Nice Body: Tattoo
more...
Johnny Depp has got a new
on Earth Johnny Depp
Elegant Chest Tattoo for
more...
DPazdanISU
Apr 5, 10:12 PM
Wow. The ignorance of the average user of this forum is unbelievable, So much ranting about an app that nobody has to download if they hate ads so much.
In any case, this is no different than the many many websites, blogs , YouTube accounts etc dedicated exclusively to collect tv, radio, and paper advertising from many countries. There's a lot of people who like to see ads and analyze the creativity and technique behind them.
Agreed. Sadly, I was working on an App nearly IDENTICAL to what Apple just came out with. I am about 80% done but am wondering if it is even worth completing: http://computerharmonyinc.com/ibillboard.html
In any case, this is no different than the many many websites, blogs , YouTube accounts etc dedicated exclusively to collect tv, radio, and paper advertising from many countries. There's a lot of people who like to see ads and analyze the creativity and technique behind them.
Agreed. Sadly, I was working on an App nearly IDENTICAL to what Apple just came out with. I am about 80% done but am wondering if it is even worth completing: http://computerharmonyinc.com/ibillboard.html
allpar
Apr 29, 03:45 PM
Great news. Now if only they'd kept Rosetta, I'd upgrade happily. As it is... I'm going to have to stay stuck in Snow Leopard.
more...
dalvin200
Sep 12, 07:40 AM
I might be getting confused here - but isn't the music store just a web thingy and not part of the software? i.e. store and media player distinct, though interlinked
yeah, but there is a link in your itunes software (client) which has "Music Store" - u know.. down the left side where your playlists are..
Wouldn't they need to change that to a generic "Store" or something..
yeah, but there is a link in your itunes software (client) which has "Music Store" - u know.. down the left side where your playlists are..
Wouldn't they need to change that to a generic "Store" or something..
wordoflife
Mar 19, 05:29 PM
Here in England thats a pretty common figure of speech that people use all the time. It doesn't mean literally ages. I forgot this was an American forum, but what does that have to do with anything anyway?
I'm from the US and I even understood what you were saying. It's just figurative language. It looks like people just want something to rant on you about.
I'm from the US and I even understood what you were saying. It's just figurative language. It looks like people just want something to rant on you about.
sushi
Oct 10, 08:43 PM
Well if they do launch it so soon, it probably won't replace the current iPods, but be a new highend model.
This would make sense.
To get a decent sized HD, wireless, good battery life, it may need to be bigger. Also, I would think folks would prefer a larger screen than the current iPod size.
This would make sense.
To get a decent sized HD, wireless, good battery life, it may need to be bigger. Also, I would think folks would prefer a larger screen than the current iPod size.
G4DP
Jan 15, 03:40 PM
�200 for a 500GB External drive - haha, good one Steve!
geoffism
Jan 9, 10:59 AM
My needs are basic and selfish:
iPhone - 3G and 16g
MacBook Pro - bump (highly unlikely) and only cause I'm in the market.
Mac Pro - nothing. It sounds perfect and has only complicated my purchase consideration. Mac Pro vs MacBook Pro. Hmmmm....
iPhone - 3G and 16g
MacBook Pro - bump (highly unlikely) and only cause I'm in the market.
Mac Pro - nothing. It sounds perfect and has only complicated my purchase consideration. Mac Pro vs MacBook Pro. Hmmmm....
guzhogi
Dec 13, 12:31 PM
I'm getting really tired of reading "iPhone on Verizon 4G after Christmas!" rumors on here. WHy is it that every time someone says "Oh, I've heard the iPhone's coming to Verizon in January," MacRumors puts it on the front page or Page 2? Are enough people so totally obsessed with the iPhone, they pee their pants if they don't hear a Verizon iPhone rumor every day/every other day?
lsvtecjohn3
Apr 15, 07:31 PM
Sounds like the Record companies are being their typical stupid selves. Only reason Apple is really able to get away with it is because they are Apple. It is not the closed system part but because they are Apple. I bet if the record company could they would say F you to Apple and pull out. I also would not be surpised if they regreat now making a deal with them when iTunes first launched.
The record companies might not like the deal they struck with Apple but I bet they like the fact that they got that money still coming in. In this day and age were almost everyone pirates there music at least with iTunes some people are still buying music. Some money is better than no money.
Amazon on it cloud stuff just said F-You to the record company and Amazon has enough sells like Apple iTMS that they can force the music company to bend over and take it.
Without getting licensing in place before launch I can see this bitting Amazon in the ass just like what happen to Google with the Google TV. No wonder why Apple is still talking to record companies.
http://www.mobiledia.com/news/85569.html
The record companies might not like the deal they struck with Apple but I bet they like the fact that they got that money still coming in. In this day and age were almost everyone pirates there music at least with iTunes some people are still buying music. Some money is better than no money.
Amazon on it cloud stuff just said F-You to the record company and Amazon has enough sells like Apple iTMS that they can force the music company to bend over and take it.
Without getting licensing in place before launch I can see this bitting Amazon in the ass just like what happen to Google with the Google TV. No wonder why Apple is still talking to record companies.
http://www.mobiledia.com/news/85569.html
inkswamp
May 3, 09:56 PM
This ad just called Steve Jobs a child.
Did you ever hear his speech at Stanford? I'm betting he'd agree.
Did you ever hear his speech at Stanford? I'm betting he'd agree.
No comments:
Post a Comment