MacCoaster
Aug 17, 12:20 PM
Wow, thanks!!!
Wait... I didn't win it? Oh well, it is still Katanna #14!!
Matthew
You know you're supposed to make a new thread for that?
Wait... I didn't win it? Oh well, it is still Katanna #14!!
Matthew
You know you're supposed to make a new thread for that?
macdaddykane
May 4, 10:33 PM
http://ocunwired.ocregister.com/files/2011/05/ipadedited.jpg
Local paper covering a local company now selling this tablet that looks like a giant iPhone 3 knockoff running windows 7.
Some people just don't get it-- like SJ said they're all about "speeds and feeds".
This is definitely worth a chuckle.
http://ocunwired.ocregister.com/2011/05/04/does-iphone-lookalike-live-up-to-specs-no/7607/
I wonder how long before apple sends them a cease and desist.
Local paper covering a local company now selling this tablet that looks like a giant iPhone 3 knockoff running windows 7.
Some people just don't get it-- like SJ said they're all about "speeds and feeds".
This is definitely worth a chuckle.
http://ocunwired.ocregister.com/2011/05/04/does-iphone-lookalike-live-up-to-specs-no/7607/
I wonder how long before apple sends them a cease and desist.
ftaok
Apr 16, 08:36 AM
My reply in red.
Oiyvay! More waiting on hold! Maybe the best thing to do is connect and disconnect from the modem with whichever mac I happen to be using at the time?
It seems there are never easy answers for my questions.
Is THIS (http://www.att.com/equipment/accessory-details/?q_categoryid=cat2020062&q_sku=sku4760228&q_manufacturer=&q_model) the modem you have?
I'm no expert, but I'd say that you'd need a router. Spend a little more to get one with Gigabit speeds (aka 10/100/1000T). I've only ever used Netgear and Apple networking products and I can say that setting the network up with either is very easy. I'm guessing that Linksys, Belkin, etc. are all just as easy.
No need to buy your own modem, unless you're paying AT&T a lease fee ... that $5/mo adds up and a DSL modem/router could pay off in a year or so.
Oiyvay! More waiting on hold! Maybe the best thing to do is connect and disconnect from the modem with whichever mac I happen to be using at the time?
It seems there are never easy answers for my questions.
Is THIS (http://www.att.com/equipment/accessory-details/?q_categoryid=cat2020062&q_sku=sku4760228&q_manufacturer=&q_model) the modem you have?
I'm no expert, but I'd say that you'd need a router. Spend a little more to get one with Gigabit speeds (aka 10/100/1000T). I've only ever used Netgear and Apple networking products and I can say that setting the network up with either is very easy. I'm guessing that Linksys, Belkin, etc. are all just as easy.
No need to buy your own modem, unless you're paying AT&T a lease fee ... that $5/mo adds up and a DSL modem/router could pay off in a year or so.
simpson123
Dec 24, 03:06 AM
Good job,
Twiiter this updation, as we all needed since a long time desprately. This information would help the present condition of the twitter. I have just installed 3.1 into my iphone and found some great feature about that.
_______________________
Gary Jezorski ripoff (http://www.scamdetective.com/Online-Marketers/Gary-Jezorski)
Twiiter this updation, as we all needed since a long time desprately. This information would help the present condition of the twitter. I have just installed 3.1 into my iphone and found some great feature about that.
_______________________
Gary Jezorski ripoff (http://www.scamdetective.com/Online-Marketers/Gary-Jezorski)
Astro7x
Aug 9, 01:40 PM
By download do they mean stream? Or actually download?
As an iPod Touch user I'd love to be able to download a show and watch it on my train ride to work every day. Unfortunately I can't do that with streaming...
My parents also have U-Verse (I'm stuck with Comcast), I'm sure they'll give me their username and password so I can take advantage of the service!
Edit:
Well nevermind... "However the download and watch feature is not available with the iTouch and iPad". What the hell?
As an iPod Touch user I'd love to be able to download a show and watch it on my train ride to work every day. Unfortunately I can't do that with streaming...
My parents also have U-Verse (I'm stuck with Comcast), I'm sure they'll give me their username and password so I can take advantage of the service!
Edit:
Well nevermind... "However the download and watch feature is not available with the iTouch and iPad". What the hell?
canucksfan88
Mar 24, 05:14 PM
what i have said from the new nano's initial release, was that it was supposed to be the new iPod Shuffle. The thing is, production/component costs probably were too high to justify it becoming the low pricepoint shuffle.
the predict a new nano in the upcoming release and the shuffle being replaced with the current nano
the predict a new nano in the upcoming release and the shuffle being replaced with the current nano
Che Castro
Oct 20, 06:30 PM
dont know is that the correct word game pad
but im looking for something i can put the ipod in and it would look like a psp with buttons to play games in
is this device available?
but im looking for something i can put the ipod in and it would look like a psp with buttons to play games in
is this device available?
Technohead
Apr 6, 07:24 AM
Whew! there is one. OMG, I AM losing it!!!!:eek:
Thanks.
Thanks.
Airforcekid
Jan 20, 12:43 PM
Nope
There is no format you can send that cannot be altered
Regardless, it could be screen captured and altered
Just give a really low resolution.
There is no format you can send that cannot be altered
Regardless, it could be screen captured and altered
Just give a really low resolution.
Dagless
Mar 22, 06:31 AM
Have you ever seen a game - film crossover?
What did GeOW have? Fun gameplay and a bad story.
As a film? bwhaha. laughable. MGS film? A stealth game with over the top, cheesy cutscenes?! They had better not go through with the Metroid film too.
What they did to Doom will disgust me forever.
What did GeOW have? Fun gameplay and a bad story.
As a film? bwhaha. laughable. MGS film? A stealth game with over the top, cheesy cutscenes?! They had better not go through with the Metroid film too.
What they did to Doom will disgust me forever.
CamoBear
Mar 31, 12:10 PM
I�m planning to upgrade the RAM on my MacBook Pro (mid 2.8Ghz core 2 duo) from 4GB- to 8GB RAM.
Will this RAM-chip fit in my MacBook?
And is Crucial a good brand?
http://www.crucial.com/store/partspecs.aspx?imodule=CT51264BC1067
Thanks in advance for any help!
Will this RAM-chip fit in my MacBook?
And is Crucial a good brand?
http://www.crucial.com/store/partspecs.aspx?imodule=CT51264BC1067
Thanks in advance for any help!
jodelli
Mar 31, 09:28 PM
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3124/2824774113_08fd59bf25_z.jpg
MrMac'n'Cheese
Apr 19, 09:47 PM
Just mah MBA 11 inch, bought him 2 months ago.
And mah iPad2, which is kinda like a mac.
And mah iPad2, which is kinda like a mac.
bvpham88
Jan 25, 07:41 PM
I have a 5th generation ipod with a password on it, i cannot restore it because this isnt the original computer it would be hooked up to. so how would i be able to restore it? or possibly reset the whole device?
acarney
Jan 19, 03:47 AM
I had the black screen when waking just 5 minutes ago. Had to put my MBA to sleep, wait a couple seconds and wake it again to get the backlight to come on. I'd really like this fixed. I've been on 10.6.6 since the day it was released.
What do you mean put it back to sleep? When I get the black screen I can't see anything on my screen and closing the MBA and opening it again a min or two later doesn't do anything at all. The only fix is a hard reset for me by holding the power button for like 2 minutes.
What do you mean put it back to sleep? When I get the black screen I can't see anything on my screen and closing the MBA and opening it again a min or two later doesn't do anything at all. The only fix is a hard reset for me by holding the power button for like 2 minutes.
Blue Velvet
Mar 28, 10:10 AM
Proper Keynesian response to a recession, particularly one headed quickly for a depression is deficit spending. Proven time and time again.
However, the neo-liberal whizz-kids who have been generally in charge of the consensus over the past 30 years always forget that the flip-side of the equation is to build a surplus when times are good, something that the Clinton (D) administration did by raising taxes on higher income earners and then handed it over to George W. Bush (R) who pissed it up the wall, giving tax cuts to billionaires and running up two wars without any of it being paid for in the long run, with the worst record of job creation of any president in history.
Cue massive recession and economic disaster after a housing bubble stoked by unregulated lenders, the dying days of the Bush and the incoming Obama administration had little choice to spend, because a recession is a problem of demand, not supply... as we can clearly see when corporations are now sitting on huge profits and the Dow is climbing steadily. But they're not creating jobs, because demand is slack, almost solely because of high unemployment.
Supply-side is a failure. It only looked good in the 80s because the Fed squeezed inflation out of the system by raising interest rates, then dropping them again... but interest rates across developed economies these days can hardly go lower. The limits of monetary policy, apart from measured quantitative easing, can go no further. Like Keynes said: like pushing on a piece of string.
The only way to raise demand is to pursue policies that further full employment. More jobs, more money in people's pockets, more revenue, more demand. However, Republicans in congress, after wasting many months of pursuing fruitless bills about abortion, defunding their pet hates etc. have a new, bright idea up their sleeves which I'm sure every forum member would like to see for themselves:
Lower wages and more unemployment
In a little-noticed economic report distributed by the office House Speaker John Boehner last week, the Republican staff of the Joint Economic Committee attempted to refute criticisms that the GOP’s economic agenda would deliver too much pain too fast.
The paper makes the party’s anti-Keynesian case that fiscal consolidation (read: spending cuts) can spur immediate economic growth and reduce unemployment. But in making that case, the Republicans may also have given Democrats some political ammunition.
For example, the paper predicts that cutting the number of public employees would send highly skilled workers job hunting in the private sector, which in turn would lead to lower labor costs and increased employment. But “lowering labor costs” is economist-speak for lowering wages — does the GOP want to be in the position of advocating for lower wages for voters who work in the private sector?
http://www.nationaljournal.com/economy/gop-prescription-spending-cuts-and-lower-wages-equal-more-jobs-20110325
Why it's foolish:
“Much of this study relies on the growth performance of a few (very) small open economies — Sweden, Canada, New Zealand, notably — after 1994,” said University of Texas economist James Galbraith, who was executive director of the JEC in the early eighties. “It’s easy to look good if you are a small country with a freshly devalued currency selling into a world boom. The ‘lessons’ will not apply to the United States, which cannot just contract domestically, devalue the dollar (sacrificing our reserve-currency position) and expect the rest of the world to bail us out by buying our exports.”
The GOP argument “would have more force if the economy today looked more like the economy in the 1990s expansion — the longest in our country’s history and the last time we had a balanced budget,” Chad Stone, chief economist for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, wrote in response to the JEC report. “In today’s economy, weak demand, not competition for funds, is the much more plausible explanation for inadequate investment.”
As the Republican report itself acknowledges, economists at the International Monetary Fund — no shrinking violet when it comes to prescribing harsh spending cuts — have contended that many of the studies cited in the report are flawed. In the October 2010 World Economic Outlook, IMF researchers asserted that cutting spending “typically reduces output and raises unemployment in the short term,” even if the non-Keynesian effects cushion the blow slightly.
We're already seeing the results of cutting spending during a recession over here in the UK and also Ireland. Unemployment on the rise, revenues down, services slashed, growth down.
Why do we put these fools in time and time again? Because many of us think like peasants:
This new Holy Trinity of right-wing basket cases has been pushing all sorts of crazy hallucinations of late, from Bachmann warning that the Americorps program would eventually be turned into a regime of forced re-education for American youth, to Beck’s meanderings about Obama creating FEMA-run concentration camps to warehouse conservative dissidents, to Norris and Beck stirring up talk of secessionist movements. And a lot of people are having fun with this, because, well, it’s funny. It’s like a Farrelly Brothers version of right-wing political agitation. But it’s also kind of sad.
After all, the reason the winger crowd can’t find a way to be coherently angry right now is because this country has no healthy avenues for genuine populist outrage. It never has. The setup always goes the other way: when the excesses of business interests and their political proteges in Washington leave the regular guy broke and screwed, the response is always for the lower and middle classes to split down the middle and find reasons to get pissed off not at their greedy bosses but at each other. That’s why even people like Beck’s audience, who I’d wager are mostly lower-income people, can’t imagine themselves protesting against the Wall Street barons who in actuality are the ones who ****ed them over. Beck pointedly compared the AIG protesters to Bolsheviks: “[The Communists] basically said ‘Eat the rich, they did this to you, get ‘em, kill ‘em!’” He then said the AIG and G20 protesters were identical: “It’s a different style, but the sentiments are exactly the same: Find ‘em, get ‘em, kill ‘em!’” Beck has an audience that’s been trained that the rich are not appropriate targets for anger, unless of course they’re Hollywood liberals, or George Soros, or in some other way linked to some acceptable class of villain, to liberals, immigrants, atheists, etc. — Ted Turner, say, married to Jane Fonda.
But actual rich people can’t ever be the target. It’s a classic peasant mentality: going into fits of groveling and bowing whenever the master’s carriage rides by, then fuming against the Turks in Crimea or the Jews in the Pale or whoever after spending fifteen hard hours in the fields. You know you’re a peasant when you worship the very people who are right now, this minute, conning you and taking your ****. Whatever the master does, you’re on board. When you get frisky, he sticks a big cross in the middle of your village, and you spend the rest of your life praying to it with big googly eyes. Or he puts out newspapers full of innuendo about this or that faraway group and you immediately salute and rush off to join the hate squad. A good peasant is loyal, simpleminded, and full of misdirected anger. And that’s what we’ve got now, a lot of misdirected anger searching around for a non-target to mis-punish… can’t be mad at AIG, can’t be mad at Citi or Goldman Sachs. The real villains have to be the anti-AIG protesters! After all, those people earned those bonuses! If ever there was a textbook case of peasant thinking, it’s struggling middle-class Americans burned up in defense of taxpayer-funded bonuses to millionaires. It’s really weird stuff. And bound to get weirder, I imagine, as this crisis gets worse and more complicated.
http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/04/14/americas-peasant-mentality/
So, the sight of the video in question, from a lobbying organisation with links to Jack Abramoff and that represents Exxon-Mobil amongst others, decrying government spending is nothing but empty but loud crap of the highest order. What they want is for government to spend money on them. Screw those who have lost their livelihoods, their jobs, their homes in the biggest recession in any of our lifetimes, let those suckers pay the bill. In fact, screw you, take a pay cut, be fearful of losing your job with all your benefits. We'll also press to weaken child labour laws so you're competing with kids...
Living standards have remained stagnant over the past decades, papered over by a housing bubble and cheap goods made in China while your healthcare costs have been going through the roof. But time and time again, you put the same oafs in who wrap themselves in the flag and carry a cross.
Jesus wept.
However, the neo-liberal whizz-kids who have been generally in charge of the consensus over the past 30 years always forget that the flip-side of the equation is to build a surplus when times are good, something that the Clinton (D) administration did by raising taxes on higher income earners and then handed it over to George W. Bush (R) who pissed it up the wall, giving tax cuts to billionaires and running up two wars without any of it being paid for in the long run, with the worst record of job creation of any president in history.
Cue massive recession and economic disaster after a housing bubble stoked by unregulated lenders, the dying days of the Bush and the incoming Obama administration had little choice to spend, because a recession is a problem of demand, not supply... as we can clearly see when corporations are now sitting on huge profits and the Dow is climbing steadily. But they're not creating jobs, because demand is slack, almost solely because of high unemployment.
Supply-side is a failure. It only looked good in the 80s because the Fed squeezed inflation out of the system by raising interest rates, then dropping them again... but interest rates across developed economies these days can hardly go lower. The limits of monetary policy, apart from measured quantitative easing, can go no further. Like Keynes said: like pushing on a piece of string.
The only way to raise demand is to pursue policies that further full employment. More jobs, more money in people's pockets, more revenue, more demand. However, Republicans in congress, after wasting many months of pursuing fruitless bills about abortion, defunding their pet hates etc. have a new, bright idea up their sleeves which I'm sure every forum member would like to see for themselves:
Lower wages and more unemployment
In a little-noticed economic report distributed by the office House Speaker John Boehner last week, the Republican staff of the Joint Economic Committee attempted to refute criticisms that the GOP’s economic agenda would deliver too much pain too fast.
The paper makes the party’s anti-Keynesian case that fiscal consolidation (read: spending cuts) can spur immediate economic growth and reduce unemployment. But in making that case, the Republicans may also have given Democrats some political ammunition.
For example, the paper predicts that cutting the number of public employees would send highly skilled workers job hunting in the private sector, which in turn would lead to lower labor costs and increased employment. But “lowering labor costs” is economist-speak for lowering wages — does the GOP want to be in the position of advocating for lower wages for voters who work in the private sector?
http://www.nationaljournal.com/economy/gop-prescription-spending-cuts-and-lower-wages-equal-more-jobs-20110325
Why it's foolish:
“Much of this study relies on the growth performance of a few (very) small open economies — Sweden, Canada, New Zealand, notably — after 1994,” said University of Texas economist James Galbraith, who was executive director of the JEC in the early eighties. “It’s easy to look good if you are a small country with a freshly devalued currency selling into a world boom. The ‘lessons’ will not apply to the United States, which cannot just contract domestically, devalue the dollar (sacrificing our reserve-currency position) and expect the rest of the world to bail us out by buying our exports.”
The GOP argument “would have more force if the economy today looked more like the economy in the 1990s expansion — the longest in our country’s history and the last time we had a balanced budget,” Chad Stone, chief economist for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, wrote in response to the JEC report. “In today’s economy, weak demand, not competition for funds, is the much more plausible explanation for inadequate investment.”
As the Republican report itself acknowledges, economists at the International Monetary Fund — no shrinking violet when it comes to prescribing harsh spending cuts — have contended that many of the studies cited in the report are flawed. In the October 2010 World Economic Outlook, IMF researchers asserted that cutting spending “typically reduces output and raises unemployment in the short term,” even if the non-Keynesian effects cushion the blow slightly.
We're already seeing the results of cutting spending during a recession over here in the UK and also Ireland. Unemployment on the rise, revenues down, services slashed, growth down.
Why do we put these fools in time and time again? Because many of us think like peasants:
This new Holy Trinity of right-wing basket cases has been pushing all sorts of crazy hallucinations of late, from Bachmann warning that the Americorps program would eventually be turned into a regime of forced re-education for American youth, to Beck’s meanderings about Obama creating FEMA-run concentration camps to warehouse conservative dissidents, to Norris and Beck stirring up talk of secessionist movements. And a lot of people are having fun with this, because, well, it’s funny. It’s like a Farrelly Brothers version of right-wing political agitation. But it’s also kind of sad.
After all, the reason the winger crowd can’t find a way to be coherently angry right now is because this country has no healthy avenues for genuine populist outrage. It never has. The setup always goes the other way: when the excesses of business interests and their political proteges in Washington leave the regular guy broke and screwed, the response is always for the lower and middle classes to split down the middle and find reasons to get pissed off not at their greedy bosses but at each other. That’s why even people like Beck’s audience, who I’d wager are mostly lower-income people, can’t imagine themselves protesting against the Wall Street barons who in actuality are the ones who ****ed them over. Beck pointedly compared the AIG protesters to Bolsheviks: “[The Communists] basically said ‘Eat the rich, they did this to you, get ‘em, kill ‘em!’” He then said the AIG and G20 protesters were identical: “It’s a different style, but the sentiments are exactly the same: Find ‘em, get ‘em, kill ‘em!’” Beck has an audience that’s been trained that the rich are not appropriate targets for anger, unless of course they’re Hollywood liberals, or George Soros, or in some other way linked to some acceptable class of villain, to liberals, immigrants, atheists, etc. — Ted Turner, say, married to Jane Fonda.
But actual rich people can’t ever be the target. It’s a classic peasant mentality: going into fits of groveling and bowing whenever the master’s carriage rides by, then fuming against the Turks in Crimea or the Jews in the Pale or whoever after spending fifteen hard hours in the fields. You know you’re a peasant when you worship the very people who are right now, this minute, conning you and taking your ****. Whatever the master does, you’re on board. When you get frisky, he sticks a big cross in the middle of your village, and you spend the rest of your life praying to it with big googly eyes. Or he puts out newspapers full of innuendo about this or that faraway group and you immediately salute and rush off to join the hate squad. A good peasant is loyal, simpleminded, and full of misdirected anger. And that’s what we’ve got now, a lot of misdirected anger searching around for a non-target to mis-punish… can’t be mad at AIG, can’t be mad at Citi or Goldman Sachs. The real villains have to be the anti-AIG protesters! After all, those people earned those bonuses! If ever there was a textbook case of peasant thinking, it’s struggling middle-class Americans burned up in defense of taxpayer-funded bonuses to millionaires. It’s really weird stuff. And bound to get weirder, I imagine, as this crisis gets worse and more complicated.
http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/04/14/americas-peasant-mentality/
So, the sight of the video in question, from a lobbying organisation with links to Jack Abramoff and that represents Exxon-Mobil amongst others, decrying government spending is nothing but empty but loud crap of the highest order. What they want is for government to spend money on them. Screw those who have lost their livelihoods, their jobs, their homes in the biggest recession in any of our lifetimes, let those suckers pay the bill. In fact, screw you, take a pay cut, be fearful of losing your job with all your benefits. We'll also press to weaken child labour laws so you're competing with kids...
Living standards have remained stagnant over the past decades, papered over by a housing bubble and cheap goods made in China while your healthcare costs have been going through the roof. But time and time again, you put the same oafs in who wrap themselves in the flag and carry a cross.
Jesus wept.
Tomorrow
Apr 28, 08:44 AM
Apple is already sending out the emails for white iPhones. I imagine that's what the downtime is about.
pcypert
Mar 17, 02:17 AM
I don't even think the creators of the game would try and make that claim. A great, fun game for sure...but far from the greatest.
Paul
Paul
Bobjob186
Jun 26, 12:26 PM
I'm trying to buy my dad a MBP. I just want it to have a year of apple care, or eligible to buy applecare for it.
pm me : )
pm me : )
Huntn
Apr 21, 03:15 PM
I read the MacRumors battery guide. What I did not see- is there a preferred way to treat your laptop battery? Is it better to always allow it to run through full cycles or does it hurt your batter if you spend several days with your laptop hooked to the power supply?
Thanks! ;)
Thanks! ;)
mc68k
Mar 4, 11:00 PM
thanks
paperinacup
Sep 18, 11:33 PM
No.
mfaye21
Sep 5, 12:25 PM
Near your drawers are those windows? If so move the desk near the window (assuming it will not block the windows by shelves etc) I like to look out the window when i'm at my desk for natural light. Other then that, paint and new posters/art good ways to spice up a room.
Yes those are windows. I was planning on moving the desk over there but it wont fit by 2 inches! Talk about a headache!
Yes those are windows. I was planning on moving the desk over there but it wont fit by 2 inches! Talk about a headache!
Shannighan
Jun 25, 07:31 AM
PSP:
Smartbomb - $15
Socom US Navy Seals Fireteam Bravo - $12
DS:
Picross - $12
DK Jungle Climber - $15
World Championship Poker - $15
Chicken Shoot - $12
M&M's Break'em - $12
Rayman Raving Rabbids - $15
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/9936/img0270kp4.jpg
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/6836/img0271be3.jpg
http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/1281/img0272rt2.jpg
Smartbomb - $15
Socom US Navy Seals Fireteam Bravo - $12
DS:
Picross - $12
DK Jungle Climber - $15
World Championship Poker - $15
Chicken Shoot - $12
M&M's Break'em - $12
Rayman Raving Rabbids - $15
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/9936/img0270kp4.jpg
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/6836/img0271be3.jpg
http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/1281/img0272rt2.jpg