twoodcc
Oct 10, 10:54 AM
Yup, but actually almost at 4mio with points of my old team combined ;)
What I am shooting for is the #5 overall spot of the team, maybe by year end...
oh wow. nice.
hey it's good to have goals. right now my goal is to get into the top 20. second goal is 2 million points after that, which would put me around 11th or 12th
What I am shooting for is the #5 overall spot of the team, maybe by year end...
oh wow. nice.
hey it's good to have goals. right now my goal is to get into the top 20. second goal is 2 million points after that, which would put me around 11th or 12th
dime21
Apr 20, 09:26 PM
sorry no longer the case for most of that.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
solvs
Jul 18, 02:01 AM
Yeah, if it's $9.99 to rent, it's going to fail. $1.99, might be worth it. I'm sure a lot of people will be happy, then a lot of people will complain. Both with have good points, but the rest of us won't care.
FearNo1
Apr 23, 10:42 AM
No, I did not mean the traditional GPS. I was referring to the one that the 911 system uses. I don't think that can be turned off. IOW, if you have any modern cell phone, you can be tracked. The difference is that with the iphone, the info is stored on the phone itself.
you can turn off the GPS in a phone and most people assume that when you do it stops tracking you yet as it already been shown it just starts storing info base the cell towers.
I just do not like the fact you can not opt out of it. It just feels wrong to me.
you can turn off the GPS in a phone and most people assume that when you do it stops tracking you yet as it already been shown it just starts storing info base the cell towers.
I just do not like the fact you can not opt out of it. It just feels wrong to me.
TangoCharlie
Sep 1, 12:03 PM
I guess they plan to put the 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme or 2.66GHz processor in it. IF they make the display height adjustable...i might consider it. Otherwise the MacPro remains the slated candidate for my desktop needs
No. They plan to stick in the 2, 2.16 and 2.33 GHz Merom CPU's in it.
But I agree... it does need a height adjustable stand.
No. They plan to stick in the 2, 2.16 and 2.33 GHz Merom CPU's in it.
But I agree... it does need a height adjustable stand.
Ping Guo
Jun 23, 11:09 AM
Lay the iMac on it's back, and it all becomes clear. There's nothing more frustrating than not being able to touch your computer screen.
Why would I lay an iMac on its back? There's nothing more frustrating than not being able to touch your computer screen, are you sure? I can think of many things that are a lot more frustrating. Perhaps you're obsessive-compulsive?:p
Why would I lay an iMac on its back? There's nothing more frustrating than not being able to touch your computer screen, are you sure? I can think of many things that are a lot more frustrating. Perhaps you're obsessive-compulsive?:p
elppa
Jan 11, 04:56 PM
Intriguing.
Maybe the �Air� branding is taking a que from the sucess of one of Apple's international partners, O2.
It's certainly something different from the obvious nano/mini/thin branding that people are expecting.
Maybe the �Air� branding is taking a que from the sucess of one of Apple's international partners, O2.
It's certainly something different from the obvious nano/mini/thin branding that people are expecting.
twoodcc
Dec 2, 04:59 AM
Well, I won't get back the #7 spot from you ;) unless these 12 cores Gulftown Mac pros come out at MWSF...
wait, by MWSF you mean CES?
wait, by MWSF you mean CES?
gnasher729
Jun 24, 11:47 AM
Imagine you lived in the 1500s and someone showed you two computers. If you had zero prior computer experience, would you pick a touch based computer... or would you pick one where you move some arrow shaped icon with a 2nd device called the mouse.
We're very used to using a mouse, but it's definitely not the most natural way to interact with a computer. It's not easy either. I've seen old people that never could figure out how to double click without moving the cursor 50 pixels from where they wanted to click.
The "natural" way to move a car would be to push it, or maybe attach two horses at the front. The method that we use is quite unnatural. :D
We're very used to using a mouse, but it's definitely not the most natural way to interact with a computer. It's not easy either. I've seen old people that never could figure out how to double click without moving the cursor 50 pixels from where they wanted to click.
The "natural" way to move a car would be to push it, or maybe attach two horses at the front. The method that we use is quite unnatural. :D
Mac Fly (film)
Sep 6, 06:33 PM
http://static.flickr.com/83/236356043_7d795c3fe0_o.jpg & http://www.wpc-fr.net/images/articles/disney-rachete-pixar/pixar.jpg
Guys, you've got to start somewhere. The TV show thing started with disney, and look at it now!!
(not in Europe yet, grumble grumble)
Guys, you've got to start somewhere. The TV show thing started with disney, and look at it now!!
(not in Europe yet, grumble grumble)
SteveRichardson
Jul 19, 11:05 PM
Q: Will there be any surprises at WWDC?
A: [Laughter, then Openheimer:] Well, you will have to be redundant and be redundant.
A: [Laughter, then Openheimer:] Well, you will have to be redundant and be redundant.
interlard
Sep 7, 01:25 PM
I want to RENT a movie for a few dollars, not buy it for $10-$15. Doh!
Imagine if you had to OWN every movie you'd ever seen?
Imagine if you had to OWN every movie you'd ever seen?
jrb363
Mar 25, 09:44 PM
Playing that game with the HDMI dongle thingy hanging off an iPad looks, um, not ideal. Now, if it could stream it using AirPlay.
Exactly what I was thinking! If the iPad could stream the gameplay to your tv in 1080p via an Apple TV using AirPlay it would be wonderful! I would buy an Apple TV just for that option. :D Go :apple:!
Exactly what I was thinking! If the iPad could stream the gameplay to your tv in 1080p via an Apple TV using AirPlay it would be wonderful! I would buy an Apple TV just for that option. :D Go :apple:!
MacinDoc
Oct 23, 07:58 PM
sorry to quote myself, but i just realized that the UK Mac Expo is this week, and that would be a good venue for releasing new MBPs
so my prediction is Oct 26 at the UK MacExpo.
cheers
Apple is attending, but no keynote, so I'll put my money on tomorrow, Tuesday Oct. 24 for the MBPs, with the Macbooks 4 weeks later (Nov. 21), still in time for Black Friday, which will be Nov. 24. This will allow Apple to take advantage of pent-up demand for new machines by selling the higher-priced MPBs before the new MacBooks are introduced, and still have the consumer-oriented machines ready for the biggest consumer retail day of the year.
Specs? Core2 Duo 2.16 GHz base 15" model with GeForce Go 7300 and 100 GB HD, upgraded 2.33 GHz 15" with GeForce Go 7600 and 120 GB HD, and 17" with similar specs to the mid-range model except a 160 GB HD. All with 8X DL SuperDrive and (gasp!) 1 GB RAM (single DIMM), upgradeable to 3 GB. Prices should stay about the same.
As for MacBooks, I expect 1.83 and 2.0 GHz Core2 Duos, with (again!) 1 GB RAM (2 DIMMS), and HDs bumped to 80 GB for the white MacBooks and 100 GB for the BlackBook. Sorry, but Intel Integrated Graphics are in the Macbooks to stay, at least in the near future. Prices should again stay about the same.
so my prediction is Oct 26 at the UK MacExpo.
cheers
Apple is attending, but no keynote, so I'll put my money on tomorrow, Tuesday Oct. 24 for the MBPs, with the Macbooks 4 weeks later (Nov. 21), still in time for Black Friday, which will be Nov. 24. This will allow Apple to take advantage of pent-up demand for new machines by selling the higher-priced MPBs before the new MacBooks are introduced, and still have the consumer-oriented machines ready for the biggest consumer retail day of the year.
Specs? Core2 Duo 2.16 GHz base 15" model with GeForce Go 7300 and 100 GB HD, upgraded 2.33 GHz 15" with GeForce Go 7600 and 120 GB HD, and 17" with similar specs to the mid-range model except a 160 GB HD. All with 8X DL SuperDrive and (gasp!) 1 GB RAM (single DIMM), upgradeable to 3 GB. Prices should stay about the same.
As for MacBooks, I expect 1.83 and 2.0 GHz Core2 Duos, with (again!) 1 GB RAM (2 DIMMS), and HDs bumped to 80 GB for the white MacBooks and 100 GB for the BlackBook. Sorry, but Intel Integrated Graphics are in the Macbooks to stay, at least in the near future. Prices should again stay about the same.
The.316
Nov 26, 06:52 AM
Logitech diNovo Mac Edition Keyboard
I finally decided that I couldn't put up with not having a number pad any longer. Feels good to have a full sized keyboard again.
Ive been contemplating this keyboard because of the same reasons. I have a question for anyone that can answer this...I use the new Logitech Performance MX, which uses the same mini usb connector, can I use that to connect the keyboard as well, or do I have to add a second USB connector for the keyboard?
I finally decided that I couldn't put up with not having a number pad any longer. Feels good to have a full sized keyboard again.
Ive been contemplating this keyboard because of the same reasons. I have a question for anyone that can answer this...I use the new Logitech Performance MX, which uses the same mini usb connector, can I use that to connect the keyboard as well, or do I have to add a second USB connector for the keyboard?
Perrumpo
Nov 26, 05:39 PM
Picked up a 23" Samsung 1080p display from Best Buy for $139. Loving it!
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c383/agt144/IMGP6687.jpg
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c383/agt144/IMGP6683.jpg
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c383/agt144/IMGP6687.jpg
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c383/agt144/IMGP6683.jpg
heffemonkeyman
Sep 7, 12:59 PM
On my lunch break at work, I just downloaded a couple of HD trailers, both 2min30sec in length; 1 at 480p and the other at 720p. My set up is an 3.0Ghz Pentium D, 1G ram, 256K Nvidia Gforce 6800, 20" Dell Digital LCD.
I could tell no difference in file quality. The problem lies in download time. Both files average dl speed was 150KBps. Thats 1.2Mbps if my math is right. The 420p file took 4:28 to dl, translating to 3:34:24 for a 2hr movie. For 720p, it took 12:39, meaning a full movie would take 9:28:45.
I know my cable provider offers up to 4Mbps downlaods, for about $120/month. And thats before the cable servise itself. Even then its not dedicated. Most people with cable will opt for their providers basic service ,like $40 - 50/month for 500-600kbps, or 1/2 as fast as my test. The movies would take twice as long to dl. 19hrs to downlaod will not fly. 7hrs may not either.
If the compression works to get a DVD quality movie down to 1G, then it could be downloaded in about 1h50mim, nearly realtime at work, or 3h40min at home. At work, I would only need maybe a 15min buffer before I start watching, and not catch up to the dl. But at home, I would need about 1h40min buffer. Maybe this is acceptable to some, but if I can walk to Wal-mart or Blockbuster and back in that time, then what's the consumer advantage beyond the novelty?
I'm sure apple engineers can do these same napkin calculations. There would have to be some alternative to the straight dl. Maybe a torrent of some kind built into iTunes 7. I don't know. Just thinking.
This is a good test, but your connection is not fast enough for this to be viable. If your getting only getting 1.2mbps, that not going to cut it.
Bandwith is a huge issue. In my area, Seattle, I can get Comcast cable for about $50/mo and I get 6-8mbps solid download. So I can stream anything that is encoded at 6-8mbps just fine. The 720p trailers are about 4-8mbps, so it works for me.
I know not everyone can get that kind of bandwidth/price, but they will soon. I think this is where Apple is going, but it's not going to work for everyone. At least not right away. But maybe enough to be profitable?
I could tell no difference in file quality. The problem lies in download time. Both files average dl speed was 150KBps. Thats 1.2Mbps if my math is right. The 420p file took 4:28 to dl, translating to 3:34:24 for a 2hr movie. For 720p, it took 12:39, meaning a full movie would take 9:28:45.
I know my cable provider offers up to 4Mbps downlaods, for about $120/month. And thats before the cable servise itself. Even then its not dedicated. Most people with cable will opt for their providers basic service ,like $40 - 50/month for 500-600kbps, or 1/2 as fast as my test. The movies would take twice as long to dl. 19hrs to downlaod will not fly. 7hrs may not either.
If the compression works to get a DVD quality movie down to 1G, then it could be downloaded in about 1h50mim, nearly realtime at work, or 3h40min at home. At work, I would only need maybe a 15min buffer before I start watching, and not catch up to the dl. But at home, I would need about 1h40min buffer. Maybe this is acceptable to some, but if I can walk to Wal-mart or Blockbuster and back in that time, then what's the consumer advantage beyond the novelty?
I'm sure apple engineers can do these same napkin calculations. There would have to be some alternative to the straight dl. Maybe a torrent of some kind built into iTunes 7. I don't know. Just thinking.
This is a good test, but your connection is not fast enough for this to be viable. If your getting only getting 1.2mbps, that not going to cut it.
Bandwith is a huge issue. In my area, Seattle, I can get Comcast cable for about $50/mo and I get 6-8mbps solid download. So I can stream anything that is encoded at 6-8mbps just fine. The 720p trailers are about 4-8mbps, so it works for me.
I know not everyone can get that kind of bandwidth/price, but they will soon. I think this is where Apple is going, but it's not going to work for everyone. At least not right away. But maybe enough to be profitable?
X-Z
Feb 22, 11:19 AM
Where can I get that date time thingy for my iPad!
Here you go: http://cj-caty.deviantart.com/art/Typophone-4-for-iPad-195872777
Here you go: http://cj-caty.deviantart.com/art/Typophone-4-for-iPad-195872777
Mulyahnto
Jul 19, 03:51 PM
Analysts' expectation of $3.68B revenue is incorrect. Apple exceeded income expectations by 10c per share and was in line with revenue expectation of about $4.4B.
milo
Aug 29, 09:15 AM
This is the lowest end machine Apple makes. Let's be realistic. This is a reasonable update for the base model. And it's probably being done in advance of a Core 2 Duo update to the iMac.
Compared to similarly priced PC's, $799 for a yonah duo 1.8 is pretty weak.
To be honest, I'd rather see the cheaper model drop in price (if not both) than a speed bump.
Compared to similarly priced PC's, $799 for a yonah duo 1.8 is pretty weak.
To be honest, I'd rather see the cheaper model drop in price (if not both) than a speed bump.
rtdunham
Aug 16, 02:57 PM
The addition of wireless really only makes sense if the iPod is to become a communication device (a protable iChat device
what are the technological hurdles preventing apple from introducing an iPod/iPhone that could permit video iChats, in addition to its more conventional music player/phone functions? (the picture phone people have been waiting for since that distant World's Fair)
--apple has iChat software
-- " " tiny iChat cameras in MacBooks
--cellphone technology exists
somebody with more smarts than me run with this, or shoot it down.
thanks
terry
what are the technological hurdles preventing apple from introducing an iPod/iPhone that could permit video iChats, in addition to its more conventional music player/phone functions? (the picture phone people have been waiting for since that distant World's Fair)
--apple has iChat software
-- " " tiny iChat cameras in MacBooks
--cellphone technology exists
somebody with more smarts than me run with this, or shoot it down.
thanks
terry
balamw
Jun 22, 06:33 PM
In fact, I would much rather see dashboard disappear and iOS take its place, because let's face it; dashboard is worthless due to its horrible implementation.
In many ways, the appeal of iOS for me is that it harkens back to the simpler, days of instant-on 8-bit computers. Even more so than the quick, reliable return form sleep on my Macs that seems unreachable on most Windows boxes.
If this means that I can run iOS apps on my iMac or MB/MBP/MBA (down the line) to quickly send an e-mail or something like that it sounds great to me. I already often reach for my iPhone for simple tasks.
Dashboard "failed" due to a lack of apps, and the same is true of Windows' widgets. Apple has access to a huge assortment of apps (some very useful, others less so) for iOS that would instantly eliminate that problem.
Make it so. Please.
B
In many ways, the appeal of iOS for me is that it harkens back to the simpler, days of instant-on 8-bit computers. Even more so than the quick, reliable return form sleep on my Macs that seems unreachable on most Windows boxes.
If this means that I can run iOS apps on my iMac or MB/MBP/MBA (down the line) to quickly send an e-mail or something like that it sounds great to me. I already often reach for my iPhone for simple tasks.
Dashboard "failed" due to a lack of apps, and the same is true of Windows' widgets. Apple has access to a huge assortment of apps (some very useful, others less so) for iOS that would instantly eliminate that problem.
Make it so. Please.
B
lowbatteries
May 2, 06:37 PM
But my iPhone is far more limited than my first Windows PC in that regard. Even with Windows 95 I could go from one app to another while letting the other on load in the background. iOS freezes everything. If I want a video to upload on Facebook, I have no choice but to keep the app open until it's done. On my PC, I can start the upload and then move on to other things while the process is completing.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
I upload large videos all the time on my iPhone, in the background. This has been built in since multitasking was introduced (if an app you are using doesn't do this, that's the developers fault).
Weird. When I ask someone a yes/no question, I expect a yes/no response.
Do you understand what I mean?
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
I upload large videos all the time on my iPhone, in the background. This has been built in since multitasking was introduced (if an app you are using doesn't do this, that's the developers fault).
Weird. When I ask someone a yes/no question, I expect a yes/no response.
Do you understand what I mean?
jafd
Mar 24, 05:44 AM
The ONLY advantage of compression is to store more files/GB and it ALWAYS degrades the quality of the recording. Always. And you're championing this as preferable because......?????
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.
No comments:
Post a Comment