Tymmz
Sep 1, 11:45 AM
hopefully it's going to look like this:
56364
56364
rajid
Mar 23, 06:00 PM
First of all, you can't stop people from sharing information of any type. If not here, then somewhere else; twitter with geotagging, perhaps. Second, as far as I know it's always been illegal to notify other drivers of a cop checking speeds. I would assume it's illegal to notify drivers of a DUI check point as well. If so, arrest the person posting the information, not the program.
longofest
Apr 4, 11:51 AM
The first article indicates that the robbers were armed. Important information to note when taking into account the security officer's actions.
vand0576
Sep 26, 09:06 AM
Cingular service in my area sucks. I've been a happy t-mobile customer for almost 5 years. I am already happy with my Samsung t-809, and still don't know how I feel about device convergence.
ClimbingTheLog
Sep 26, 04:41 PM
Wrong. Cingular is rolling out 3.5G (HSDPA), and although they only have one phone that currently supports it (the LG CU500, http://onlinestorez.cingular.com/cell-phone-service/cell-phones/cell-phones.jsp?RFlow=A&source=INC230056&zip=10010&q_deviceId=cdsku9870167&WT.svl=dtl), reviewers have been wowed by the download speeds and smooth streaming video performance (download speeds are 1.8 Mbps).
All the networks are pretty good when you're the only one using it. As you mentioned, there's only one phone that can even use it now and the reviewers got access probably before most of those were even sold. We'll see how things are 2 years from now. Maybe it'll be great.
All the networks are pretty good when you're the only one using it. As you mentioned, there's only one phone that can even use it now and the reviewers got access probably before most of those were even sold. We'll see how things are 2 years from now. Maybe it'll be great.
W1MRK
Mar 23, 06:51 PM
There is also the issue of government control. Heres another similar
There are apps that allow you to listen to tons of live scanner feeds and hear real time what police and fire are responding to. Michigan and Indiana had laws up until recently that made Police Scanners in cars illegal. They said it was to help prevent crime.
Yep, That sat real well with Race Car Fans heading to the 500.
It is illegal to commit a crime with the aid of a scanner. Federal Law
It is also illegal and stupid to drive drunker than the state limit or even close to it. Common Sense and Law
A Scanner wont help you, neither will the Trapper app when you use it to avoid the stop and weave in and out of your lane past a patrolman or motorist who calls 911. You play with fire, some day you will get burned. Maybe not that day but theres no guarantee they would get you at the stop anyway as around here they only take every third car. (to be fair) It makes me feel like a random check at the airport for really bad stuff.
I appreciate the thoughts of people who think removing this app will help in the fight against Drunk Driving or Under the Influence. If I thought it would help solve the problem I would get behind it also. But Its not the next best thing since sliced bread. And in reality this is really more for those of us not intoxicated just minding our own business trying to get home without being treated like John Dillinger.
I hope Apple does not cave to the concerns of lawmakers who if they ever got stopped at one of these "checkpoints" would have the officers begging not to lose their jobs for the mistake.
Mike Kulis
There are apps that allow you to listen to tons of live scanner feeds and hear real time what police and fire are responding to. Michigan and Indiana had laws up until recently that made Police Scanners in cars illegal. They said it was to help prevent crime.
Yep, That sat real well with Race Car Fans heading to the 500.
It is illegal to commit a crime with the aid of a scanner. Federal Law
It is also illegal and stupid to drive drunker than the state limit or even close to it. Common Sense and Law
A Scanner wont help you, neither will the Trapper app when you use it to avoid the stop and weave in and out of your lane past a patrolman or motorist who calls 911. You play with fire, some day you will get burned. Maybe not that day but theres no guarantee they would get you at the stop anyway as around here they only take every third car. (to be fair) It makes me feel like a random check at the airport for really bad stuff.
I appreciate the thoughts of people who think removing this app will help in the fight against Drunk Driving or Under the Influence. If I thought it would help solve the problem I would get behind it also. But Its not the next best thing since sliced bread. And in reality this is really more for those of us not intoxicated just minding our own business trying to get home without being treated like John Dillinger.
I hope Apple does not cave to the concerns of lawmakers who if they ever got stopped at one of these "checkpoints" would have the officers begging not to lose their jobs for the mistake.
Mike Kulis
Tymmz
Sep 14, 05:53 AM
Can't believe it until I see it in stores. Sorry.
dr Dunkel
Mar 30, 01:22 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; sv-se) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I'm 100% with M$ on this one. Apple's case would never hold here.
I'm 100% with M$ on this one. Apple's case would never hold here.
TigerBabe
Apr 25, 01:42 AM
OP you seem like you are nothing but spoiled know-it all brat. You probably won't stop until you kill someone on the road. :mad::mad::mad:
Multimedia
Sep 11, 12:20 PM
Ah, but note Fig 3, especially item labelled 38.
I can tell you right now that today's cube does not have any type of fan.
Multitasking right now, and my Cube is COMPLETELY inaudiable. No fan.
If the patent includes a fan, as this one clearly does, it could well be new.While our Cubes have no fans, they do have a fan mounting location on the inside of the bottom of the system. Apple originally planned on installing a fan there but figured out how they didn't have to. Cube upgraders to dual G4 processors put a fan there. I know this because I was planning on doing a dual G4 processor upgrade to one - own two. In fact, I bought the second one specifically for that purpose. But which model to upgrade with I never made up my mind. Here's the Barefeats page on the subject (http://www.barefeats.com/cubeup.html).
But then I made the leap to the D 2 G5 and never looked back.
I can tell you right now that today's cube does not have any type of fan.
Multitasking right now, and my Cube is COMPLETELY inaudiable. No fan.
If the patent includes a fan, as this one clearly does, it could well be new.While our Cubes have no fans, they do have a fan mounting location on the inside of the bottom of the system. Apple originally planned on installing a fan there but figured out how they didn't have to. Cube upgraders to dual G4 processors put a fan there. I know this because I was planning on doing a dual G4 processor upgrade to one - own two. In fact, I bought the second one specifically for that purpose. But which model to upgrade with I never made up my mind. Here's the Barefeats page on the subject (http://www.barefeats.com/cubeup.html).
But then I made the leap to the D 2 G5 and never looked back.
aristotle
Nov 14, 12:00 AM
Wow. That's quite a diatribe. Historically inaccurate, too. English common law descends from the Roman system of laws that predates christianity (and which was not based on judaism) and from Saxon law, which also has nothing to do with judeo-christian ethics.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
The bible frames it slightly different but that is the gist of how it appears in the bible.
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
The bible frames it slightly different but that is the gist of how it appears in the bible.
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
jiggie2g
Jul 14, 11:27 AM
I don't see the connection between overclocking and childishness. Overclocking is done by enthusiasts and power users of all ages. There is nothing wrong with it, and the practice should not be stigmatized.
There is no connection , just ignorant people who can't handle the fact that someone just saved alot of money buying a lower end cpu and overclocking it to a point where it stomps their $999 cpu. I would never spend over $350 for a CPU or Video Card.
There is no connection , just ignorant people who can't handle the fact that someone just saved alot of money buying a lower end cpu and overclocking it to a point where it stomps their $999 cpu. I would never spend over $350 for a CPU or Video Card.
Al Coholic
Apr 14, 12:59 PM
Might want to do a little research:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380954,00.asp
Uh... who cares? You missed my point.
The "world" isn't going to support ThunderPants as Intel now embraces USB3. You're left with basically only Apple to beat the TB drum.
Hence, TB dies or at best fades away slowly. It will never sweep the land aka "firewire" style.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380954,00.asp
Uh... who cares? You missed my point.
The "world" isn't going to support ThunderPants as Intel now embraces USB3. You're left with basically only Apple to beat the TB drum.
Hence, TB dies or at best fades away slowly. It will never sweep the land aka "firewire" style.
ergle2
Sep 10, 01:34 AM
True, the Pentium M (Mobil Centrino) was a hudge sucess for Intel! The Pentium D (Desktop) was a dual-core disaster, pushing the old "NetBurst" Pentium 4 past all safe design limits.
Core 2 is the all new rework that saved Intel!
Core 2 isn't "all new". It's an evolutionary design based on Core tho some parts are borrowed from other Intel designs (the Memory Disambiguation tech was originally designed for the unreleased, unlamented Tejas, for example).
Other changes include a full 128-bit path to the SSE registers, meaning that all SSE instructions can now complete in a single cycle, L2 shared cache instead of separate L2's per CPU, an extra integer unit, etc.
And, of course, the 64bit extensions :)
Sure, there's enough in the way of changes/additions to render it worthy of being considered a new microarch, but those changes are evolutionary.
Ironically enough, there's a direct line from Core 2 going all the way back to P6, whereas NetBurst really was "all new"!
Core 2 is the all new rework that saved Intel!
Core 2 isn't "all new". It's an evolutionary design based on Core tho some parts are borrowed from other Intel designs (the Memory Disambiguation tech was originally designed for the unreleased, unlamented Tejas, for example).
Other changes include a full 128-bit path to the SSE registers, meaning that all SSE instructions can now complete in a single cycle, L2 shared cache instead of separate L2's per CPU, an extra integer unit, etc.
And, of course, the 64bit extensions :)
Sure, there's enough in the way of changes/additions to render it worthy of being considered a new microarch, but those changes are evolutionary.
Ironically enough, there's a direct line from Core 2 going all the way back to P6, whereas NetBurst really was "all new"!
lllll
Mar 23, 06:11 PM
Senators stop wasting tax payer money soliciting Apple to your feet and start asking Apple from bring jobs back to America. This makes more sense then trying to eliminate one app.
sure, 10,000 died DUI every yr. But 1,000,000 died every yr because they didn't have a job to support themselves.
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/23/u-s-senators-ask-apple-to-remove-dui-checkpoint-apps-from-app-store/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/23/171301-trapster.jpg
CNET reports (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20045942-37.html) that four U.S. senators have sent a letter to Apple's iPhone software head, Scott Forstall, asking the company to remove from the App Store applications that are designed to allow users to be alerted to checkpoints for sobriety testing.The same letter was also sent to Google and Research in Motion to encourage those companies to remove similar apps from their application stores. Research in Motion has already agreed (http://schumer.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=332121&) to remove applications offering data on DUI checkpoint locations.
While the letter itself does not specifically reference any iOS applications, a press release (http://schumer.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=332109) from Senator Schumer names Trapster (http://appshopper.com/navigation/trapster) and PhantomALERT (http://appshopper.com/navigation/phantomalert) as examples of free apps offering location information on such checkpoints.
In addition to real-time information on DUI checkpoints, many of the apps in question also offer information on speed traps, red light and speed cameras, accidents, and other traffic conditions, several of which have also been considered controversial, but the senators' letter focuses specifically on the DUI checkpoint functionality.
Article Link: U.S. Senators Ask Apple to Remove DUI Checkpoint Apps From App Store (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/23/u-s-senators-ask-apple-to-remove-dui-checkpoint-apps-from-app-store/)
sure, 10,000 died DUI every yr. But 1,000,000 died every yr because they didn't have a job to support themselves.
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/23/u-s-senators-ask-apple-to-remove-dui-checkpoint-apps-from-app-store/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/23/171301-trapster.jpg
CNET reports (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20045942-37.html) that four U.S. senators have sent a letter to Apple's iPhone software head, Scott Forstall, asking the company to remove from the App Store applications that are designed to allow users to be alerted to checkpoints for sobriety testing.The same letter was also sent to Google and Research in Motion to encourage those companies to remove similar apps from their application stores. Research in Motion has already agreed (http://schumer.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=332121&) to remove applications offering data on DUI checkpoint locations.
While the letter itself does not specifically reference any iOS applications, a press release (http://schumer.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=332109) from Senator Schumer names Trapster (http://appshopper.com/navigation/trapster) and PhantomALERT (http://appshopper.com/navigation/phantomalert) as examples of free apps offering location information on such checkpoints.
In addition to real-time information on DUI checkpoints, many of the apps in question also offer information on speed traps, red light and speed cameras, accidents, and other traffic conditions, several of which have also been considered controversial, but the senators' letter focuses specifically on the DUI checkpoint functionality.
Article Link: U.S. Senators Ask Apple to Remove DUI Checkpoint Apps From App Store (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/23/u-s-senators-ask-apple-to-remove-dui-checkpoint-apps-from-app-store/)
vitaboy
Aug 24, 04:20 AM
Is this a one-time payment to include all future uses?
It seems to be the case, as the agreement resolves "all disputes." I'm sure there is a stipulation that Creative agrees not to pursue patent claims against Apple in the future.
Which is why the whole "Creative won" argument doesn't wash. Considering that iPod will end up generating tens of billions of dollars in future revenue for Apple (on top of the billions it's already made), settling for $100 million is not exactly a sign of Creative dealing from a position of strength.
I mean think about it. Creative is basically claiming Apple stole its goose that lays golden eggs. Apple says "No, we didn't, in fact, you stole our spinning wheel that can spin threads of gold from straw!" They both argue and threaten each other, but in the end Apple offers Creative a little piece of golden eggshell, and Creative is so happy about winning, it tells Apple, "Aww, shucks, thanks for the piece of shell, you can keep the goose!"
I don't think so. :P
Which is why the deal has all the signs of Creative gulping down its pride and accepting a settlement on Apple's terms. Creative accepted because if it didn't, the chances were quite high that it would not be in business a year from now, mainly because Zune will wipe out its ability to sell in a crowded market. At least now, it has a big stick it can use against Microsoft.
In the end, it's a big win for Apple.
It seems to be the case, as the agreement resolves "all disputes." I'm sure there is a stipulation that Creative agrees not to pursue patent claims against Apple in the future.
Which is why the whole "Creative won" argument doesn't wash. Considering that iPod will end up generating tens of billions of dollars in future revenue for Apple (on top of the billions it's already made), settling for $100 million is not exactly a sign of Creative dealing from a position of strength.
I mean think about it. Creative is basically claiming Apple stole its goose that lays golden eggs. Apple says "No, we didn't, in fact, you stole our spinning wheel that can spin threads of gold from straw!" They both argue and threaten each other, but in the end Apple offers Creative a little piece of golden eggshell, and Creative is so happy about winning, it tells Apple, "Aww, shucks, thanks for the piece of shell, you can keep the goose!"
I don't think so. :P
Which is why the deal has all the signs of Creative gulping down its pride and accepting a settlement on Apple's terms. Creative accepted because if it didn't, the chances were quite high that it would not be in business a year from now, mainly because Zune will wipe out its ability to sell in a crowded market. At least now, it has a big stick it can use against Microsoft.
In the end, it's a big win for Apple.
mjillard
Jan 11, 12:14 AM
I don't think anything is invulnerable. However, I do not see the point in using antivirus for my iDevices. Instead, it just seems more sensible to be careful what I do on these devices rather than to have something that will probably just cause more problems, as bloated antivirus programs tend to do. I have the free trial of Sophos on my iMac, and even though it hasn't slowed it down any yet, it also has yet to uncover a single threat.
Ace R.
Apr 4, 12:57 PM
ITT:
People do not READ. It was self defense. Those robbers were BLASTING. 40 rounds exchanged.
Sucks someone had to die but that's the price you pay when you decide to commit a crime and use deadly force.. aka we're going to rob the Apple store and if anyone tries to stop us we're shooting.
I'm just glad the security guard survived this ordeal. Imagine if the headline read "Security guard dead in Apple store robbery"
This could easily of been the case.
People do not READ. It was self defense. Those robbers were BLASTING. 40 rounds exchanged.
Sucks someone had to die but that's the price you pay when you decide to commit a crime and use deadly force.. aka we're going to rob the Apple store and if anyone tries to stop us we're shooting.
I'm just glad the security guard survived this ordeal. Imagine if the headline read "Security guard dead in Apple store robbery"
This could easily of been the case.
Multimedia
Sep 11, 06:16 PM
The benchmarks on Tom's Hardware are up.
Intel's Core 2 Quadro Kentsfield: Four Cores on a Rampage (http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_on_the_rampage/)
An up to 100% performance increase over the Core 2 Duo. Goodness me.
I was surprised to see that it's the same form factor chunkywise (same pin setup as Core 2 Duo and compatible with those MBs) - I thought it would be thicker.Great catch Law Guy. Congratulations and thanks!
This is huge news. Where is everybody?!? :confused:
It appears that Conroe motherboards or logic boards, as some like to call them, are Core 2 Quadro ready. Oops! No wonder Apple hasn't released an early Conroe Mac. They's obviously waiting for these Core 2 Quadros to ship - dropping a bomb on everyone who bought a Mac Pro. :eek:
Am I the only one here who thinks this is gigantic news? I can hear a pin drop. The stunned silence is deafening. :eek: ;)
Maybe an early Christmas Present Is In The Works For November Shipping from Apple. :)
So Kentsfield is dubbed Core 2 Quadro or C2Q for short. And it looks like this - last pic is pin view with Core 2 Duo on left Core 2 Quadro on right:
Intel's Core 2 Quadro Kentsfield: Four Cores on a Rampage (http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_on_the_rampage/)
An up to 100% performance increase over the Core 2 Duo. Goodness me.
I was surprised to see that it's the same form factor chunkywise (same pin setup as Core 2 Duo and compatible with those MBs) - I thought it would be thicker.Great catch Law Guy. Congratulations and thanks!
This is huge news. Where is everybody?!? :confused:
It appears that Conroe motherboards or logic boards, as some like to call them, are Core 2 Quadro ready. Oops! No wonder Apple hasn't released an early Conroe Mac. They's obviously waiting for these Core 2 Quadros to ship - dropping a bomb on everyone who bought a Mac Pro. :eek:
Am I the only one here who thinks this is gigantic news? I can hear a pin drop. The stunned silence is deafening. :eek: ;)
Maybe an early Christmas Present Is In The Works For November Shipping from Apple. :)
So Kentsfield is dubbed Core 2 Quadro or C2Q for short. And it looks like this - last pic is pin view with Core 2 Duo on left Core 2 Quadro on right:
infernohellion
Sep 26, 09:40 AM
Well what about Thailand where the law says GSM phones must not be exclusive to only one carrier (all must be unlocked)??
cube
Apr 22, 12:53 PM
Uhh, no, it won't. As long as the logic board is at the thickest point then they will be able to house the same power components as the current Pro.
Making the Pro thinner and removing the optical drive does not make a big MBA. Not in the slightest.
Even the 15" Zacates have optical drives. An MBP without optical drive would look bad.
Making the Pro thinner and removing the optical drive does not make a big MBA. Not in the slightest.
Even the 15" Zacates have optical drives. An MBP without optical drive would look bad.
SiliconAddict
Jul 14, 06:12 PM
Woohoo! 3GHz here we come. As was mentioned before, though, a mid-sized tower priced at the iMac level (but upgradable) would be the final logical step in the Apple product line. That would leave Woodcrest to the high end MacPro with its quad configuration.
Try 4Ghz...Anandtech in their review (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=18) overclocked their X6800 to a stable 4Ghz. :eek:
Try 4Ghz...Anandtech in their review (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=18) overclocked their X6800 to a stable 4Ghz. :eek:
Kaafir
Oct 27, 01:05 PM
i think this whole environmental movement has been turned into a product. look at so-called environmentally-friendly cars (hybrids, flex fuel, etc). they're all using gas or resources in one way or another. but on the commercials you're told that by driving them, you're 'saving the earth'. it's all just a gimmick now.
don't throw your old ipods or computers away. give them to poor people. that's what i've done.
I tried that, but the hobo down at the tracks said he wanted a new video iPod because it was the new hotness and the mini I was trying to give him was old and busted. (/sarc)
Somthing else that people don't readily think about is the fact that when paper is recycled, there are more chemicals put back into the environment in order to break it down to pulp than would be used to turn new pulp wood into paper.
I'm all for not clubbing baby seals to make Tiffany store tampons for rich ho's in Bel Air, but you have to draw the line for reasonableness somewhere. Some of this stuff, honestly, seems like a marketing ploy -
"We'll sell you this bottle made from 100% recycled iPods and which also contains 100% biodegradable chemicals that are safe to use in your bathroom! Best of all, we're going to make 600% profit since the ordinary non-ecofriendly stuff only makes us 150% profit, but you get to rest your conscious about driving that Tahoe with no kids and living in the suburbs by fooling yourself into thinking that you're being environmentally responsible and doing your part! Go you!"
don't throw your old ipods or computers away. give them to poor people. that's what i've done.
I tried that, but the hobo down at the tracks said he wanted a new video iPod because it was the new hotness and the mini I was trying to give him was old and busted. (/sarc)
Somthing else that people don't readily think about is the fact that when paper is recycled, there are more chemicals put back into the environment in order to break it down to pulp than would be used to turn new pulp wood into paper.
I'm all for not clubbing baby seals to make Tiffany store tampons for rich ho's in Bel Air, but you have to draw the line for reasonableness somewhere. Some of this stuff, honestly, seems like a marketing ploy -
"We'll sell you this bottle made from 100% recycled iPods and which also contains 100% biodegradable chemicals that are safe to use in your bathroom! Best of all, we're going to make 600% profit since the ordinary non-ecofriendly stuff only makes us 150% profit, but you get to rest your conscious about driving that Tahoe with no kids and living in the suburbs by fooling yourself into thinking that you're being environmentally responsible and doing your part! Go you!"
rdowns
Apr 25, 08:57 AM
I was going to ask what the D stands for but I guess that's kind of obvious.