manic
Sep 25, 10:51 AM
this is the sorryiest bit of non-news ive seen in a while.
macinside
Apr 18, 05:32 PM
There was a study a bit ago that showed that complexity drastically reduced participation in altruistic activities, while simplicity -- especially exact instructions on how to participate -- drastically increased participation.
I think that's applies here. Using a Mac is so simple, generally speaking, that the folding@home pages seem obtuse in comparison. The pages are all ugly, and instructions are unclear, and files seem to be missing that instruction pages reference.
To increase participation I recommend that a very clear communicator make a new thread (perhaps a sticky) with *dead simple* step by step instructions w/screenshots on how to install and turn it on (circa 2010). Maybe even a screen flow that just shows exactly how to it, hosted on a service with crystal clear video like vimeo.com. Get our mirror neurons goin', yaknow?
Case in point, I'm having my own issues. Where exactly is the screen saver? On http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/OSX/OSX.html, it talks about it, and say to grab it off the download page, but I just can't find it. Makes me feel dumb, which is hardly what you want in a social endeavor.
Beyond my notebooks, I also have 2 8 Core Mac Pro's I'd like to put into the game, but I really only want the processor power being used when they're idle. I need that power to myself at the other times. Screen saver or idle time processing is perfect.
Second, I did install just the basic install of http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/release/Folding@home-OSX10.5-6.29.3.pkg.zip in the meantime. Activated the client in System Preferences, and hit the enable button. When does this thing activate? It's not showing any activity in Activity Monitor yet. I guess maybe this does idle time processing w/o any visual feedback?
I think that's applies here. Using a Mac is so simple, generally speaking, that the folding@home pages seem obtuse in comparison. The pages are all ugly, and instructions are unclear, and files seem to be missing that instruction pages reference.
To increase participation I recommend that a very clear communicator make a new thread (perhaps a sticky) with *dead simple* step by step instructions w/screenshots on how to install and turn it on (circa 2010). Maybe even a screen flow that just shows exactly how to it, hosted on a service with crystal clear video like vimeo.com. Get our mirror neurons goin', yaknow?
Case in point, I'm having my own issues. Where exactly is the screen saver? On http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/OSX/OSX.html, it talks about it, and say to grab it off the download page, but I just can't find it. Makes me feel dumb, which is hardly what you want in a social endeavor.
Beyond my notebooks, I also have 2 8 Core Mac Pro's I'd like to put into the game, but I really only want the processor power being used when they're idle. I need that power to myself at the other times. Screen saver or idle time processing is perfect.
Second, I did install just the basic install of http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/release/Folding@home-OSX10.5-6.29.3.pkg.zip in the meantime. Activated the client in System Preferences, and hit the enable button. When does this thing activate? It's not showing any activity in Activity Monitor yet. I guess maybe this does idle time processing w/o any visual feedback?
thesmileman
Mar 11, 07:38 AM
....
thatisme
Mar 29, 08:20 AM
Yup. So the EF-s lens is providing a field of view of 16-35.2mm in full-frame, 35mm equivalent. So is effected by the 1.6 crop. Which is what I've been saying all along.
Yep. so you are now using the term Equivalent, not actual, which is not what you have been arguing, but I have.... Actual focal length is 10-22 in EFS. Effective in 35mm terms is 16-32mm.
OK. So, with your logic, take that Equivalent in Full Frame EF 16-35.2mm lens and put it back on your 7D, and your FOV changes again, and your Image changes. It will be using the center of the lens's elements, in effect "cropping" your image tighter, which now gives you an effective focal length of 56.32 mm on the long end, not the 22mm as your argument would dictate.
As stated before, you are comparing Apples to Oranges. You have to have a standard frame of reference which is a 35mm sensor size.
Yep. so you are now using the term Equivalent, not actual, which is not what you have been arguing, but I have.... Actual focal length is 10-22 in EFS. Effective in 35mm terms is 16-32mm.
OK. So, with your logic, take that Equivalent in Full Frame EF 16-35.2mm lens and put it back on your 7D, and your FOV changes again, and your Image changes. It will be using the center of the lens's elements, in effect "cropping" your image tighter, which now gives you an effective focal length of 56.32 mm on the long end, not the 22mm as your argument would dictate.
As stated before, you are comparing Apples to Oranges. You have to have a standard frame of reference which is a 35mm sensor size.
more...
OutThere
Apr 9, 08:30 AM
The fact that a big sticking point in all of this was the social conservative nonsense about abortions and planned parenthood is just ridiculous. If this is all that many of our politicians can think about in times like these, we're ********** doomed.
davidjearly
Dec 18, 10:39 AM
^ oh well, you disprove.
I along with hundreds of thousands of others don't think it's such an awfully "sad" thing to do spending 10 seconds of our day purchasing a track that may very well give us all a good chuckle over Christmas.
Oh I guess you must be right then. :rolleyes:
I along with hundreds of thousands of others don't think it's such an awfully "sad" thing to do spending 10 seconds of our day purchasing a track that may very well give us all a good chuckle over Christmas.
Oh I guess you must be right then. :rolleyes:
more...
Origin
Sep 20, 09:43 AM
What's up doc ? Wrong forum ???? :D
MacNut
Apr 23, 05:30 PM
Trump is a great salesman. If he wanted to run for president he should be the best at selling himself. I bet he would even turn the campaign into an episode of The Apprentice. The last person to not get fired wins the White House.
more...
flopticalcube
Apr 25, 02:49 PM
Given the source, I say "triple meh".
bossxii
Feb 24, 10:39 AM
What a colossal waste of Taxpayer money.
How about parents get off their lazy ass and actually parent vs shoving a gadget in their kids hands to baby sit em.
What a joke.
How about parents get off their lazy ass and actually parent vs shoving a gadget in their kids hands to baby sit em.
What a joke.
more...
macinside
Apr 18, 05:32 PM
There was a study a bit ago that showed that complexity drastically reduced participation in altruistic activities, while simplicity -- especially exact instructions on how to participate -- drastically increased participation.
I think that's applies here. Using a Mac is so simple, generally speaking, that the folding@home pages seem obtuse in comparison. The pages are all ugly, and instructions are unclear, and files seem to be missing that instruction pages reference.
To increase participation I recommend that a very clear communicator make a new thread (perhaps a sticky) with *dead simple* step by step instructions w/screenshots on how to install and turn it on (circa 2010). Maybe even a screen flow that just shows exactly how to it, hosted on a service with crystal clear video like vimeo.com. Get our mirror neurons goin', yaknow?
Case in point, I'm having my own issues. Where exactly is the screen saver? On http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/OSX/OSX.html, it talks about it, and say to grab it off the download page, but I just can't find it. Makes me feel dumb, which is hardly what you want in a social endeavor.
Beyond my notebooks, I also have 2 8 Core Mac Pro's I'd like to put into the game, but I really only want the processor power being used when they're idle. I need that power to myself at the other times. Screen saver or idle time processing is perfect.
Second, I did install just the basic install of http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/release/Folding@home-OSX10.5-6.29.3.pkg.zip in the meantime. Activated the client in System Preferences, and hit the enable button. When does this thing activate? It's not showing any activity in Activity Monitor yet. I guess maybe this does idle time processing w/o any visual feedback?
I think that's applies here. Using a Mac is so simple, generally speaking, that the folding@home pages seem obtuse in comparison. The pages are all ugly, and instructions are unclear, and files seem to be missing that instruction pages reference.
To increase participation I recommend that a very clear communicator make a new thread (perhaps a sticky) with *dead simple* step by step instructions w/screenshots on how to install and turn it on (circa 2010). Maybe even a screen flow that just shows exactly how to it, hosted on a service with crystal clear video like vimeo.com. Get our mirror neurons goin', yaknow?
Case in point, I'm having my own issues. Where exactly is the screen saver? On http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/OSX/OSX.html, it talks about it, and say to grab it off the download page, but I just can't find it. Makes me feel dumb, which is hardly what you want in a social endeavor.
Beyond my notebooks, I also have 2 8 Core Mac Pro's I'd like to put into the game, but I really only want the processor power being used when they're idle. I need that power to myself at the other times. Screen saver or idle time processing is perfect.
Second, I did install just the basic install of http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/release/Folding@home-OSX10.5-6.29.3.pkg.zip in the meantime. Activated the client in System Preferences, and hit the enable button. When does this thing activate? It's not showing any activity in Activity Monitor yet. I guess maybe this does idle time processing w/o any visual feedback?
fotografica
Nov 5, 06:41 AM
It may out eye candy OS-X,but it's still Windows. If you put a dress on a pig,it's still a pig ;)..Not to mention the fact that a large % of PC's out there aren't even capable of running it.So if somebody has a choice to make of either getting a new PC to run Vista,or switch to OS-X??Things could get interesting this coming year...
more...
DeeGee48
Nov 17, 05:57 PM
Kinda wonder if this "PI" is even real...
Since the story broke, the guy's website has been posted across every tech news site around.
Fact of the matter is that I am sure that this situation has netted him a few more sales.
____________________
I'm sure it has too. But you just KNOW it won't go on. Apple people read all those tech sites too and know all about it now!
Since the story broke, the guy's website has been posted across every tech news site around.
Fact of the matter is that I am sure that this situation has netted him a few more sales.
____________________
I'm sure it has too. But you just KNOW it won't go on. Apple people read all those tech sites too and know all about it now!
zap2
Mar 10, 09:43 AM
I'm sort of hoping lego star wars to be fun....I really like the first one, the 2nd was ok....I played the demo for this new one on the PS3 and was a little worried, but I'll most likely go for it.
more...
SteveRichardson
Aug 14, 12:37 PM
oh GOD, 20?!
please make it stop...
Meh, it was effective enough to get in the LA Times...
...the only reason why I didn't like the campaign at first was because I thought it was dull and everyone would pass it by as if it were just another commercial. But according to this article, it sounds like it has generated some definite interest...which, imo, is a good thing.
effective does not mean good. ever heard of negative attention?
those ads suck...admit it. they are AWFUL.
(bring back the feiss)
please make it stop...
Meh, it was effective enough to get in the LA Times...
...the only reason why I didn't like the campaign at first was because I thought it was dull and everyone would pass it by as if it were just another commercial. But according to this article, it sounds like it has generated some definite interest...which, imo, is a good thing.
effective does not mean good. ever heard of negative attention?
those ads suck...admit it. they are AWFUL.
(bring back the feiss)
MacBandit
Sep 14, 02:09 AM
Originally posted by MacManiac1224
Can the G4 beat the Pentium 5? You are probably scratching your heads on this one. Yep, the Pentium 5 is very real, and it is coming soon. 2nd quarter of the Pentium 5 debuting at 3.2GHZ is going to come out. It will have 100 million transistors on it and it will be manufactured at .09 microns. Also, here is the doozy, it will have 1 mb of L2 on die cache, and it will support 333mhz bus speeds, with the addition of DDR, that is a possible 667mhz bus speeds. By the way, if you were wondering, the Pentium 4 has 42 million transistors.
Now, for the G4: I am not sure how many transistors the G4 has, but I imagine it is way less then 100 million, or even 42 million, considering the P4 came out after the G4. Anyway, the cache on the G4 is higher on the high-end, 2mb of cache. But: the speed: 1.25Ghz? Can that really stand up to a P5 with 333mhz bus, and 3.2Ghz clock speeds? My opinion: most likely not.
Not to be criticle but the G4 does not have 2mb of L2 cache on the high end model it only has 256k. It does have 2mb of L3. The 1MB of L2 in my oppinion will be a lot faster then any L3 cache because it's accessed at full CPU speed. But we all know this doesn't really make a nickels worth of difference because we all know the current cpu at the current speed would be absolutely trounced by this new pentium. I also know feel that we will not be stuck at this slow progression of speed for the next year.
I personally though am in no way dissapointed in the new macs they are extremely fast. Yes faster then the Quicksilvers they just need to be used in the right application i.e. video editing, gaming, etc.. Anything that requires large amounts of data to be moved from the hard drive to the Ram and the same for the PCI and AGP cards to the Ram or Hard drive.
Can the G4 beat the Pentium 5? You are probably scratching your heads on this one. Yep, the Pentium 5 is very real, and it is coming soon. 2nd quarter of the Pentium 5 debuting at 3.2GHZ is going to come out. It will have 100 million transistors on it and it will be manufactured at .09 microns. Also, here is the doozy, it will have 1 mb of L2 on die cache, and it will support 333mhz bus speeds, with the addition of DDR, that is a possible 667mhz bus speeds. By the way, if you were wondering, the Pentium 4 has 42 million transistors.
Now, for the G4: I am not sure how many transistors the G4 has, but I imagine it is way less then 100 million, or even 42 million, considering the P4 came out after the G4. Anyway, the cache on the G4 is higher on the high-end, 2mb of cache. But: the speed: 1.25Ghz? Can that really stand up to a P5 with 333mhz bus, and 3.2Ghz clock speeds? My opinion: most likely not.
Not to be criticle but the G4 does not have 2mb of L2 cache on the high end model it only has 256k. It does have 2mb of L3. The 1MB of L2 in my oppinion will be a lot faster then any L3 cache because it's accessed at full CPU speed. But we all know this doesn't really make a nickels worth of difference because we all know the current cpu at the current speed would be absolutely trounced by this new pentium. I also know feel that we will not be stuck at this slow progression of speed for the next year.
I personally though am in no way dissapointed in the new macs they are extremely fast. Yes faster then the Quicksilvers they just need to be used in the right application i.e. video editing, gaming, etc.. Anything that requires large amounts of data to be moved from the hard drive to the Ram and the same for the PCI and AGP cards to the Ram or Hard drive.
more...
Fuzzy14
Dec 17, 07:34 AM
Of course they don't. Most of them probably just want to be involved in the commotion, so they can put their hand up and say "yeah, I downloaded that track, suck it Cowell!"
Yeah, I'm sure millionaire Cowell really cares. Whoever was the poor winner of the X-factor will be used and spat out by him regardless if he gets to no1 or not.
Simon is an interesting character. He seems to have profited greatly off humiliating people on live television and has a unique position of capturing the attention of people on television, but also the airwaves.
Yeah that just about sums it up.
My only gripe that in in a normal year you need to sell 170,000-250,000 records to get Christmas number one, the X-factor single has already passed this mark so unfortunately it looks like more people have been buying it to prevent Rage winning. So Cowell wins either way, no such thing as bad publicity.
Incidentally, I'm not savvy with reality TV (I prefer reality) or FaceSpace Books, I heard Zane Lowe play the song about a week ago and thought, what a classic, I haven't heard that for years and went out and downloaded it. I don't agree with the people saying it's not a good song, in 1992 Tom Morello's guitar playing was groundbreaking and the lyrics ideally suit this chart battle.
But to paraphrase another Rage song, you can't rebel by buying something.
Yeah, I'm sure millionaire Cowell really cares. Whoever was the poor winner of the X-factor will be used and spat out by him regardless if he gets to no1 or not.
Simon is an interesting character. He seems to have profited greatly off humiliating people on live television and has a unique position of capturing the attention of people on television, but also the airwaves.
Yeah that just about sums it up.
My only gripe that in in a normal year you need to sell 170,000-250,000 records to get Christmas number one, the X-factor single has already passed this mark so unfortunately it looks like more people have been buying it to prevent Rage winning. So Cowell wins either way, no such thing as bad publicity.
Incidentally, I'm not savvy with reality TV (I prefer reality) or FaceSpace Books, I heard Zane Lowe play the song about a week ago and thought, what a classic, I haven't heard that for years and went out and downloaded it. I don't agree with the people saying it's not a good song, in 1992 Tom Morello's guitar playing was groundbreaking and the lyrics ideally suit this chart battle.
But to paraphrase another Rage song, you can't rebel by buying something.
appleguy123
Mar 26, 05:09 PM
Two questions:
1) Is that an iPad on the table?
2) Who paid for the coffee? :D
-Kevin
http://www.9to5mac.com/files/Screen%20shot%202010-03-26%20at%205.26.29%20PM.png
It's one of those containers holding the bill. It's too black to be an iPad.
1) Is that an iPad on the table?
2) Who paid for the coffee? :D
-Kevin
http://www.9to5mac.com/files/Screen%20shot%202010-03-26%20at%205.26.29%20PM.png
It's one of those containers holding the bill. It's too black to be an iPad.
rasmasyean
May 3, 03:57 PM
The effect of terrorists to the West is enormously magnified by our reaction to them. How many Western deaths have been caused through terrorism in the last 15 years. 5000? Probably less than 200 in the last 5 years.
How many soldiers have been killed in subsequent wars? Over 7000 (http://icasualties.org/).
How many civilians have been killed in these wars? 100s of thousands.
And how much are we spending on this? What is the 'opportunity cost' of that lost cash - which could have been spent on health care/research/education?
I think we need to learn to ignore the 'short game' of small terrorist outrages and instead concentrate on the 'long game', which the West is undoubtably winning.
Terrorists represent a tiny proportion of radicals, that bubble to the surface of large populations of unhappy, poor and repressed people. Those underlying populations are changing though... all across North Africa and the Arab world people are mobilising to gain democracy, spurred on by the slow liberalising Western influence of open communication technologies and culture. This 'long game' political change is MUCH more significant than OBL's death.
Take away the unhappy cultures that breed terrorists won't completely remove risk - but it will make terrorism more the action of criminals, and less of a 'clash of cultures'. Smart Western political leadership would sell terrorist outrages as 'random acts of criminal radicals' not 'we must go to war with the axis of evil'.
All Obama has to do is decide whether he can afford to stop propping up the US military industrial complex.
Not all lives are "equal". One life of an important financial worker who perished at WTC might be worth more than 1000 soldiers. That's the order of society. A soldier's life is meant to be sacrificed to protect the worker. Some "warriors" are born to be this way, like army ants. The worker is more important because he makes guns to put into the hands of new soldiers. And of course, as you may have noticed, many of the front line (infantry) consists of would be rejects of society that have been conditioned and given a chance to serve a greater purpose than to become delinquents or menial workers that they would have been. "Unimportant Lives" in the big picture despite what their own families think of them. That's the unwritten rule.
In history, war is the driver of innovation...from the measly dart, to the nuclear warhead. Whether we will sustain through it to reap the benefits ourselves may be another story....like Nazi Germany where we stole all their world changing innovations after we collapsed them. Although it may bring disgust to some ppl today, Nazi Germany was one of the greatest economic, technological, and war machines ever devised and Adolf Hitler was one of the most influential and greatest men who ever lived...for his people. He just lost so we don't believe in what he tried to establish.
If there is no war, we would build more capitalistic indulgence crap to make eachother happy and lazy. But in war, we build things that help us survive. Advanced in bomb detection leads to better sensors for medical diagnosis.
Advances in robots leads to better prosthetics and automating.
Advances in field portable displays leads to large LED screens for remote surgery.
Advances in nanotech will potentially change everything we know of as "technology" today.
Many of the above will assist the "cure for cancer", or whatever it is that scares you to death. If you think that during "peacetime", everyone and their mom will devote their lives to "finding the cure", you are sadly mistaken. Humans are lazy...until their life is immediately threatened. War is why we evolved so far past the next "animal".
How many soldiers have been killed in subsequent wars? Over 7000 (http://icasualties.org/).
How many civilians have been killed in these wars? 100s of thousands.
And how much are we spending on this? What is the 'opportunity cost' of that lost cash - which could have been spent on health care/research/education?
I think we need to learn to ignore the 'short game' of small terrorist outrages and instead concentrate on the 'long game', which the West is undoubtably winning.
Terrorists represent a tiny proportion of radicals, that bubble to the surface of large populations of unhappy, poor and repressed people. Those underlying populations are changing though... all across North Africa and the Arab world people are mobilising to gain democracy, spurred on by the slow liberalising Western influence of open communication technologies and culture. This 'long game' political change is MUCH more significant than OBL's death.
Take away the unhappy cultures that breed terrorists won't completely remove risk - but it will make terrorism more the action of criminals, and less of a 'clash of cultures'. Smart Western political leadership would sell terrorist outrages as 'random acts of criminal radicals' not 'we must go to war with the axis of evil'.
All Obama has to do is decide whether he can afford to stop propping up the US military industrial complex.
Not all lives are "equal". One life of an important financial worker who perished at WTC might be worth more than 1000 soldiers. That's the order of society. A soldier's life is meant to be sacrificed to protect the worker. Some "warriors" are born to be this way, like army ants. The worker is more important because he makes guns to put into the hands of new soldiers. And of course, as you may have noticed, many of the front line (infantry) consists of would be rejects of society that have been conditioned and given a chance to serve a greater purpose than to become delinquents or menial workers that they would have been. "Unimportant Lives" in the big picture despite what their own families think of them. That's the unwritten rule.
In history, war is the driver of innovation...from the measly dart, to the nuclear warhead. Whether we will sustain through it to reap the benefits ourselves may be another story....like Nazi Germany where we stole all their world changing innovations after we collapsed them. Although it may bring disgust to some ppl today, Nazi Germany was one of the greatest economic, technological, and war machines ever devised and Adolf Hitler was one of the most influential and greatest men who ever lived...for his people. He just lost so we don't believe in what he tried to establish.
If there is no war, we would build more capitalistic indulgence crap to make eachother happy and lazy. But in war, we build things that help us survive. Advanced in bomb detection leads to better sensors for medical diagnosis.
Advances in robots leads to better prosthetics and automating.
Advances in field portable displays leads to large LED screens for remote surgery.
Advances in nanotech will potentially change everything we know of as "technology" today.
Many of the above will assist the "cure for cancer", or whatever it is that scares you to death. If you think that during "peacetime", everyone and their mom will devote their lives to "finding the cure", you are sadly mistaken. Humans are lazy...until their life is immediately threatened. War is why we evolved so far past the next "animal".
Ish
Mar 18, 05:11 AM
I like this, Dale! The first one, Never show your work to anyone, you could take the opposite way. If you never showed your work to anyone you could think you're among the best! Okay, maybe you still suck but you could go through life in blissful ignorance!! :)
I wouldn't necessarily call concentrating on one thing a fixation, and even if it is, who cares? If you're constantly photographing what you enjoy, eventually you see more and more details to express through your photographs. Just enjoy! And share!
I wouldn't necessarily call concentrating on one thing a fixation, and even if it is, who cares? If you're constantly photographing what you enjoy, eventually you see more and more details to express through your photographs. Just enjoy! And share!
balamw
Jan 2, 10:46 PM
Any help?
Not using VLC, but when I have wanted to extract audio from DVDs I've tended to use bbdemux http://sourceforge.net/projects/macbbdemux/ or bbdmux http://members.cox.net/beyeler/bbmpeg.html to first pull the audio out of the VOB and then converted it.
The other approach I have used is to use handbrake, and then demux out only the audio.
B
Not using VLC, but when I have wanted to extract audio from DVDs I've tended to use bbdemux http://sourceforge.net/projects/macbbdemux/ or bbdmux http://members.cox.net/beyeler/bbmpeg.html to first pull the audio out of the VOB and then converted it.
The other approach I have used is to use handbrake, and then demux out only the audio.
B
Diode
Aug 19, 02:20 PM
I thought so too but in the review he said they used the Places feature out in and around DC so it was working in DC for the testing:
http://ptech.allthingsd.com/20100818/facebook-places-review/
I'm in DC and can't get it to work ...
http://ptech.allthingsd.com/20100818/facebook-places-review/
I'm in DC and can't get it to work ...
wpotere
Apr 1, 06:45 AM
I when to France once before. I remember the cheapest gas had an octane rating of 95 or so, the next level up was 98 octane. I'm assuming that regular in the UK is around 95 octane as well? That tops what get. Our gas starts at 87 octane and tops out at 93 octane for so called premium (about $0.40 per gallon more than regular where I'm at).
Anyhow, judging by how our gas is priced, it's about 2x what we pay here in the States. You win some (having better cars), you lose some (higher priced gas).
Octane ratings are calculated differently in Europe than they are here in the USA. MON versus RON and AKI....
In the USA the number we see is the AKI (Anti Knock Index) and our 93 - 94 is equivalent with Europe 98. Here is a good read on it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating
That being said, I did live in Germany for 4 years and remember paying 9 to 10 dollars a gallon for gas. Most of that was tax, but I didn't mind paynig it because the roads are awesome.
Anyhow, judging by how our gas is priced, it's about 2x what we pay here in the States. You win some (having better cars), you lose some (higher priced gas).
Octane ratings are calculated differently in Europe than they are here in the USA. MON versus RON and AKI....
In the USA the number we see is the AKI (Anti Knock Index) and our 93 - 94 is equivalent with Europe 98. Here is a good read on it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating
That being said, I did live in Germany for 4 years and remember paying 9 to 10 dollars a gallon for gas. Most of that was tax, but I didn't mind paynig it because the roads are awesome.
BenRoethig
Oct 9, 03:54 PM
I don't think they have anything to fear for quite a while. iTunes movies downloads are the digital equivalent to UMD. It's cool for Apple to be able to sell a movie for your iPod, but I don't see the practical use yet. You can't watch it on your T.V. (without spending $300 on Apple's upcoming iTV), you can't burn it to DVD, watching it full screen on a Mac or PC is not going to be as crisp as on a T.V., and the extra features aren't there. Quite frankly really who wants to hold an iPod for 2-3 hours to watch a movie anyway? Apple is going to have to offer something more useful for this to really catch on.
No comments:
Post a Comment