AppleScruff1
Apr 17, 02:38 AM
I want to know when 7-11 will start carrying iPads.
iStudentUK
Apr 8, 02:26 PM
To an unbeliever, a person is born morally neutral. Their actions can only be graded on the basis of how others are impacted, because "good" and "bad" often change drastically based on one's perspective.
I think what you said is very interesting and insightful. I have a big problem with the concept of original sin, or that people need saving in some way.
If I could just pick out some small thing?
I'm not sure everyone is born strictly neutral. There is a lot of evidence to show morality is, in part, evolutionary. I'm not saying people are born to be automatically wonderful, but if there was no structured society people would not all become mass murderers. Therefore I'd say people (with a few exceptions) are born with very basic morality already in place. However, upbringing and society can add or detract from this.
Of course, this is viewed by a modern standard, and as you suggested- what is "good" and what is "bad" without a standard to judge it by? My head hurts! :confused:
I think what you said is very interesting and insightful. I have a big problem with the concept of original sin, or that people need saving in some way.
If I could just pick out some small thing?
I'm not sure everyone is born strictly neutral. There is a lot of evidence to show morality is, in part, evolutionary. I'm not saying people are born to be automatically wonderful, but if there was no structured society people would not all become mass murderers. Therefore I'd say people (with a few exceptions) are born with very basic morality already in place. However, upbringing and society can add or detract from this.
Of course, this is viewed by a modern standard, and as you suggested- what is "good" and what is "bad" without a standard to judge it by? My head hurts! :confused:
stuffradio
Mar 28, 11:12 PM
It'll be $129 � the same as ALL of the past upgrades except for Snow Leopard which was Leopard but just a slimmed-down, rewriting of the OS. Apple felt that without a lot of core new features being added, they would give the public a break and just charge a nominal fee for Snow Leopard, rather than the typical $129.
Don't listen to anyone who says differently. It will be $129.
It will be $99.
Don't listen to anyone who says differently. It will be $129.
It will be $99.
teleromeo
Mar 19, 11:54 AM
I love my pre classic 80 gig video iPod and would like te replace it with a classic whenever it dies.
Also Apple should shift to selling videoclips instead of songs. Cover art is so very old fashion ...
Also Apple should shift to selling videoclips instead of songs. Cover art is so very old fashion ...
eawmp1
Mar 21, 05:23 PM
:eek: Wow. I must find myself a wife, so that she can say no.
Take my wife...please. She's good at saying "no".
Take my wife...please. She's good at saying "no".
Kristenn
Sep 14, 09:53 AM
How is Halo a Quake rip off? The games are nothing alike besides the fact that they are both first person shooters. And as long as we are talking about the Original Quake, it was more like a mid evil DOOM (I love Quake 1 btw)
Halo brought something new to the FPS genre when it came out and there have been plenty of "Halo ripoffs". The only thing Halo is guilty of is being a FPS.
It looks good and it looks like they brought back picking up health packs like Halo 1. I just wish the rest of the Halo games would come to Macintosh like the first one did.
I know I'm dreaming here but the only thing I like about Xbox 360 is the controllers and Halo and Perfect Dark. Only reason I had a Xbox 360. Its broken right now so I probably wont get this game.
By the way, am I the only person here who thinks Halo Combat Evolved was the best? Halo 3 comes in very close for me.
Halo brought something new to the FPS genre when it came out and there have been plenty of "Halo ripoffs". The only thing Halo is guilty of is being a FPS.
It looks good and it looks like they brought back picking up health packs like Halo 1. I just wish the rest of the Halo games would come to Macintosh like the first one did.
I know I'm dreaming here but the only thing I like about Xbox 360 is the controllers and Halo and Perfect Dark. Only reason I had a Xbox 360. Its broken right now so I probably wont get this game.
By the way, am I the only person here who thinks Halo Combat Evolved was the best? Halo 3 comes in very close for me.
GeekLawyer
Apr 12, 11:41 AM
Great news. The more manufacturing capacity, the better.
ten-oak-druid
May 5, 12:09 AM
Yeah, Blu Ray players are pretty useless because of the PS3, which is usually cheaper and can play Blu Ray anyway. Of course, my dad got a Blu Ray player before I could say anything :rolleyes:
And I think the digital copy is useless because of Netflix, which can just stream it. The internet is the future for now, not discs.
I don't know about the digital copy being useless. I have netflix and I also add movies to itunes. I see them as complimentary. Some items I do not care to purchase and it is nice to have netflix. On the other hand I like owning movie and TV shows that I really like. Also netflix doesn't have everything I want. And don't forget when traveling, you don't always have good internet.
The Apple TV is nice because it accesses both netflix and my itunes media.
Anyway movies I really like, I tend to buy physical copies anyway and rip them to add to itunes. The digital copy/blu ray is better as I can play the 1080p version once in a while and access it on the computer/ iOS anytime.
I'm looking forward to the release of Lord of the Rings extended edition coming out this summer on blu ray. I believe that has digital copy too.
And I think the digital copy is useless because of Netflix, which can just stream it. The internet is the future for now, not discs.
I don't know about the digital copy being useless. I have netflix and I also add movies to itunes. I see them as complimentary. Some items I do not care to purchase and it is nice to have netflix. On the other hand I like owning movie and TV shows that I really like. Also netflix doesn't have everything I want. And don't forget when traveling, you don't always have good internet.
The Apple TV is nice because it accesses both netflix and my itunes media.
Anyway movies I really like, I tend to buy physical copies anyway and rip them to add to itunes. The digital copy/blu ray is better as I can play the 1080p version once in a while and access it on the computer/ iOS anytime.
I'm looking forward to the release of Lord of the Rings extended edition coming out this summer on blu ray. I believe that has digital copy too.
SevenInchScrew
Sep 30, 11:15 AM
Because Firefight - Matchmaking IS a competition.
If we're being technical, yes, you are competing to see who can attain the most points. I just meant that you aren't competing DIRECTLY against other high-caliber players, thus lessening the need to be super awesome to have fun.
I admit I am not the biggest fan of Halo multiplayer, not liking the general community that plays.
Well, that is every online game, if we're being honest. Doesn't matter what you play, there are going to be people out there who just want to ruin the experience for others. It sucks, but it is the sad reality of the online world these days. The Halo community, in my opinion, is quite good and friendly, but it doesn't take but a very small group of individuals to ruin it. My only suggestion is to play with as many friends or nice players that you know. I have a handful of real-life friends who play Halo, but I also won't hesitate to add someone who I enjoyed playing with.
I used to play a TON of Rocket Race in Halo 3. It was a crazy fun gametype, but it was also very easy to ruin for everyone, if you were that kind of person. So, I just started adding people to my friends list every chance I got when I had fun playing with people. Pretty soon, I had tons of people online who I could play with. We would fill up the lobby with actual, good players, thus ending any chance of griefing right from the start. I won't touch competitive Matchmaking any more unless I have enough people I know playing to fill up our team. Partly because of jerks, but mostly because it is just more fun when you have a team of people you know, and enjoy playing with.
If we're being technical, yes, you are competing to see who can attain the most points. I just meant that you aren't competing DIRECTLY against other high-caliber players, thus lessening the need to be super awesome to have fun.
I admit I am not the biggest fan of Halo multiplayer, not liking the general community that plays.
Well, that is every online game, if we're being honest. Doesn't matter what you play, there are going to be people out there who just want to ruin the experience for others. It sucks, but it is the sad reality of the online world these days. The Halo community, in my opinion, is quite good and friendly, but it doesn't take but a very small group of individuals to ruin it. My only suggestion is to play with as many friends or nice players that you know. I have a handful of real-life friends who play Halo, but I also won't hesitate to add someone who I enjoyed playing with.
I used to play a TON of Rocket Race in Halo 3. It was a crazy fun gametype, but it was also very easy to ruin for everyone, if you were that kind of person. So, I just started adding people to my friends list every chance I got when I had fun playing with people. Pretty soon, I had tons of people online who I could play with. We would fill up the lobby with actual, good players, thus ending any chance of griefing right from the start. I won't touch competitive Matchmaking any more unless I have enough people I know playing to fill up our team. Partly because of jerks, but mostly because it is just more fun when you have a team of people you know, and enjoy playing with.
RebootD
Apr 11, 03:06 PM
Do those in the anti-piracy camp have major issues with someone who pirates Adobe products, but doesn't "profit" from them?....i.e doesn't make even enough money to cover the costs of the original products or even makes zero dollars?
Yes. It's stealing, download a trial version and if you like it buy it. If not go get a cheaper solution elsewhere.
I give it one more year, and Adobe's products will be entirely replaceable by App store Apps that will be SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper. Developers will be making their money, the apps will be cheap enough that piracy won't be as big of an issue, and everyone will be happy (except Adobe....and those heavily invested into their software model, and business).
People have been saying this for a decade and instead the competition has been eaten or don't exist anymore. There is more than Adobe's apps but the entire collaboration between native files within the suite.
Could it happen? Sure. But they will have be big enough to fight a buyout buy Adobe and/or come out with an entire suite (page layout, photo and web etc) to directly compete as a 'package' to really make in the professional realm of agencies etc.
Yes. It's stealing, download a trial version and if you like it buy it. If not go get a cheaper solution elsewhere.
I give it one more year, and Adobe's products will be entirely replaceable by App store Apps that will be SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper. Developers will be making their money, the apps will be cheap enough that piracy won't be as big of an issue, and everyone will be happy (except Adobe....and those heavily invested into their software model, and business).
People have been saying this for a decade and instead the competition has been eaten or don't exist anymore. There is more than Adobe's apps but the entire collaboration between native files within the suite.
Could it happen? Sure. But they will have be big enough to fight a buyout buy Adobe and/or come out with an entire suite (page layout, photo and web etc) to directly compete as a 'package' to really make in the professional realm of agencies etc.
DustyLBottoms
Nov 13, 12:30 PM
Facebook just updated this afternoon. I wonder if Apple rush approved the update because of all this?
Gem�tlichkeit
Mar 18, 05:17 PM
I see no need for it when you have an outstanding product like the iPod Touch.
Sminman86
Mar 25, 02:03 PM
Mine's weighing in at 666.0MB... :apple:
Mac-Addict
Jan 11, 05:14 PM
Apples New WiMax service, covering the entire world, it will work with the iPhone 2 and all later laptops but Apple will sell an external modem plugging into the previous MBPs ExpressCard/34. The WiMax service has VOIP, the previous iPhone will still be being sold and will so until their contract runs out with each carrier. I got told from a friend of a friend of a girl friends mothers ex friend who knew this guy who says he worked in an Apple store and was told by his manager who was told by Steve who came up with the whole thing.
skunk
Apr 9, 04:57 AM
Based on scripture I personally believe that while man is definitely capable of "good" due to the fact that he has been created in the image of God, that image has been marred by sin. This leaves man in a "broken" condition and at the core we are selfish by nature. On the contrary, based on scripture, the elohim made man in their own image complete with all their own foibles and traits. El was jealous, vengeful, prone to anger: why would humans be any different?
The human spirit is capable of many good things, but without an accurate understanding of who God is and our relationship to him these good works become nothing but acts of vanity and self glorification that serve only to advance pride and promote self-reliance.I find this statement utterly appalling. Do those who sacrifice themselves for others do so from selfish motives?
The human spirit is capable of many good things, but without an accurate understanding of who God is and our relationship to him these good works become nothing but acts of vanity and self glorification that serve only to advance pride and promote self-reliance.I find this statement utterly appalling. Do those who sacrifice themselves for others do so from selfish motives?
andylyon
Nov 13, 11:49 AM
Incidently a facebook app update has just been released!
azentropy
Apr 14, 01:04 PM
Please. A Macbook costs about $1,000. There will be people who deliberately go for something cheaper, but the majority of people can _afford_ it. The "similarly performing system" to the mini tower is the iMac for $1199. And people who are poor but clever know that in the long term, quality is cheaper - usually the best thing to buy is the cheapest of the best, which would be for example the MacBook. It will still be running fine when you bought the second replacement for a cheaper laptop.
That $1199 iMac has lots of other wonderful features including a screen, but if you think it is anywhere close to the performance of a i7-2600 based PC (that go for $750 from HP/Dell) then you are delusional. To get something from Apple with an equivalent processor you are looking at a $2199 iMac or a $2499 Mac Pro. Doesn't matter that in the long term the Mac could be a better value, some people can't justify that huge price difference or paying additional for features they don't need or want or cannot afford to.
Again Macs are a premium product and because of that Apple will hit a ceiling of those who can afford or justify buying their products.
That $1199 iMac has lots of other wonderful features including a screen, but if you think it is anywhere close to the performance of a i7-2600 based PC (that go for $750 from HP/Dell) then you are delusional. To get something from Apple with an equivalent processor you are looking at a $2199 iMac or a $2499 Mac Pro. Doesn't matter that in the long term the Mac could be a better value, some people can't justify that huge price difference or paying additional for features they don't need or want or cannot afford to.
Again Macs are a premium product and because of that Apple will hit a ceiling of those who can afford or justify buying their products.
macridah
Nov 23, 04:56 PM
I bought 10 out of those 2,000,000 songs
knightlie
Nov 4, 07:26 AM
Don't just blame Adobe...blame apple too. It's a code/OS issue. It's works perfectly on PCs.
Ahh, the armchair programmers are out again. Exactly what is a "code/OS issue"?
Apple is not responsible for Adobes crappy code. The fact that it "works perfectly" on PCs is completely irrelevant. I can write a program that works well on Windows and a program that works crappy on OSX - how is that Apples fault?
Why is Apple blocking Flash? This is one for the FCC! Same reason that Microsoft used to block Netscape. Apple wants websites to use Apple software and not Flash. FAIL! It's a violation of free markets! Here comes a Netscape-Microsoft lawsuit in the Supreme Court, except this time with Flash-Apple.
Actually, Apple wants websites to use open standards such as HTML, which is not Apples software. Flash is proprietary and is certainly not a free market. You should cut down on the caffeine.
Ahh, the armchair programmers are out again. Exactly what is a "code/OS issue"?
Apple is not responsible for Adobes crappy code. The fact that it "works perfectly" on PCs is completely irrelevant. I can write a program that works well on Windows and a program that works crappy on OSX - how is that Apples fault?
Why is Apple blocking Flash? This is one for the FCC! Same reason that Microsoft used to block Netscape. Apple wants websites to use Apple software and not Flash. FAIL! It's a violation of free markets! Here comes a Netscape-Microsoft lawsuit in the Supreme Court, except this time with Flash-Apple.
Actually, Apple wants websites to use open standards such as HTML, which is not Apples software. Flash is proprietary and is certainly not a free market. You should cut down on the caffeine.
hulugu
Mar 30, 12:58 AM
The key point facilitating foreign intervention in Libya is the fact that one of the factions in this civil war invited us to participate, within certain limitations. This is not an invasion, nor is it unilateral action by any party. The entire affair is predicated on 1) The Libyan opposition's call for help and 2) A UN resolution sanctioning the use of force in Libya, with support froom the Arab league (and in this case NATO as well). The actions retain legitimacy so long as this broad coalition can be maintained. Obama has never suggested that the US should or would be involved except as part of a coalition.
Finally, it is clear that Obama is flouting neither the constitution nor congress by these actions. Any claim to the contrary is either misinformed or disingenuous. That isn't to say I am enthusiastic about the affair, or that I complately agree with the president's war powers as they currently stand.
But Republicans are trying hard to get maximum political mileage out of their criticisms, with the result that they are overstepping the mark.
I agree.
I'm not surprised. Every administration grabs more and more power. I get depressed just seeing how everyone takes it as the status quo and defends it. The Constitution was set up almost as if to stop one person from being able to take up to war on a whim. Well, if Obama has that right, then George Bush III, or whoever will push the limits of his powers even further. I guess that's the power of precedence. If you look at the Constitution, it vests in the Congress the exclusive power to declare war. Things just have a way of changing. I thought Bush was bad enough with Iraq. Now Obama's actions are even worse than Bush's. Obama didn't even put up the charade of making a case.
Looking at the history, Congress has often taken a backseat to presidential authority on these matters going back as far as Apache wars (1840-1886). Moreover, even in the modern age after the War Powers Act, four administrators have invaded five countries without express Congressional approval�the Iraq AMF being an abdication rather than an express declaration of war.
Reagan invaded Grenada; Bush invaded Panama, Iraq, and Somalia; and Clinton bombed the Serbians.
Moreover, the Korean war also went without an express Congressional approval, rather it operated under UNSCR order. Vietnam was operated under a manner similar to the Iraq War, without an express declaration of war, but with authorization by Congress.
Rather than looking at it as a power-grab, you should instead evaluate whether or not the use of force in the above instances fits within the paradigm of Libya. I think it does.
The specific application of force by US warplanes under UN auspices, with request by the rebels and the Arab League should give the operation any legal cover it should need in both International and US law. Moreover, since NATO is also involved, our treaty obligations require us to act as well.
Finally, it is clear that Obama is flouting neither the constitution nor congress by these actions. Any claim to the contrary is either misinformed or disingenuous. That isn't to say I am enthusiastic about the affair, or that I complately agree with the president's war powers as they currently stand.
But Republicans are trying hard to get maximum political mileage out of their criticisms, with the result that they are overstepping the mark.
I agree.
I'm not surprised. Every administration grabs more and more power. I get depressed just seeing how everyone takes it as the status quo and defends it. The Constitution was set up almost as if to stop one person from being able to take up to war on a whim. Well, if Obama has that right, then George Bush III, or whoever will push the limits of his powers even further. I guess that's the power of precedence. If you look at the Constitution, it vests in the Congress the exclusive power to declare war. Things just have a way of changing. I thought Bush was bad enough with Iraq. Now Obama's actions are even worse than Bush's. Obama didn't even put up the charade of making a case.
Looking at the history, Congress has often taken a backseat to presidential authority on these matters going back as far as Apache wars (1840-1886). Moreover, even in the modern age after the War Powers Act, four administrators have invaded five countries without express Congressional approval�the Iraq AMF being an abdication rather than an express declaration of war.
Reagan invaded Grenada; Bush invaded Panama, Iraq, and Somalia; and Clinton bombed the Serbians.
Moreover, the Korean war also went without an express Congressional approval, rather it operated under UNSCR order. Vietnam was operated under a manner similar to the Iraq War, without an express declaration of war, but with authorization by Congress.
Rather than looking at it as a power-grab, you should instead evaluate whether or not the use of force in the above instances fits within the paradigm of Libya. I think it does.
The specific application of force by US warplanes under UN auspices, with request by the rebels and the Arab League should give the operation any legal cover it should need in both International and US law. Moreover, since NATO is also involved, our treaty obligations require us to act as well.
tCruzin4lyfe
May 5, 08:01 AM
It'll be nice as an option. Could careless either way. No update is that important. I can wait til I get home really. Can't wait til June to see what's coming to iOS 5 though.
jlc1978
Apr 11, 10:54 AM
The subscription model is nice for those reasons you mention, and I do see a lot of high end Adobe shops buying into it. It does make sense for them. The small time freelancer is going to be a tough call IMHO.
i agree - as an independent myself I really have to justify outlays based on revenue potential. I no long can just write a purchase order and spend the corporate cash. OTOH, it has made me more aware of other tools beside the big guys that do what I need at a fraction of the cost.
I have been looking to see how Adobe will handle the initial software distribution, e.g. do I have to plunk down $xxx.xx amount of money to get the software, then pay $35 a month or whatever for the license? Haven't found anything yet.
Neither have I, but if the require a cash outlay plus a monthly fee then it'll be a non-starter for many small businesses or freelancers. If they really want their business (and maybe convert some people who use pirated versions) they'd make it a flat fee, pay as you go deal; with maybe a cheaper rate if you buy x months at a time. That would let people jump in and out of the products as they need them, get support from Adobe, and help them decide if they want to buy or continue to rent the software.
i agree - as an independent myself I really have to justify outlays based on revenue potential. I no long can just write a purchase order and spend the corporate cash. OTOH, it has made me more aware of other tools beside the big guys that do what I need at a fraction of the cost.
I have been looking to see how Adobe will handle the initial software distribution, e.g. do I have to plunk down $xxx.xx amount of money to get the software, then pay $35 a month or whatever for the license? Haven't found anything yet.
Neither have I, but if the require a cash outlay plus a monthly fee then it'll be a non-starter for many small businesses or freelancers. If they really want their business (and maybe convert some people who use pirated versions) they'd make it a flat fee, pay as you go deal; with maybe a cheaper rate if you buy x months at a time. That would let people jump in and out of the products as they need them, get support from Adobe, and help them decide if they want to buy or continue to rent the software.
Sydde
Mar 11, 06:27 PM
Would you like to hear what former president Eisenhower had to say on the issue?
Actually, that is what those links go to :)
Actually, that is what those links go to :)
logandzwon
Apr 18, 07:03 AM
How very strange. I can not believe a store that sells telephones, MP3 players, Digital Cameras, video games, eReaders, GPS devices, TVs, dvd players, Apple iPods, laptops, and tablets would carry the Apple iPad.
Very surprising. I bet next your going to try to tell me the Apple Store is going to carry them.
Very surprising. I bet next your going to try to tell me the Apple Store is going to carry them.