twoodcc
Apr 25, 09:41 PM
well i got a new motherboard and processor for my third i7 system. i also put in 4 GPUs in it as well. i have it running all 4 GPUs and a bigadv unit in a VM, but i'm not sure if the bigadv VM is working right. it didn't look quite right when i left, but i had to leave. i guess i'll find out in 3 days if it's working or not
davepoint
Aug 14, 01:29 PM
the world sucks
tigress666
Apr 25, 12:07 PM
Resizing only means having to rewrite apps if the screen resolution changes -- especially if it changes by something other than a whole-number multiple (e.g. 1.5x versus 2x). All rumors indicate a 3.7-inch screen iPhone would have the same Retina-Display resolution (still maintaining over 300dpi).
Technically their "Retina-Display" stuff is based also on typical viewing distance as well -- so a "Retina Display" iPad, iMac, or MacBook (assuming those are in the works) may not go as high as 300dpi. However, a Retina-Display iPad would like require the same pixel-doubling (2x) that was done for apps not optimized for the Retina Display until updates came that included higher-resolution graphics.
Well, in that case, I'd be for it. It won't make me jealous of the 5 (I have a 4 and my contract doesn't run out til next year so no plans on a new phone til then), but I certainly wouldn't be complaining (where as I might if they made the phone bigger or messed up the form in some way to make it less usable or really ugly).
It will be a nice extra when I get my "6" next year (that better have bigger storage by then, that and a faster processor is really all I really want/require out of my next iphone. Not that I would complain about extras other than those two things long as they didn't ruin the phone for what I like it for).
Technically their "Retina-Display" stuff is based also on typical viewing distance as well -- so a "Retina Display" iPad, iMac, or MacBook (assuming those are in the works) may not go as high as 300dpi. However, a Retina-Display iPad would like require the same pixel-doubling (2x) that was done for apps not optimized for the Retina Display until updates came that included higher-resolution graphics.
Well, in that case, I'd be for it. It won't make me jealous of the 5 (I have a 4 and my contract doesn't run out til next year so no plans on a new phone til then), but I certainly wouldn't be complaining (where as I might if they made the phone bigger or messed up the form in some way to make it less usable or really ugly).
It will be a nice extra when I get my "6" next year (that better have bigger storage by then, that and a faster processor is really all I really want/require out of my next iphone. Not that I would complain about extras other than those two things long as they didn't ruin the phone for what I like it for).
Tibbar
Apr 3, 08:56 PM
A friend of mine works with the Xbox support team. I'll ask him if there's anything (legal) that they can do. You have my admiration for your good detective work!
more...
bigjnyc
Apr 26, 08:55 AM
So who was that guy in the blue shirt who kept yelling at them to stop and kept getting in between them to stop it? was that not a McDonalds employee? or is that just being ignored in this crusade?
aftk2
Sep 25, 03:14 PM
I would ALSO have a lot of trouble with a G4 Quad.
Nevetheless, you can't say anything without actual thoughts, and not RANDOM ones. The G5 Quad you were using must have been misused by kids mucking around with it, not responsible users who take care of their machine.
I'm sure Aperture will run great on my Intel 1,66 Mini, with 2GB RAM
Heh, or insufficient RAM. I believe the display machines at the apple stores have gotten better about this, but for the longest time, they were hamstrung with the stock RAM that came with Apple machines (e.g.: the leading-edge Quad G5s living with the semi-anemic video card and - much worse - 512 megs of RAM.)
Nevetheless, you can't say anything without actual thoughts, and not RANDOM ones. The G5 Quad you were using must have been misused by kids mucking around with it, not responsible users who take care of their machine.
I'm sure Aperture will run great on my Intel 1,66 Mini, with 2GB RAM
Heh, or insufficient RAM. I believe the display machines at the apple stores have gotten better about this, but for the longest time, they were hamstrung with the stock RAM that came with Apple machines (e.g.: the leading-edge Quad G5s living with the semi-anemic video card and - much worse - 512 megs of RAM.)
more...
CalBoy
Apr 21, 10:09 PM
So same system but without the down vote button at all?
arn
Yes, I think that would be better as well if we're going to have ratings.
I think a purely numerical system will just encourage all of the negative aspects of the ratings system.
arn
Yes, I think that would be better as well if we're going to have ratings.
I think a purely numerical system will just encourage all of the negative aspects of the ratings system.
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 29, 03:08 PM
No, but I think it will make Safari snappier!!
I've gone back to Firefox (4) after using Safari and Chrome. Both seem to have this awful problem of lag when opening new pages on tabs (i.e. you click back to the page you were viewing while the new one loads and it just sits there; maybe it doesn't happen on dual-core processors, but it happens on this netbook with both Safari and Chrome (both Webkit based). Firefox4 doesn't have this problem. It may be slightly slower rendering a page, but I can do other things while it's rendering a new page whereas I just have to sit and wait with Safari and Chrome.
These naysayers have been moaning and groaning about iOS forever. They will continue to do so forever. In the meantime the rest of the world will get on with using some great software (many of it free) and getting a lot of things done.
Getting things done? The fanatics that worship Apple are too busy playing cheerleader for Apple and voting down the voices of logic on here to get ANYTHING done EVER. :p
I'm glad Apple is pushing things forward. The last thing I want to see is OS X stagnate.
But is has and IS stagnating. Apple is playing cutesy interface with this iOS merging and not much else. Where are the REAL features at like OpenGL4, display resolution independence, updated video drivers, a newer file system (like the ZFS that never came to be), format/write support for NTFS so I don't have to boot into Windows just to create a Windows compatible media drive, support for EXT3 (for the same reason with Linux drives and various NAS setups (e.g. Negear's USB UPnP runs many times faster with EXT3 than NTFS and doesn't support HFS period. How about a feature to NOT copy over '.files' when moving media files over to a Windows machine or putting songs on a USB stick (where car players will often trip over them)? These are FUNCTIONAL differences that would improve enjoyment of OSX and make it faster/better.
What good is an app launcher like iOS devices use on OSX? It's POINTLESS and worse yet intimates that it may be the future primary interface for OSX some day. Other than OpenGL3, I don't see much in the way of true 'OS' improvements in Lion. I see a bunch of smart phone crap that does very little to improve anything. Instead, it's starting to compete with itself.
more...
cute puppies and kittens together. Fiestas la jun kitten
PUPPIES AND KITTENS TOGETHER
more...
Impetuous puppy kitten are
Cute+puppies+and+kittens+
more...
Pics Of Puppies And Kittens Together. Foryorkshire terrier puppies; Cute Puppies And Kittens Together; Foryorkshire terrier puppies; Cute Puppies And
![pics of puppies and kittens together. Please demonstrate specific Islamic principles to this then. A woman#39;s witness is worth half of a man#39;s: [6] cute puppies and kittens together.](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_v9KLy9p81eObzUf9R_AN1SstQgJdAk4MDD9h83Mvyk6SUA2kYxbSEH7H60r5qAkDAkYv4fHVRqyiN0aLFNThWd9Lt3BxYnr-YqKNSY1pC6ES9B0exOsgSeutIiA12W1NK-R9iWdOPp9xLSN2E=s0-d "Please demonstrate specific Islamic principles to this then. A woman#39;s witness is worth half of a man#39;s: [6] cute puppies and kittens together.")
Please demonstrate specific Islamic principles to this then. A woman#39;s witness is worth half of a man#39;s: [6] cute puppies and kittens together.
more...
PUPPIES AND KITTENS TOGETHER
puppies and kittens with
more...
Puppies And Kittens Together Wallpaper
and kittens together, cute
kittens together wallpaper
I've gone back to Firefox (4) after using Safari and Chrome. Both seem to have this awful problem of lag when opening new pages on tabs (i.e. you click back to the page you were viewing while the new one loads and it just sits there; maybe it doesn't happen on dual-core processors, but it happens on this netbook with both Safari and Chrome (both Webkit based). Firefox4 doesn't have this problem. It may be slightly slower rendering a page, but I can do other things while it's rendering a new page whereas I just have to sit and wait with Safari and Chrome.
These naysayers have been moaning and groaning about iOS forever. They will continue to do so forever. In the meantime the rest of the world will get on with using some great software (many of it free) and getting a lot of things done.
Getting things done? The fanatics that worship Apple are too busy playing cheerleader for Apple and voting down the voices of logic on here to get ANYTHING done EVER. :p
I'm glad Apple is pushing things forward. The last thing I want to see is OS X stagnate.
But is has and IS stagnating. Apple is playing cutesy interface with this iOS merging and not much else. Where are the REAL features at like OpenGL4, display resolution independence, updated video drivers, a newer file system (like the ZFS that never came to be), format/write support for NTFS so I don't have to boot into Windows just to create a Windows compatible media drive, support for EXT3 (for the same reason with Linux drives and various NAS setups (e.g. Negear's USB UPnP runs many times faster with EXT3 than NTFS and doesn't support HFS period. How about a feature to NOT copy over '.files' when moving media files over to a Windows machine or putting songs on a USB stick (where car players will often trip over them)? These are FUNCTIONAL differences that would improve enjoyment of OSX and make it faster/better.
What good is an app launcher like iOS devices use on OSX? It's POINTLESS and worse yet intimates that it may be the future primary interface for OSX some day. Other than OpenGL3, I don't see much in the way of true 'OS' improvements in Lion. I see a bunch of smart phone crap that does very little to improve anything. Instead, it's starting to compete with itself.
more...
slffl
Jan 7, 10:43 PM
So I just watched a bit of the Bill Gates keynote at CES. It was streaming live at 500k with no problems. Is this because there isn't as many people watching it? Or do they have more resources available to get the stream out there?
BTW, I had to laugh when they demoed FMV used as a wallpaper in Vista, and the crowd ooohed and awwed and clapped. :)
BTW, I had to laugh when they demoed FMV used as a wallpaper in Vista, and the crowd ooohed and awwed and clapped. :)
oldMac
Aug 10, 08:35 AM
And that's what's so sinister about the electrics. Because it is hard to track just how efficient (or inefficient) the electricity from the grid is... people tend to ignore that whole side of the equation. But it is just as important.
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
so the efficiency of the power coming off the grid becomes the primary concern. And figuring that out is much harder than looking at mpg numbers.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
How many pounds of coal/gallons of oil are burned at the power plant to get your Volt a mile down the road (I assume it works out to be fairly efficent, but I don't know any numbers)?
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
More importantly, would a proliferation in plug-ins result in regular rolling blackouts because power plants can't keep up with rising demand?
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
The biggest thing Americans have trouble with is adjusting to smaller cars. The cars we drive are, on average, unneccesarily big - and anyone who says otherwise is thought to be a Communist.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Lifestyle changes (buying a smaller car, driving less) are the only way to really reduce fuel consumption on a national or global scale in the near to medium future. We can't wait for technology alone to pick up the slack.
And if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
so the efficiency of the power coming off the grid becomes the primary concern. And figuring that out is much harder than looking at mpg numbers.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
How many pounds of coal/gallons of oil are burned at the power plant to get your Volt a mile down the road (I assume it works out to be fairly efficent, but I don't know any numbers)?
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
More importantly, would a proliferation in plug-ins result in regular rolling blackouts because power plants can't keep up with rising demand?
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
The biggest thing Americans have trouble with is adjusting to smaller cars. The cars we drive are, on average, unneccesarily big - and anyone who says otherwise is thought to be a Communist.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Lifestyle changes (buying a smaller car, driving less) are the only way to really reduce fuel consumption on a national or global scale in the near to medium future. We can't wait for technology alone to pick up the slack.
And if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
more...
JohnMacnMiami
Jan 15, 01:23 PM
Apparently the market was not excited about it.
Down $30+ a share since early Jan.
Oh well, 6 years until I retire, I'll hope to see it bounce back (heh heh)
Down $30+ a share since early Jan.
Oh well, 6 years until I retire, I'll hope to see it bounce back (heh heh)
Much Ado
Jan 12, 03:46 AM
They are BLOGGERS. There are no rules in blogging. There are no codes of ethics.
As soon as you start advertising on your blog and maintain a healthy stream for revenue from hits, you become more than just a blog. They owe it to themselves to be professional for the sake of their reputations, and they just screwed that up royally.
As soon as you start advertising on your blog and maintain a healthy stream for revenue from hits, you become more than just a blog. They owe it to themselves to be professional for the sake of their reputations, and they just screwed that up royally.
more...
kiljoy616
May 4, 06:38 AM
love the ad, truly a great device. a year ago everyone joke about the name but now people see the true side of the device what it could actually do.
No I still think the name is funny :D
iMajic would have been better if just to bother the trolls. ;)
No I still think the name is funny :D
iMajic would have been better if just to bother the trolls. ;)
iBug2
Apr 30, 10:03 PM
There's no proof that a closed app store brought in developers because prior to the app store existing there was no 3rd party development on the device (well, besides jailbreakers). So you can't claim that. Case in point, the Mac App store hasn't exploded in popularity the way the iPhone app store did.
But it's pretty clear that if Apple closed the platform they would lose the marketshare in:
1. education (need unix shell, ability to write programs in Eclipse, etc)
2. server (need extensibility)
3. games (steam for example could not operate)
4. professional (Adobe wouldn't stand for not being able to manage their own business model, for example)
5. open source (major open source projects would avoid the Mac because App store doesn't jive with their licenses, Firefox, OpenOffice, etc)
They'd probably also face a major antitrust lawsuit.
It's an unrealistic doomsday proposition that Apple isn't stupid enough to pursue.
You are talking about things that would happen if they closed it today. I said 15 years. :)
And it's not a doomsday proposition or anything. That's just where the entire industry will go.
But it's pretty clear that if Apple closed the platform they would lose the marketshare in:
1. education (need unix shell, ability to write programs in Eclipse, etc)
2. server (need extensibility)
3. games (steam for example could not operate)
4. professional (Adobe wouldn't stand for not being able to manage their own business model, for example)
5. open source (major open source projects would avoid the Mac because App store doesn't jive with their licenses, Firefox, OpenOffice, etc)
They'd probably also face a major antitrust lawsuit.
It's an unrealistic doomsday proposition that Apple isn't stupid enough to pursue.
You are talking about things that would happen if they closed it today. I said 15 years. :)
And it's not a doomsday proposition or anything. That's just where the entire industry will go.
more...
pudrums
Apr 8, 10:30 AM
I purchased it digitally and don't have a Blu-Ray player. Thanks anyway :p
TheMacBookPro
Mar 18, 10:51 AM
That was exactly my point. I don't see why people care so much about what phone someone else has. It's only the Android folks that engage in this, I have yet to see an iPhone owner behave so pathetically.
Seriously?
You're behaving pretty pathetically too. What are you trying to gain from this thread? The approval of other Apple fanboys? Or are you trying to make yourself feel better about your purchase?
Take a look through the forums, and you'll find plenty of people 'behaving so pathetically' in plenty of threads. Including this one!
FTR I have two iPhone 4's, a Nexus S and a LYNX 3D (SH-03C). There goes your theory that Android device owners are all too poor to afford an iPhone :rolleyes:
Several things:
Never had Angry Birds run at '2FPS' and I have the 'original Google phone'- a HTC G1. Runs nice and smooth on 2.2 (general usage and games). My iPhone 3G OTOH...
Doing the same things (heavy web browsing, 1~2 hours of talk time, 1 hour of A2DP BT music streaming in my car) I get just under 1 days' battery life on both my NS and iPhone 4.
As for the screen- less pixel dense on my NS obviously but in direct sunlight the NS's SAMOLED is way better than my iPhone.
Love the 3D on my SH-03C. Mobile ASV on it is as good, if not better than, the iPhone's IPS technology.
I gotta admit that my 4's screen is crisper. Shame they can't produce them all the same (my 32GB is pee-yellow while my 16GB is very white).
You're either a balanced 'reviewer' or an Apple apologist (plenty of them here!). I'm leaning towards the latter. ;)
Seriously?
You're behaving pretty pathetically too. What are you trying to gain from this thread? The approval of other Apple fanboys? Or are you trying to make yourself feel better about your purchase?
Take a look through the forums, and you'll find plenty of people 'behaving so pathetically' in plenty of threads. Including this one!
FTR I have two iPhone 4's, a Nexus S and a LYNX 3D (SH-03C). There goes your theory that Android device owners are all too poor to afford an iPhone :rolleyes:
Several things:
Never had Angry Birds run at '2FPS' and I have the 'original Google phone'- a HTC G1. Runs nice and smooth on 2.2 (general usage and games). My iPhone 3G OTOH...
Doing the same things (heavy web browsing, 1~2 hours of talk time, 1 hour of A2DP BT music streaming in my car) I get just under 1 days' battery life on both my NS and iPhone 4.
As for the screen- less pixel dense on my NS obviously but in direct sunlight the NS's SAMOLED is way better than my iPhone.
Love the 3D on my SH-03C. Mobile ASV on it is as good, if not better than, the iPhone's IPS technology.
I gotta admit that my 4's screen is crisper. Shame they can't produce them all the same (my 32GB is pee-yellow while my 16GB is very white).
You're either a balanced 'reviewer' or an Apple apologist (plenty of them here!). I'm leaning towards the latter. ;)
more...
Warbrain
Sep 12, 08:30 AM
If not today, we could see an MB/MBP update sometime after Sep 16th when the free ipod nano promo expires. That's my best guess, but even i am hoping desperately for the update to happen today!
Probably not. We might see an updated iPod nano after the rebate is over if we don't see it today, but not an updated portable line. That'll come later down the road.
Probably not. We might see an updated iPod nano after the rebate is over if we don't see it today, but not an updated portable line. That'll come later down the road.
Brinkman
Sep 28, 12:20 PM
Gates: What's that?
Jobs: It's an iHouse.
Gates: But there's no Windows.
Jobs: Exactly!!! Hahahahaha!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHO8l-Bd1O4
I'm surprised how few windows it actually does have haha.
Jobs: It's an iHouse.
Gates: But there's no Windows.
Jobs: Exactly!!! Hahahahaha!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHO8l-Bd1O4
I'm surprised how few windows it actually does have haha.
snberk103
Apr 13, 09:48 AM
The 9/11 hijackers did not bring anything on the plane that was banned. No amount of groping or searching by airport security would've prevented 9/11.
9/11 was a failure of intelligence, not a failure of airport security.
I thought box cutters were banned? Can you provide a link to support your statement?
Box cutters were banned in response to 9/11. As always, airline security is reactive. Bush sold us a bill of goods while increasing the size and cost of government.
The OP was ambiguous ... I read it that the weapons used on 9/11 were still not banned. As opposed to not banned at the time.
Hasn't anyone noticed that not a single US plane has been hijacked in the past 10 years? A quick look at Wikipedia shows 7 US planes hijacked in the 1970s, several in the 80s and 90s. Four planes were hijacked in 2001 (all on the same day....) - and then not a single US, European, Japanese plane has been hijacked.
Something is working.....
9/11 was a failure of intelligence, not a failure of airport security.
I thought box cutters were banned? Can you provide a link to support your statement?
Box cutters were banned in response to 9/11. As always, airline security is reactive. Bush sold us a bill of goods while increasing the size and cost of government.
The OP was ambiguous ... I read it that the weapons used on 9/11 were still not banned. As opposed to not banned at the time.
Hasn't anyone noticed that not a single US plane has been hijacked in the past 10 years? A quick look at Wikipedia shows 7 US planes hijacked in the 1970s, several in the 80s and 90s. Four planes were hijacked in 2001 (all on the same day....) - and then not a single US, European, Japanese plane has been hijacked.
Something is working.....
JayMysterio
Dec 8, 06:24 PM
The multiple games give you choices...but this game alone gives you no choice but to run and gun. If i wanted to Run and Gun and waste my life i'd go join the taliban and pray to Allah.
This game gives you very little choice and in that makes the game terrible.
And you said it yourself. Treyarch ruined the game for all the snipers. Great job!
Treyarch = morons and dip*****. Bring back Infinity War. Black Ops Blows.
Have you decided what type of game you want to play? Cause if you don't want to run & gun, go play some hardcore. I promise you, you and 7 others will sit & camp for 20 or 30 minutes and you should be in heaven. As far as the taliban thing, it's a free country knock yourself out.
There are four frikkin' gametypes, each with match types of their own. If you can't find a game you like, it's because you don't want to. Play hardcore, play pure without the killstreaks, play only with players who've prestiged. But really, there's only one way to play the game? There's a word called creativity, give it a try. You may change up your game style. Not everyone runs & guns, some camp, some die. Just grasp the idea you can't sit up in a clock tower all day and NOT expect to get shot back at.
The game gives you every choice in the world, the question is if it's the right choice. Some maps will allow you to camp and slow the game down, other maps won't have it. The game is far more fluid than others, because of it's unpredictability. Sometimes that works for you and it's great, other times it won't. It's a trade off. Will you have all day to camp as you seem to want to? Probably not, once a 'spawn flip' occurs and you find someone behind your camp site. Personally I like the non static spawn points, while the spawning often works against me, I don't hear to much about spawn camping. I personally like the rarer spawn camping.
No, I said Treyarch 'nerfed' sniping. Now if you want to snipe, it actually takes something called 'skill'. You want a one hit kill, it better be dead on in the forehead or back of skull. No more auto assist towards an expanded hit box. There are one hit kills, as you've probably done a headshot or two, but now they are truly difficult. Not the old Rainbow Six shots with the Barrett that grazed your boot and were instant deaths. Now when I play it's often that a sniper tries a few times. Near misses are just that now, near misses, not the instant kills because a bullet was in the same township of your guy.
As I said, Black Ops is an alternative, a choice. If you don't care for it, I'm pretty sure you can take it out of your xbox, and go play something else. I believe they make a new Cabela's hunting game where camping is an important part, very little running & gunning I assume. Otherwise more than enough people are playing MW1 & 2, and they will welcome you. There are also more than enough enjoying Black Ops, don't join them, ...they haven't missed you.
This game gives you very little choice and in that makes the game terrible.
And you said it yourself. Treyarch ruined the game for all the snipers. Great job!
Treyarch = morons and dip*****. Bring back Infinity War. Black Ops Blows.
Have you decided what type of game you want to play? Cause if you don't want to run & gun, go play some hardcore. I promise you, you and 7 others will sit & camp for 20 or 30 minutes and you should be in heaven. As far as the taliban thing, it's a free country knock yourself out.
There are four frikkin' gametypes, each with match types of their own. If you can't find a game you like, it's because you don't want to. Play hardcore, play pure without the killstreaks, play only with players who've prestiged. But really, there's only one way to play the game? There's a word called creativity, give it a try. You may change up your game style. Not everyone runs & guns, some camp, some die. Just grasp the idea you can't sit up in a clock tower all day and NOT expect to get shot back at.
The game gives you every choice in the world, the question is if it's the right choice. Some maps will allow you to camp and slow the game down, other maps won't have it. The game is far more fluid than others, because of it's unpredictability. Sometimes that works for you and it's great, other times it won't. It's a trade off. Will you have all day to camp as you seem to want to? Probably not, once a 'spawn flip' occurs and you find someone behind your camp site. Personally I like the non static spawn points, while the spawning often works against me, I don't hear to much about spawn camping. I personally like the rarer spawn camping.
No, I said Treyarch 'nerfed' sniping. Now if you want to snipe, it actually takes something called 'skill'. You want a one hit kill, it better be dead on in the forehead or back of skull. No more auto assist towards an expanded hit box. There are one hit kills, as you've probably done a headshot or two, but now they are truly difficult. Not the old Rainbow Six shots with the Barrett that grazed your boot and were instant deaths. Now when I play it's often that a sniper tries a few times. Near misses are just that now, near misses, not the instant kills because a bullet was in the same township of your guy.
As I said, Black Ops is an alternative, a choice. If you don't care for it, I'm pretty sure you can take it out of your xbox, and go play something else. I believe they make a new Cabela's hunting game where camping is an important part, very little running & gunning I assume. Otherwise more than enough people are playing MW1 & 2, and they will welcome you. There are also more than enough enjoying Black Ops, don't join them, ...they haven't missed you.
daijones
Nov 23, 10:35 PM
dont be pissed off, many years ago you had the pleasure of persecuting the pilgrams for their religion, for which they left the uk to establish black friday in america. now i guess u wish you werent so intolerant, cuz now we get the discounts!
Um. There's 17th C history, and there's 21st C reality. Intolerance? I'm sure it's a gag, but perhaps it's worthwhile to look at the influence of the religious right on American politics today.
D
Um. There's 17th C history, and there's 21st C reality. Intolerance? I'm sure it's a gag, but perhaps it's worthwhile to look at the influence of the religious right on American politics today.
D
Flowbee
Jan 12, 03:52 PM
Equating destruction of physical property to turning off tv sets is a stretch.
Obviously.:rolleyes: I was responding to the idea that is was somehow ironic (and funny) that such a low-tech device could disrupt such a high-tech show. There are many other low-tech ways to cause problems for exhibitors. You can't have an open, accessible show floor and protect against everyone's idea of a "prank." Exhibitors have to be able to trust that attendees, especially press credentialed attendees, won't make them look foolish in order to drive traffic to their blogs.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
If pranks like these become more common, companies and trade shows will start to put severe restrictions on who's allowed to attend their events.
That's nothing to laugh about.
Obviously.:rolleyes: I was responding to the idea that is was somehow ironic (and funny) that such a low-tech device could disrupt such a high-tech show. There are many other low-tech ways to cause problems for exhibitors. You can't have an open, accessible show floor and protect against everyone's idea of a "prank." Exhibitors have to be able to trust that attendees, especially press credentialed attendees, won't make them look foolish in order to drive traffic to their blogs.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
If pranks like these become more common, companies and trade shows will start to put severe restrictions on who's allowed to attend their events.
That's nothing to laugh about.
BRLawyer
Oct 3, 03:36 PM
One and ONLY release at MW 2007: iTV. Oh yeah, and the retirement annoucement by SJ: iGiveup.
takao
Sep 8, 12:13 PM
oh no please not a US version of Xavier Naidoo, a german ultra-whiny-sounding guy rapping about god etc. deserving to be made a head shorter... seriously ... he sounds so whiny you want to kill him just to make him stop
that aside everybody knows that Jesus is ***** Metal ;) (http://www.thinkgeek.com/pennyarcade/swag/6fc1/)
that aside everybody knows that Jesus is ***** Metal ;) (http://www.thinkgeek.com/pennyarcade/swag/6fc1/)
0 comments:
Post a Comment