skoker
Jan 9, 04:51 PM
Awesome Running smooth. We're the first in line so its smooth. Keynote coverage and ***removed**** release.
THANK YOU!
You must be either excited or ignorant, spoiler ;)
THANK YOU!
You must be either excited or ignorant, spoiler ;)
ITR 81
Oct 17, 12:18 PM
so it's kind of a mixture here.
1. more capacity -> blu-ray
2. lower price -> hd-dvd
3. porn industry choses the cheapest format -> hd-dvd
the big thing will be the players. blu-ray players had a bad start (frames were dropped, image quality wasn't that good, delays).
it looks like blu-ray will have a hard fight.
HD DVD is barely any cheaper then Blu-Ray right now.
I mean few bucks isn't going to change my mind.
Also the porn industry more then likely went with VHS because of it's 3 hrs capacity then it just being cheaper of the two. Think how much porn could be crammed onto a blu-ray disc!?
1. more capacity -> blu-ray
2. lower price -> hd-dvd
3. porn industry choses the cheapest format -> hd-dvd
the big thing will be the players. blu-ray players had a bad start (frames were dropped, image quality wasn't that good, delays).
it looks like blu-ray will have a hard fight.
HD DVD is barely any cheaper then Blu-Ray right now.
I mean few bucks isn't going to change my mind.
Also the porn industry more then likely went with VHS because of it's 3 hrs capacity then it just being cheaper of the two. Think how much porn could be crammed onto a blu-ray disc!?
ct2k7
Apr 16, 10:26 AM
Yes, if it's A1285. Hard to read...
Just looked up A1289, it's the 8-core Nehalem Mac Pro.
Either way, B.S.
I agree, although I like the design (I like metal things, the 3G and 3GS didn't appeal to me as it was plastic and that looks cheap to me - or maybe I'm a magpie and like shiny things :o)
Just looked up A1289, it's the 8-core Nehalem Mac Pro.
Either way, B.S.
I agree, although I like the design (I like metal things, the 3G and 3GS didn't appeal to me as it was plastic and that looks cheap to me - or maybe I'm a magpie and like shiny things :o)
CoolAccent
Nov 23, 04:35 PM
According to Apple's Canadian website, the Black Friday sale will be there too, not only in the U.S.
bigmc6000
Oct 6, 10:21 AM
Except Verizon does that too!!!!
Wait, you mean that grass on the other side isn't actually greener it's just painted green?!?!?! ;)
Wait, you mean that grass on the other side isn't actually greener it's just painted green?!?!?! ;)
Calidude
Apr 16, 05:00 PM
Is your dictionary still in print, and how would I order one?
Yes, I do believe Merriam Webster is still up and running...
Yes, I do believe Merriam Webster is still up and running...
iAlan
Sep 25, 11:15 AM
held the event on a Monday nowing that Adobe was going to announce a new Beta of Lightroom -- and wanted to either steal their thunder or at least get there bit in
this doesn't mean there will not be any updates to the MBP on Tuesday.
BTW -- how many makers of Windows laptops have versions with the new chips? This is not a smartass comment - just wanting to know
And I think i might go out and get me-self Aperture
this doesn't mean there will not be any updates to the MBP on Tuesday.
BTW -- how many makers of Windows laptops have versions with the new chips? This is not a smartass comment - just wanting to know
And I think i might go out and get me-self Aperture
abhimat.gautam
Apr 29, 02:54 PM
Did distracting iCal go away?
iMikeT
Sep 12, 04:05 AM
All I can say is that five weeks from now we will see iTunes 8.0 along with a "true" iPod Video.
Aniej
Jan 9, 04:37 PM
I posted a story to digg (http://www.digg.com/apple/MacRumors_spoils_keynote_for_watchers_on_their_spoiler_free_page) regarding the spoiling issue. I think Arn was extremely responsive to the issue and avoiding these kinds of inadvertent spoiling is difficult to do in this day and age. My brother even txted me a spoiler. Is it possible to be completely unspoiled regarding something like this?
There is no spoiling information so far in the story, but I imagine most of us are avoiding digg like the plague.
I mean that's great, but a bit of foresight would be better. I don't understand why a simple, non-postable page or thread could not be dedicated to just one simple link. That's the irritating point. Couple that with the people who posted spoilers on a thread dedicated to not spoiling the event for those of us who brought up the idea and were interested in it and it just kind of sucks to have people who have no concern for anyone else or the reasoning to stop for a second and ask should I really post what I am about to.
There is no spoiling information so far in the story, but I imagine most of us are avoiding digg like the plague.
I mean that's great, but a bit of foresight would be better. I don't understand why a simple, non-postable page or thread could not be dedicated to just one simple link. That's the irritating point. Couple that with the people who posted spoilers on a thread dedicated to not spoiling the event for those of us who brought up the idea and were interested in it and it just kind of sucks to have people who have no concern for anyone else or the reasoning to stop for a second and ask should I really post what I am about to.
nycartst
Jan 15, 01:30 PM
What about an update to the Mac Book Pro that was supposed to happen? There was a lot of talk about upgrading the chipset and nothing ... lame. And we have to pay MORE for the iPhone update?! Like we did not pay enough for the phone itself. Real sad Steve ... real sad. :mad:
Thanatoast
Apr 20, 03:56 PM
Patting down children is ridiculous. Anyone who's angry enough to blow up their own child on an airplane isn't going to be deterred by what we all sarcastically refer to as TSA "security".
How about we stop giving people reasons for blowing up planes? That would be easier and cheaper, but would also require an unwanted soul-searching moment for our entire society.
How about we stop giving people reasons for blowing up planes? That would be easier and cheaper, but would also require an unwanted soul-searching moment for our entire society.
Yannick
Oct 17, 09:54 AM
I do , I have 140Gb of Photos from my DSLR (and previous digital cameras) putting this on 3 discs rather than 40 discs would be great
I also have 28Gb of music, backing up form itunes to 1 disc rather than 8 would also be useful
External drives are very easy to break beyond repair with osx (3 different NEW external drives, 3 different disc manufacturers discs, and the longest they lasted without dying so badly they needed an RMA was 72 hours) and discs take up less space, and you have the possibility of having 3-4 copies.
+1
it was the same with DVD instead of CD
I also have 28Gb of music, backing up form itunes to 1 disc rather than 8 would also be useful
External drives are very easy to break beyond repair with osx (3 different NEW external drives, 3 different disc manufacturers discs, and the longest they lasted without dying so badly they needed an RMA was 72 hours) and discs take up less space, and you have the possibility of having 3-4 copies.
+1
it was the same with DVD instead of CD
Hallivand
Apr 6, 04:49 AM
So an app advertises an app for advertising more apps.
Nice one Apple.
Nice one Apple.
blahblah100
Mar 28, 02:46 PM
When was the last time a standards setting, headline grabbing, everyone's gotta have it Mac application created?
1987 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperCard
:D
1987 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperCard
:D
jackc
Jan 14, 08:56 PM
Now, Gizmodo just posted another editorial. They are not just refusing to apologize, they are actually proud. Supposedly this is a an act of civil disobedience, a sign of their independence. Not only are they being immature jerks, but exhibit this self righteous attitude. It is just a prank, (actually it is not even a creative one) so it is not that big of a deal, but their new editorial makes them seem even more immature. I wonder if somebody is going to play pranks on them to show some independence of his own.
Linky (http://gizmodo.com/344447/giz-banned-for-life-and-loving-it-on-pranks-and-civil-disobedience-at-ces)
They should be writing political speeches, I had a tear rolling down my cheek thinking about how they're standing up to corporations
Linky (http://gizmodo.com/344447/giz-banned-for-life-and-loving-it-on-pranks-and-civil-disobedience-at-ces)
They should be writing political speeches, I had a tear rolling down my cheek thinking about how they're standing up to corporations
Prom1
Mar 24, 09:42 PM
I was there at the beginning - in & out 3 times.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko4V3G4NqII
OS X you've been the Apple of my eye since the beginning!
:apple:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko4V3G4NqII
OS X you've been the Apple of my eye since the beginning!
:apple:
wlh99
Apr 26, 08:59 PM
After that I implement a Cancel method pointing to sender (button)
So, my goal is to use 1 start button and 1 cancel button.. and just do their actions. I have set up a the start button to start both timers, obviously both start their countdown at the same time which is not good.
I want to tell one timer to start and if I press cancel, invalidate it. Then If I press start again, call the second timer. (I do this because I read that you can't reuse a timer after you invalidate it).
Some people have suggested to use Booleans like true or false, or conditions. What do you think?
What if after pressing the start button, you create a timer and start it. Then pressing the cancel button invalidates and releases it. Then pressing the start button would create another timer, using the same pointer.
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
So, my goal is to use 1 start button and 1 cancel button.. and just do their actions. I have set up a the start button to start both timers, obviously both start their countdown at the same time which is not good.
I want to tell one timer to start and if I press cancel, invalidate it. Then If I press start again, call the second timer. (I do this because I read that you can't reuse a timer after you invalidate it).
Some people have suggested to use Booleans like true or false, or conditions. What do you think?
What if after pressing the start button, you create a timer and start it. Then pressing the cancel button invalidates and releases it. Then pressing the start button would create another timer, using the same pointer.
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
sunfast
Sep 12, 07:23 AM
HERE WE GO!
Very excited
Very excited
wlh99
Apr 26, 08:59 PM
After that I implement a Cancel method pointing to sender (button)
So, my goal is to use 1 start button and 1 cancel button.. and just do their actions. I have set up a the start button to start both timers, obviously both start their countdown at the same time which is not good.
I want to tell one timer to start and if I press cancel, invalidate it. Then If I press start again, call the second timer. (I do this because I read that you can't reuse a timer after you invalidate it).
Some people have suggested to use Booleans like true or false, or conditions. What do you think?
What if after pressing the start button, you create a timer and start it. Then pressing the cancel button invalidates and releases it. Then pressing the start button would create another timer, using the same pointer.
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
So, my goal is to use 1 start button and 1 cancel button.. and just do their actions. I have set up a the start button to start both timers, obviously both start their countdown at the same time which is not good.
I want to tell one timer to start and if I press cancel, invalidate it. Then If I press start again, call the second timer. (I do this because I read that you can't reuse a timer after you invalidate it).
Some people have suggested to use Booleans like true or false, or conditions. What do you think?
What if after pressing the start button, you create a timer and start it. Then pressing the cancel button invalidates and releases it. Then pressing the start button would create another timer, using the same pointer.
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
skunk
Apr 21, 12:22 PM
It's only because the page is changing so quickly and the vote count you see may not be accurate at the time you place your vote but your vote is included and the vote count refreshed after you make a vote.Not the case, as I can reverse it at will.
SandboxGeneral
Apr 2, 12:03 PM
There is no beta of Windows 8 yet so it is hard to say. MS can add million new features to make it sound good on paper and then fail it like they did with Vista. In the end, the most important thing is stability. Windows 7 is great and I really hope W8 will take it even further.
I agree. Stability is very important and it is what makes or breaks an OS. I hope Microsoft does really well in their next OS. Win7 is a winner in my book as I use and manage it at the office while OS X is the winner in my home. As long as MS & :apple: have decent OS's to compete against each other, the hopeful winners will be the users in that we get quality software to run.
I agree. Stability is very important and it is what makes or breaks an OS. I hope Microsoft does really well in their next OS. Win7 is a winner in my book as I use and manage it at the office while OS X is the winner in my home. As long as MS & :apple: have decent OS's to compete against each other, the hopeful winners will be the users in that we get quality software to run.
Applejuiced
Apr 27, 12:46 PM
same with me. On IE7 running Vista
Edit: Now works! :)
Works now for me too.
Win7 with IE9.
Had to log out of the forum, delete all cookies and restart the computer.
Then I logged back in and the arrows work without bringing me to the main forum section any more:)
Edit:
It was working fine for 15-20 and now started doing it again. I didnt log out or even closed the IE page I had open.
I dont know whats up, seems like its still buggy....
Edit: Now works! :)
Works now for me too.
Win7 with IE9.
Had to log out of the forum, delete all cookies and restart the computer.
Then I logged back in and the arrows work without bringing me to the main forum section any more:)
Edit:
It was working fine for 15-20 and now started doing it again. I didnt log out or even closed the IE page I had open.
I dont know whats up, seems like its still buggy....
gwangung
Jan 12, 05:57 PM
I still don't get the blogger pulls a prank equating to all bloggers everywhere being punished by conference organizers. Seriously, it sounds all Zod evil where they threaten to kill some random guy if Superman doesn't bow down to them.
Seriously, you DON'T????
I can certainly see that. I'd be doing that if I were running a conference.
Seriously, you DON'T????
I can certainly see that. I'd be doing that if I were running a conference.
No comments:
Post a Comment