emulator
May 4, 12:02 PM
I want that voice-over guy to read me bedtime stories.
And in the morning, you would buy everything you come across. ;)
And in the morning, you would buy everything you come across. ;)
AidenShaw
Nov 19, 05:49 AM
Let me clear something up, IA32e is what a 64 bit intel chip uses to run 32-bit operating systems and applications. You probably meant EM64T which is what gives the chip the capability to read 64-bit instructions.
The name is now "Intel� 64 Architecture".
http://www.intel.com/technology/intel64/index.htm
Intel� 64 Architecture
Intel� 64 architecture (formerly known as Intel� Extended Memory 64 Technology, or Intel� EM64T) enables 64-bit computing on server, workstation, desktop and mobile platforms when combined with supporting software.� Intel 64 architecture improves performance by allowing systems to address more than 4 gigabytes (GB) of both virtual and physical memory. Today, all Intel� processors for server and workstation platforms support 64-bit computing. And with the introduction of Intel� Core�2 Duo processors in the second half of most Intel desktop and mobile processors are also 64-bit capable. Intel 64 provides support for:
Example+cv+for+students
Curriculum vitae Sample
more...
simple curriculum vitae
Accounting (CPA) resume sample
more...
curriculum vitae sample
curriculum vitae sample for
more...
student resume examples
Heresample cv samples
more...
curriculum vitae samples.
curriculum vitae samples
more...
sample Cv+formats+samples
Poor CV example 1 : The
more...
Here#39;s a functional resume
free curriculum vitae samples.
more...
sample curriculum vitae
cv examples, resume offers
student curriculum vitae
The name is now "Intel� 64 Architecture".
http://www.intel.com/technology/intel64/index.htm
Intel� 64 Architecture
Intel� 64 architecture (formerly known as Intel� Extended Memory 64 Technology, or Intel� EM64T) enables 64-bit computing on server, workstation, desktop and mobile platforms when combined with supporting software.� Intel 64 architecture improves performance by allowing systems to address more than 4 gigabytes (GB) of both virtual and physical memory. Today, all Intel� processors for server and workstation platforms support 64-bit computing. And with the introduction of Intel� Core�2 Duo processors in the second half of most Intel desktop and mobile processors are also 64-bit capable. Intel 64 provides support for:
gonnabuyamacbsh
May 4, 01:13 AM
Love it. iPad really is revolutionary. It's replaced the laptop for so many people I know
Zwhaler
Apr 15, 09:55 PM
Agreed.
http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=222299&d=1271355038
Owned that's all I have to say...
http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=222299&d=1271355038
Owned that's all I have to say...
more...
KnightWRX
Apr 8, 01:55 PM
We are all to blame here for jumping.
Who's this we ? My first post in that other thread was questionning the source of the rumor and asking why everyone was taking it as fact without any proof. :D
Use "I" if you must, don't include all of us in your over-reaction.
Who's this we ? My first post in that other thread was questionning the source of the rumor and asking why everyone was taking it as fact without any proof. :D
Use "I" if you must, don't include all of us in your over-reaction.
tvachon
Jan 9, 02:38 PM
sorry about the spoiler in the ticker guys
I'm sitting here trying to do updates... that one was a mistake on my part.
Really sorry. I removed it. we'll still post the link when it comes.
arn
Thanks Arn, the people who did see it gave warning to us all.
I'm sitting here trying to do updates... that one was a mistake on my part.
Really sorry. I removed it. we'll still post the link when it comes.
arn
Thanks Arn, the people who did see it gave warning to us all.
more...
obeygiant
Apr 25, 05:18 PM
Is anyone mad as the two *******s who actually beat this person up? I am. They should be charged with aggravated assault.
Warbrain
Dec 13, 10:53 AM
Haha, nope.
This is the company that released an EDGE phone as it's first model. No way they're jumping to LTE this early in the game.
This is the company that released an EDGE phone as it's first model. No way they're jumping to LTE this early in the game.
more...
Viking Quest
Aug 9, 12:23 PM
Hey guys quick question:
Is it possible to plug an Xbox 360 into one of the Apple displays? I'm looking into getting the 20inch at the new reduced price.
Thanks for your help!
Is it possible to plug an Xbox 360 into one of the Apple displays? I'm looking into getting the 20inch at the new reduced price.
Thanks for your help!
Monkey194545
Dec 13, 10:31 AM
This is utter ********. The experience is key, and LTE hardware is nowhere near advanced enough to guarantee the experience that Apple would demand for a device the stature of the iPhone.
Remember: we're talking about the company that withheld phone wallpapers on the Original and 3G iPhones because the experience would have been several milliseconds too slow.
Fact: Verizon is not expecting LTE-capable hardware until mid-2011. There's no way Apple magically has an LTE phone ready to go while everyone else won't have one for 6 months.
Fact: Apple declined to integrate 3G into the iPhone when 3G was already available, because the hardware wasn't power-efficent enough. One of the main distinguishing features of the iPhone is its battery life. They're not going to tarnish that image by hacking first-generation, power-hogging LTE hardware into the phone, in ADDITION to CDMA, which is another radio tech they're only now deploying.
These sources are full of ****. QED.
On your first point: It is also the company that came out with the iphone 4 and its antenna problems.
Your second point: Don't you think Verizon would take the oppurtunity to give apple what they really want over the Android phones: The first 4g phone on Verizon network. That would be a huge advantage. Just because the network isnt fully up yet doesn't mean Verizon couldn't have given apple the tech to make a 4g iphone. Verizon see android phone sales dropping and know that an iphone would boost sales by a huge amount.
Your third point: It would only be one chip, read the article for reference. How do you know how much battery it uses? It may be only a small amount more than 3g. Att's 3g sucked when the 3g iphone came out. It still sucks. Don't underestimate apple and verizon. You may be surprised!
Edit: By no means am a I acknowledging the merit or lack there of of this article
Remember: we're talking about the company that withheld phone wallpapers on the Original and 3G iPhones because the experience would have been several milliseconds too slow.
Fact: Verizon is not expecting LTE-capable hardware until mid-2011. There's no way Apple magically has an LTE phone ready to go while everyone else won't have one for 6 months.
Fact: Apple declined to integrate 3G into the iPhone when 3G was already available, because the hardware wasn't power-efficent enough. One of the main distinguishing features of the iPhone is its battery life. They're not going to tarnish that image by hacking first-generation, power-hogging LTE hardware into the phone, in ADDITION to CDMA, which is another radio tech they're only now deploying.
These sources are full of ****. QED.
On your first point: It is also the company that came out with the iphone 4 and its antenna problems.
Your second point: Don't you think Verizon would take the oppurtunity to give apple what they really want over the Android phones: The first 4g phone on Verizon network. That would be a huge advantage. Just because the network isnt fully up yet doesn't mean Verizon couldn't have given apple the tech to make a 4g iphone. Verizon see android phone sales dropping and know that an iphone would boost sales by a huge amount.
Your third point: It would only be one chip, read the article for reference. How do you know how much battery it uses? It may be only a small amount more than 3g. Att's 3g sucked when the 3g iphone came out. It still sucks. Don't underestimate apple and verizon. You may be surprised!
Edit: By no means am a I acknowledging the merit or lack there of of this article
more...
Lunettes
Jan 10, 10:29 PM
Hope they don't shut down Steve's screen at the keynote...
hynke
May 4, 05:52 AM
Sign! With this an iPad would be interesting for me for drawing. A stylus beats fingers for drawing, the Egypts knew that 5000 years ago, but seems like Steve doesn't.
Except that there allready are lots of people that use iPad for drawing like the guy in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufYOWA8HdFM
Except that there allready are lots of people that use iPad for drawing like the guy in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufYOWA8HdFM
more...
Al Coholic
Apr 29, 07:26 PM
It's really hard to screw up a simple UI "Button" but leave it to Apple to constantly assume their user base is stupid and can't manage a simple "click". Give us the ability to change themes if you want to the UI to look differently.
We promise not to kill ourselves.
We promise not to kill ourselves.
tny
Nov 16, 04:30 PM
uk store down too.. my moneys on maintenence
Nope. Wouldn't put the store down at 5:30 pm on a Thursday (EST) for maintenance. My money is on either a major failure (unlikely) or a PRODUCT(RED) MacBook.
EDIT:
Or, come to think of it, Quad Core Mac Pros.
Nope. Wouldn't put the store down at 5:30 pm on a Thursday (EST) for maintenance. My money is on either a major failure (unlikely) or a PRODUCT(RED) MacBook.
EDIT:
Or, come to think of it, Quad Core Mac Pros.
more...
backsidetailsli
Jan 9, 06:44 PM
im still not getting it!
rhett7660
Apr 22, 10:15 AM
Boy I can't wait to see this used on some of the posts by certain members. This is going to be down right comical. Nothing like seeing a -54 on a post. :D
more...
MaxRady
Jan 15, 05:49 PM
Everyone seems to be complaining that they didnt get what they wanted from Apple and pointing out a lot of negatives, but the positives: new iPhone apps, Apple TV price drop, new MBA, iTunes Movie Rentals, plus more. Lets be honest, new iPhone already, i mean the thing just came out, and if you are really that bored with your iPhone that soon, well then i just dont know what to tell you.
rodpascoe
Sep 27, 03:58 PM
Isn't it obvious :eek:
Not to me? I've been wondering what optimized support means too! I nearly fell off my chair when I saw the Fuji S3 support! Hooray! :p
Not to me? I've been wondering what optimized support means too! I nearly fell off my chair when I saw the Fuji S3 support! Hooray! :p
suneohair
Mar 28, 02:03 PM
http://tallahassee.craigslist.org/search/sss?query=xbox%20360
Can you give me some details about the games? Maybe one title name and the number stolen.
Can you give me some details about the games? Maybe one title name and the number stolen.
Nekbeth
Apr 27, 08:19 PM
I going to do that balamw, I'll show you what I got so far in little while.
Knight , I don't know how you do it. Check my photo log, mine keeps on running.
Knight , I don't know how you do it. Check my photo log, mine keeps on running.
kdarling
Dec 25, 04:41 PM
Yes they do. BUT not when it means a crap ass experience for the customer. Because that just results in returns, complaints etc. LTE right now is only in a handful of major cities and not even perfect coverage there.
Verizon's LTE covers about as many people now, as AT&T's 3G did back when the iPhone 3G came out.
Apple is not just about pro-user experience. They also make decisions based on saving money (no 3G chip at first) and gaining market access (disabling WiFi for China at first).
My understanding is that LTE is a whole new language, totally different from both CDMA and GSM. So phones would be, for a time, dual chips.
Correct.
In the same way there is 4g in the sense of 4th generation which is an improvement over the 3rd generation. and 4g which is 4th generation AND a particular minimum level of speed etc. And so say the naysayers, many folks saying '4g' mean the former and not the latter.
Correct.
Verizon's LTE covers about as many people now, as AT&T's 3G did back when the iPhone 3G came out.
Apple is not just about pro-user experience. They also make decisions based on saving money (no 3G chip at first) and gaining market access (disabling WiFi for China at first).
My understanding is that LTE is a whole new language, totally different from both CDMA and GSM. So phones would be, for a time, dual chips.
Correct.
In the same way there is 4g in the sense of 4th generation which is an improvement over the 3rd generation. and 4g which is 4th generation AND a particular minimum level of speed etc. And so say the naysayers, many folks saying '4g' mean the former and not the latter.
Correct.
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
ulbador
Apr 26, 09:59 AM
The point dejo was trying to make, is that you are missing a VERY basic Objective C (well, any language really) fundamental.
This:
- (void) cancelIt:(NSTimer*)timer
does NOT create an object.
It's simply a map to say "When I call this method, I will pass in an existing timer object". It is still your responsibility to allocate/initialize a timer and then pass that into your method. Simply using the selector as you are doing wouldn't accomplish this.
At some point you would have to do something like:
[self cancelIt:MyExistingAndValidTimerObject];
This:
- (void) cancelIt:(NSTimer*)timer
does NOT create an object.
It's simply a map to say "When I call this method, I will pass in an existing timer object". It is still your responsibility to allocate/initialize a timer and then pass that into your method. Simply using the selector as you are doing wouldn't accomplish this.
At some point you would have to do something like:
[self cancelIt:MyExistingAndValidTimerObject];
Chris in SJ
Jan 9, 05:12 PM
Just wait, it will eventually play
Ummm.. just out of curiousity.. when you say 'eventually' do you mean 1 minute? 5 minutes? 30 minutes? 90 minutes?
I have been waiting here for 15 minutes and it's still not playing..
You'd think they would just not make it available until they could meet demand..
- C
Ummm.. just out of curiousity.. when you say 'eventually' do you mean 1 minute? 5 minutes? 30 minutes? 90 minutes?
I have been waiting here for 15 minutes and it's still not playing..
You'd think they would just not make it available until they could meet demand..
- C