DJRVDIO
Apr 29, 10:47 AM
Ah.... I cry foul. Not real at all.
I did not cry foul. I did not photoshop this picture. How would i even go about doing that. There was no keyboard or mouse. and you can obviously see that the virtual keyword is present on the screen in the picture. :apple:
I did not cry foul. I did not photoshop this picture. How would i even go about doing that. There was no keyboard or mouse. and you can obviously see that the virtual keyword is present on the screen in the picture. :apple:
mrcrlee
Mar 29, 08:58 AM
Well Google I/O conference sold out in 59 Minutes! (https://twitter.com/vicgundotra/status/34680121109516288#) :eek:
The difference being:
1. 1/3 the price at $450.
2. Google gives all attendees an Android phone.
3. A scalper bought a huge portion of the tickets to resell. Apple does not let you transfer tickets. You must check-in at the registration desk with government issued ID (4th year attending).
The difference being:
1. 1/3 the price at $450.
2. Google gives all attendees an Android phone.
3. A scalper bought a huge portion of the tickets to resell. Apple does not let you transfer tickets. You must check-in at the registration desk with government issued ID (4th year attending).
Stridder44
Aug 16, 12:25 AM
i'm liking the new mail features :D
i happen to like the ovalness and coloring :P
Exactly, it just seems like that's where the new UI is going to go. Mail made the change, now Preview?? A random app like preview gets that same change? Im thinking it might be a sign of things to come..
i happen to like the ovalness and coloring :P
Exactly, it just seems like that's where the new UI is going to go. Mail made the change, now Preview?? A random app like preview gets that same change? Im thinking it might be a sign of things to come..
coder12
Apr 22, 12:17 AM
Play the Sue Me, Sue You Blues (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2JIexhpMNs).
LOL, If you don't want an iPhone... don't buy it type of song :)
Sounds to me like the real insecure one here is maclaptop, if thats the mindset you have going on concerning phones and image.
My Mac Laptop is secure, Lion told me so ;)
LOL, If you don't want an iPhone... don't buy it type of song :)
Sounds to me like the real insecure one here is maclaptop, if thats the mindset you have going on concerning phones and image.
My Mac Laptop is secure, Lion told me so ;)
more...
AidenShaw
Apr 29, 11:17 PM
I bought some Christmas music that was tagged as miscellaneous not Christmas... That is annoying.
Agree - christmas music is quite annoying.
And the selection of Saturnalia music is quite thin.
Agree - christmas music is quite annoying.
And the selection of Saturnalia music is quite thin.
myamid
Nov 4, 08:10 AM
If it's taking you two minutes to resume a session and two minutes plus to suspend it, on that machine you mentioned the specs of, something is frickin' wrong with that machine.
2.16 Core 2 Duo 20" iMac here, 2GB, stock 250GB drive, Parallels does the following:
- it cold starts in 4 seconds
- it boots my XP VM (512MB of RAM/8GB virtual hard disk) to the Desktop in 9
- it suspended that same XP VM in 14
- it restored that same XP VM in 11
And that's with Crossover for Mac running several Windows apps in the background too, so some of my resources are already drained when I fired up Parallels and the VM. Memory usage at the moment for the entire machine is sitting at 1154MB of 2048MB, 69 tasks, 330 threads as measured by MenuMeters.
So, give that box a tuneup or whatever, because you're certainly not getting the performance from Parallels that you should be getting. Also, check your VT-x flags under Parallels to make sure it's functioning properly.
btw, this is Parallels build 1970, the latest and greatest, and I've had nothing but positive usage of Parallels since I bought it off the shelf in an Apple Store along with this iMac a month ago. 3 upgrades so far, no issues at all.
bb
I get similar performance on my slighly slower iMac.... And my VM images are on a less than ideal external FW drive!!! I'll second the opinion that if your system is significatly slower than this with Parallels, there's something VERY wrong with your Mac...
2.16 Core 2 Duo 20" iMac here, 2GB, stock 250GB drive, Parallels does the following:
- it cold starts in 4 seconds
- it boots my XP VM (512MB of RAM/8GB virtual hard disk) to the Desktop in 9
- it suspended that same XP VM in 14
- it restored that same XP VM in 11
And that's with Crossover for Mac running several Windows apps in the background too, so some of my resources are already drained when I fired up Parallels and the VM. Memory usage at the moment for the entire machine is sitting at 1154MB of 2048MB, 69 tasks, 330 threads as measured by MenuMeters.
So, give that box a tuneup or whatever, because you're certainly not getting the performance from Parallels that you should be getting. Also, check your VT-x flags under Parallels to make sure it's functioning properly.
btw, this is Parallels build 1970, the latest and greatest, and I've had nothing but positive usage of Parallels since I bought it off the shelf in an Apple Store along with this iMac a month ago. 3 upgrades so far, no issues at all.
bb
I get similar performance on my slighly slower iMac.... And my VM images are on a less than ideal external FW drive!!! I'll second the opinion that if your system is significatly slower than this with Parallels, there's something VERY wrong with your Mac...
more...
rolfbert
Apr 22, 07:12 AM
Germany is a painful place to defend a patent suit.
because the law system actually makes sense?
because the law system actually makes sense?
RWinOR
May 3, 07:59 AM
Looks like an IMac upgrade in our future.
more...
shartypants
Apr 13, 07:43 PM
I wonder how many people will side-grade to the white one. Not sure how many new sales this will spur.
dXTC
Jan 12, 10:25 AM
...
Oh and I do have a hard time believing that she ate as much as that article claims, at least in one sitting. Her stomach would surely burst! :eek:
It's easy in terms of the physics behind it. Consume less than you burn, you lose weight. However, there's something psychological behind the urge to eat. In some cases it would be like telling an alcoholic that it's easy, just stop drinking. There are also some studies and theories which have pointed out that some people don't get the necessary signals to indicate that they are full. So it's simple but it's not. (if you know what I mean.)
Have you ever seen a "professional eating" contest? The human digestive system can do rather amazing things, especially if it's been conditioned over a period of years, which is definitely true in this woman's case. The "sitting" may be 2 to 3 hours, with a bathroom break so that she can make room in her colon for the "next wave", but yeah, it's possible, especially with light yet calorie-dense foods like snack cakes, and high-calorie drinks like Kool-Aid to wash it down/through.
Psychological factors? You betcha. Donna's admitted to being a feedee, and in the vast majority of feeder/feedee relationships, there's a codependence factor.
Oh and I do have a hard time believing that she ate as much as that article claims, at least in one sitting. Her stomach would surely burst! :eek:
It's easy in terms of the physics behind it. Consume less than you burn, you lose weight. However, there's something psychological behind the urge to eat. In some cases it would be like telling an alcoholic that it's easy, just stop drinking. There are also some studies and theories which have pointed out that some people don't get the necessary signals to indicate that they are full. So it's simple but it's not. (if you know what I mean.)
Have you ever seen a "professional eating" contest? The human digestive system can do rather amazing things, especially if it's been conditioned over a period of years, which is definitely true in this woman's case. The "sitting" may be 2 to 3 hours, with a bathroom break so that she can make room in her colon for the "next wave", but yeah, it's possible, especially with light yet calorie-dense foods like snack cakes, and high-calorie drinks like Kool-Aid to wash it down/through.
Psychological factors? You betcha. Donna's admitted to being a feedee, and in the vast majority of feeder/feedee relationships, there's a codependence factor.
more...
ten-oak-druid
Apr 28, 04:59 PM
Give it up already. This is not true. The only image you could trust is the one looking straight on for both phones and they look the same in that one. All the rest use perception to make one look thicker.
And the case issue? LMAO!
1. Apple would tell case manufacturers if this were a problem so that they could prepare.
2. The difference in thickness would be minimal (10%?? No way). So only a few cases would be affected so owners of white iphones would have to selected from a smaller variety of options. If this were a true story that is.
The only people who could possibly get upset would be owners of black iphone 4's who bought a white iphone 4's and want to use the same case. But how many people actually bought an iphone 4 less than 6 months ago and are now buying the same phone again just for the color?
And the case issue? LMAO!
1. Apple would tell case manufacturers if this were a problem so that they could prepare.
2. The difference in thickness would be minimal (10%?? No way). So only a few cases would be affected so owners of white iphones would have to selected from a smaller variety of options. If this were a true story that is.
The only people who could possibly get upset would be owners of black iphone 4's who bought a white iphone 4's and want to use the same case. But how many people actually bought an iphone 4 less than 6 months ago and are now buying the same phone again just for the color?
Plutonius
Apr 21, 04:27 PM
Not exactly... -aggie- and I have a history in this forum... so... when we do disagree its usually because its him or me on a mood. Mostly him, since he is old...:D:D:D:eek::D
pfft....
Aggie is a youngin.
pfft....
Aggie is a youngin.
more...
br0adband
Nov 7, 04:04 AM
To be honest, I've had more application crashes and restarts on OSX than I have under XP/Windows in the past 3 years. So much for "crash resistant" - and yes, I've had 4 kernel panics since I got this iMac home; that's more than the number of BSODs I've had under XP in 4 years.
Which means -- as everyone is saying -- that there is something wrong with your computer. I have a MacBook, two Intel iMacs, and a Mac Pro in my house, and they do not crash despite heavy daily use. My poor Mac Pro is running three different operating systems right now using Parallels, with nary a complaint. If you are getting unexplained kernel panics on a clean install of Mac OS X, then you have a hardware problem.
Hardware problems can affect any OS -- I've seen Windows systems that get daily BSODs. It's not because "Windows sucks", it's because there was a sub-par memory chip or somesuch in the system. Likewise Mac OS X crashes, when nobody else is experiencing a problem, are not an indication of the stability of the OS but rather of your hardware.
You're quoting me back to me when all of us (including me) were talking about that other guy that is having hardware problems because his Parallels "sucks." Parallels kicks ass on my C2D 20" iMac - hence the reason I piped up to be the first to say something is wrong with the other guy's machine if he can't get it working right.
On mine, which is stock hardware except for the 2GB of RAM I have in it, Parallels starts up in 4 seconds, boots my XP VM in 9-10, shuts down in 3-4, restarts the same VM in under 5 seconds (have yet to figure that one out, probably because of caching someplace; I don't even see the XP splash screen when it reboots/restarts because it's so fast), suspends in 22-25 seconds, resumes in 30-34, and I have no issues with any hardware at all in my XP VM. I even burn CDs and DVDs from the XP VM over FireWire/USB without hassles (Plextor FireWire/USB external).
So, on a similarly configured piece of hardware, if he's having suspend/resume times that seem to be 4-6x longer than others then, as you said, there is something wrong with the hardware. If none of the rest of us are having said issues, your line of logic would follow and apply to his machine since he's the only one reporting such ridiculously long suspend/resume times among other things.
Parallels works for me. Since I can't post specific benchmark data for Parallels and that other new-on-the-scene virtualization software for Macs <hint, hint> I'll just say this:
I completed the testing I said I was going to do, and Parallels simply lays the smackdown across that other software. And yes I'm well aware that other software is in beta - or pre-beta late alpha as one person put it - and that's fine. But I paid for Parallels, and to use that most famous line about Macs:
It just works.
Oh yeah, it beats that other software even with multi-core CPU support enabled. Go figure.
bb
Parallels sucks but until now its been the only REAL game in town.
Ah... the clarion call of lamers. Might as well bash Windows since it's so pervasive while you're at it. And it's still no excuse for stealing the software and breaking the faith. Bleh...
Which means -- as everyone is saying -- that there is something wrong with your computer. I have a MacBook, two Intel iMacs, and a Mac Pro in my house, and they do not crash despite heavy daily use. My poor Mac Pro is running three different operating systems right now using Parallels, with nary a complaint. If you are getting unexplained kernel panics on a clean install of Mac OS X, then you have a hardware problem.
Hardware problems can affect any OS -- I've seen Windows systems that get daily BSODs. It's not because "Windows sucks", it's because there was a sub-par memory chip or somesuch in the system. Likewise Mac OS X crashes, when nobody else is experiencing a problem, are not an indication of the stability of the OS but rather of your hardware.
You're quoting me back to me when all of us (including me) were talking about that other guy that is having hardware problems because his Parallels "sucks." Parallels kicks ass on my C2D 20" iMac - hence the reason I piped up to be the first to say something is wrong with the other guy's machine if he can't get it working right.
On mine, which is stock hardware except for the 2GB of RAM I have in it, Parallels starts up in 4 seconds, boots my XP VM in 9-10, shuts down in 3-4, restarts the same VM in under 5 seconds (have yet to figure that one out, probably because of caching someplace; I don't even see the XP splash screen when it reboots/restarts because it's so fast), suspends in 22-25 seconds, resumes in 30-34, and I have no issues with any hardware at all in my XP VM. I even burn CDs and DVDs from the XP VM over FireWire/USB without hassles (Plextor FireWire/USB external).
So, on a similarly configured piece of hardware, if he's having suspend/resume times that seem to be 4-6x longer than others then, as you said, there is something wrong with the hardware. If none of the rest of us are having said issues, your line of logic would follow and apply to his machine since he's the only one reporting such ridiculously long suspend/resume times among other things.
Parallels works for me. Since I can't post specific benchmark data for Parallels and that other new-on-the-scene virtualization software for Macs <hint, hint> I'll just say this:
I completed the testing I said I was going to do, and Parallels simply lays the smackdown across that other software. And yes I'm well aware that other software is in beta - or pre-beta late alpha as one person put it - and that's fine. But I paid for Parallels, and to use that most famous line about Macs:
It just works.
Oh yeah, it beats that other software even with multi-core CPU support enabled. Go figure.
bb
Parallels sucks but until now its been the only REAL game in town.
Ah... the clarion call of lamers. Might as well bash Windows since it's so pervasive while you're at it. And it's still no excuse for stealing the software and breaking the faith. Bleh...
DeeEss
Mar 31, 12:12 PM
Is this someone's idea of a sick f'n joke?
Contrived, tacky and hideous
Contrived, tacky and hideous
more...
Adidas Addict
Apr 15, 03:02 AM
They are already out in the wild. How do I know? Read below :)
I was in a restaurant in the bay area earlier this week when a lady walked in to pick up her takeout. She was yakking on a white iPhone. I got a nice look at it from about 3-4 feet away. It wasn't a black iPhone with a white cover, it was clearly a white iPhone with no cover. Saw the silver Apple logo and the engravings very clearly. It did strike me as odd, but I haven't been tracking all-things-apple closely, so didn't know if the white iPhone was in the market or not.
And yes, it could be that the lady had paid mega bucks to get a custom white skin, but that honestly seems more far fetched.
You realise that it's been possible to buy the conversion kits to make your iPhone 4 white for over 6 months right?
http://shop.ebay.co.uk/i.html?_nkw=iphone+4+white+conversion&_frs=1&_trksid=p3286.c0.m359
I was in a restaurant in the bay area earlier this week when a lady walked in to pick up her takeout. She was yakking on a white iPhone. I got a nice look at it from about 3-4 feet away. It wasn't a black iPhone with a white cover, it was clearly a white iPhone with no cover. Saw the silver Apple logo and the engravings very clearly. It did strike me as odd, but I haven't been tracking all-things-apple closely, so didn't know if the white iPhone was in the market or not.
And yes, it could be that the lady had paid mega bucks to get a custom white skin, but that honestly seems more far fetched.
You realise that it's been possible to buy the conversion kits to make your iPhone 4 white for over 6 months right?
http://shop.ebay.co.uk/i.html?_nkw=iphone+4+white+conversion&_frs=1&_trksid=p3286.c0.m359
skunk
Apr 24, 07:17 PM
anyone born with a penisHow about someone with a penis and breasts?
more...
CFreymarc
May 4, 12:25 AM
One more time boys and girls.
iPhone 4G release on keynote of WWDC this summer.
iPhone 4G release on keynote of WWDC this summer.
louiek
Apr 28, 04:05 PM
For the love of god, does no one with a white iPhone own a pair of calipers?
law guy
Jan 30, 08:31 PM
Good time to buy. $$ :D
Amen. It's such an increase from just three years ago when it was around $23 a share. Buying low now takes a lot more money.
Amen. It's such an increase from just three years ago when it was around $23 a share. Buying low now takes a lot more money.
kainjow
Nov 3, 09:49 AM
Some more info here:
http://www.tuaw.com/2006/11/03/vmwares-fusion-begins-private-beta/
http://www.tuaw.com/2006/11/03/vmwares-fusion-begins-private-beta/
LemonsofDeath
Apr 22, 01:18 AM
Corporations are evil.
Apple is evil, so is samsung. Why anyone would have an emotional yearning for one company above another is beyond me, both companies would gladly take all your money for nothing if you let them.
Let them duke is out, neither is right.
Apple is evil, so is samsung. Why anyone would have an emotional yearning for one company above another is beyond me, both companies would gladly take all your money for nothing if you let them.
Let them duke is out, neither is right.
Popeye206
Apr 28, 10:30 AM
It is interesting to see the 3Gs doing so well. Too bad Apple doesn't make a "light version" of iOS for it so it's snappier again. It was a good phone and for many consumers at $49 or maybe even free someday a great entry level smart phone.
mtkagan
Mar 11, 08:10 AM
Heads up to anyone planning to go to south coast, mall security isn't allowing anyone to line up before the store opens .
SciFrog
Oct 28, 02:04 PM
Congrats whiterabbit on your first bigadv unit. Team outlook looks better, yet we are not out of the woods yet.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий