Chundles
Sep 14, 10:27 AM
No offense taken-did not think you harsh. As I was typing it I thought " Oh boy, I'm sure this is one of those constant quaetsions" - should I be doing this.
Was afraid Cundles might have gone ballistic. Especially after Tuesdays constant postings of some very old news:)
Sorry if I ripped on you back then mate. I was going through some nasty withdrawal after falling off the wagon of my codeine addiction and it made me really irritable for a while.
Back to my normal cheerful self now until the pain flares up and I have to jump off the wagon again.
Sorry once again. Hope my explanation made some sense.
Was afraid Cundles might have gone ballistic. Especially after Tuesdays constant postings of some very old news:)
Sorry if I ripped on you back then mate. I was going through some nasty withdrawal after falling off the wagon of my codeine addiction and it made me really irritable for a while.
Back to my normal cheerful self now until the pain flares up and I have to jump off the wagon again.
Sorry once again. Hope my explanation made some sense.
Jason Beck
Mar 6, 04:42 AM
@SVD yah I love the 24-70 and as a first L it has been good to me. Shooting with it is a breeze. At 2,8 it's great and even better stopped down a bit. Especially with flash/studio lights. Camera upgrade is next on the agenda. I can safely say that the 24-70 has been my studio's workhorse the past few months and made me quite a bit of money. If I hadn't built that system in my sig, I would have a 5dmk1 right now but I opeted for a better computer for Adobe and a speedlight with some money I made last month.
Get the 24-70 and you'll love it! The 7d /50,60d's I may also consider as viable upgrade paths. I'd love a 50d.
Get the 24-70 and you'll love it! The 7d /50,60d's I may also consider as viable upgrade paths. I'd love a 50d.
mscriv
Apr 11, 11:57 AM
I object to the notion that good deeds I do are due to vanity, pride etc.
No, sorry, you cannot have that one. "Altruistic" does not coincide with "vanity and self glorification". In my filthy heathen state of unsaved gracelessness, I still do things for which my only reward is a smile. And even when I do have an ulterior motive ("you can return the favor at your leisure, to me or to someone else"), how does that detract from my having done well and good by someone else?
I find this statement utterly appalling. Do those who sacrifice themselves for others do so from selfish motives?
I agree. There is so much wrong with the original statement in addition to your point. I consider "goodness" to get your spot in heaven the ultimate in selfishness. Also, what about gods other than Jesus, are the good things performed in their name just as "selfless"?
Ok, good questions and thoughts. Let me explain/expound upon my statement. The bolded part below seems to be what is drawing the most reaction.
An accurate understanding of original sin does not mean that man is completely "evil" in the sense that we are incapable of doing works that would be considered "good" or altruistic. The human spirit is capable of many good things, but without an accurate understanding of who God is and our relationship to him these good works become nothing but acts of vanity and self glorification that serve only to advance pride and promote self-reliance.
I am not speaking about conscious motivation within an individuals actions/behavior, although that could be true as we all know people do at times act out of selfish and prideful intentions.
I'm talking about a theological understanding of man's state before God. For those that do not believe in a higher power or absolute truth, man, in and of himself, is the highest order of existence/being/evolution, etc. etc.. Thus, any and all accomplishments of man ("good works") are then viewed as self evident truths to this proposition. Man's capacity for altruism, self sacrifice, and compassion are seen as proof of his independence from God. "See what we can accomplish on our own... we don't need God." In this manner all of man's action is an act of self glorification and self reliance.
I'm in a "helping profession" and work daily with people who seek to support and serve others. Many do this out of the "goodness of their own heart" and genuinely do not seek any form of return for their efforts. On a human level these actions are noble and sacrificial and I applaud them. However, on a spiritual level, I must recognize that scripture teaches us that our "good deeds" are worthless if our heart is not right with God.
Please understand, this doesn't mean that the positive results of these actions are meaningless. For example, giving food to the homeless is a sacrificial act that does help people in need, but it will in no way earn you "points" with God. The Bible does not teach a theology of works. It's not about what you do, it's about your relationship with Christ.
Again, as I always say, this is ultimately an issue of faith and I completely understand that it can be hard to comprehend for some. And it is a subtle nuance to understand the difference between doing something because you adhere to a set of principles (right vs. wrong) and doing it because it is an outflow of your relationship with God.
It's like I told someone recently in a conversation we were having. I don't stay true to my wife because being unfaithful to her would be the morally wrong thing to do. I could care less about the moral principle of marital faithfulness. My motivation for staying true to my wife is that I have an intimate loving relationship with her and I would never want to hurt her or damage that relationship in any way.
Which takes us into rougher territory. If works are relatively insignificant in the scheme of salvation, your absolute moral code starts to crumble and fall in on itself. For, why should a believer bother to follow it if the saviour is always near at hand to forgive and redeem?
You may not realize it Sydde, but what you are saying is still along the lines of a works based relationship with God and that is not what the Bible teaches. It's not about a revolving door of "messing up" and and then asking for forgiveness. Christ death paid the price in full for all sin (past, present, and future). What matters is the condition of your heart before him and the intimacy of your relationship with him. Within that context are you seeking your own way including your own selfish desires or are you seeking to be the servant leader he wants you to be. The examples you gave in your post were all of people being selfishly motivated for their own gain.
In light of the examples of history (perhaps including those in the bible itself), how can you say that religion has made anyone a better person than they would have been? To me, it looks like religion has made the world a worse place than it might have been without it.
I'd think you would agree that people like Mother Theresa were able to successfully live out their faith with the goal of bringing glory to God while serving others. She's just the first example that pops into my head, but there are countless others. Again, it's not about "religion" making us "better people", that's a selfish manner of thinking. My relationship with God is not about me, it's about him.
"Many people mistake our work for our vocation. Our vocation is the love of Jesus."
"There is always the danger that we may just do the work for the sake of the work. This is where the respect and the love and the devotion come in - that we do it to God, to Christ, and that's why we try to do it as beautifully as possible."
~ Mother Theresa
Every time I hear about how we are naturally selfish and corrupt, I hear the utterer trying to apologize for their own faults by expanding them upon all others. As a counselor, you should be familiar with the mechanism called "projection".
I'm very familiar with projection. I can assure you that is not what's happening here. I'm merely presenting what God has communicated to us through the Bible. Could it be that your skepticism and cynicism is a projection of something within you? Why don't you come over he and lie on this couch and tell me about your mother... ;)
Yet, again, the absolutes get bent. When believers run up against a moral wall that divides them from their goals, they seek the counsel of a cleric. The cleric typically sympathizes with the believer's plight and very often finds a way to interpret the scripture to turn the question to the believer's favor. So you have your absolutes, but they are also flexible. What good then are they, that they can be molded to suit your needs? How is this better than situational ethics (logic, reason and compromise), other than to employ scholars in the service of the almighty?
Well, first of all, "clerics" are not required for us to interpret scripture or have a relationship with God. When Christ was crucified he tore the temple veil representing that his sacrifice has made the way for man to have a direct relationship with God, no human intermediary is required. As far as prooftexting or manipulating scripture for your own personal motives due to a presenting dilemma, well, I'm sure you already know my answer to this based on my previous comments. Scripture stands alone as authoritative regardless of how I "feel" about it or what I "want" it to say. If I'm seeking to find an "exception" in scripture to justify my own position then my heart is not in the right place.
I have had more than a third of a century (from teenage years) to develop my philosophy and unbeliefs, and you are obviously quite steadfast in yours, so yes, there can be little doubt of the mexican stand-off. Does it trouble you? As hoary and mulish as I may be, I still find merit in these discussions, because they draw things out into the light that I had not bothered to look at. You do teach me things, though they are almost certainly not the things you intend. I hope you in some way also benefit, it would be a shame to think this only leads you to despair.
Fret not my friend. I think there is extreme merit in these discussions and I appreciate the respectful way in which many of us here are able to engage each other on such topics.
As far as me being troubled or in "despair" the answer to your question is both yes and no. I do seek to consistently and genuinely live out my faith and thus I do wish to see other's come into relationship with Christ (you know that whole "go ye therefore" thing in the Bible). However, do I judge others and base my entire relationship with them on evangelistic purposes? No. One of the greatest gifts God has given us is free will, in fact, without free will everything we are talking about falls apart. I respect, just as God has designed it to be, that people have the freedom and the ability to reject him and live their life as they see fit. I love, value, relate to, and learn from others regardless of their spiritual beliefs. It would be foolish of me to limit my relationships with people solely on their spirituality or lack thereof. My goal is to accept people as they are, treat them with dignity and respect, and seek out how I might serve or support them in the context of our relationship.
Besides, if I do happen to get down about it, I know a pretty good therapist. ;)
Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to address the questions/comments that had been made. :)
No, sorry, you cannot have that one. "Altruistic" does not coincide with "vanity and self glorification". In my filthy heathen state of unsaved gracelessness, I still do things for which my only reward is a smile. And even when I do have an ulterior motive ("you can return the favor at your leisure, to me or to someone else"), how does that detract from my having done well and good by someone else?
I find this statement utterly appalling. Do those who sacrifice themselves for others do so from selfish motives?
I agree. There is so much wrong with the original statement in addition to your point. I consider "goodness" to get your spot in heaven the ultimate in selfishness. Also, what about gods other than Jesus, are the good things performed in their name just as "selfless"?
Ok, good questions and thoughts. Let me explain/expound upon my statement. The bolded part below seems to be what is drawing the most reaction.
An accurate understanding of original sin does not mean that man is completely "evil" in the sense that we are incapable of doing works that would be considered "good" or altruistic. The human spirit is capable of many good things, but without an accurate understanding of who God is and our relationship to him these good works become nothing but acts of vanity and self glorification that serve only to advance pride and promote self-reliance.
I am not speaking about conscious motivation within an individuals actions/behavior, although that could be true as we all know people do at times act out of selfish and prideful intentions.
I'm talking about a theological understanding of man's state before God. For those that do not believe in a higher power or absolute truth, man, in and of himself, is the highest order of existence/being/evolution, etc. etc.. Thus, any and all accomplishments of man ("good works") are then viewed as self evident truths to this proposition. Man's capacity for altruism, self sacrifice, and compassion are seen as proof of his independence from God. "See what we can accomplish on our own... we don't need God." In this manner all of man's action is an act of self glorification and self reliance.
I'm in a "helping profession" and work daily with people who seek to support and serve others. Many do this out of the "goodness of their own heart" and genuinely do not seek any form of return for their efforts. On a human level these actions are noble and sacrificial and I applaud them. However, on a spiritual level, I must recognize that scripture teaches us that our "good deeds" are worthless if our heart is not right with God.
Please understand, this doesn't mean that the positive results of these actions are meaningless. For example, giving food to the homeless is a sacrificial act that does help people in need, but it will in no way earn you "points" with God. The Bible does not teach a theology of works. It's not about what you do, it's about your relationship with Christ.
Again, as I always say, this is ultimately an issue of faith and I completely understand that it can be hard to comprehend for some. And it is a subtle nuance to understand the difference between doing something because you adhere to a set of principles (right vs. wrong) and doing it because it is an outflow of your relationship with God.
It's like I told someone recently in a conversation we were having. I don't stay true to my wife because being unfaithful to her would be the morally wrong thing to do. I could care less about the moral principle of marital faithfulness. My motivation for staying true to my wife is that I have an intimate loving relationship with her and I would never want to hurt her or damage that relationship in any way.
Which takes us into rougher territory. If works are relatively insignificant in the scheme of salvation, your absolute moral code starts to crumble and fall in on itself. For, why should a believer bother to follow it if the saviour is always near at hand to forgive and redeem?
You may not realize it Sydde, but what you are saying is still along the lines of a works based relationship with God and that is not what the Bible teaches. It's not about a revolving door of "messing up" and and then asking for forgiveness. Christ death paid the price in full for all sin (past, present, and future). What matters is the condition of your heart before him and the intimacy of your relationship with him. Within that context are you seeking your own way including your own selfish desires or are you seeking to be the servant leader he wants you to be. The examples you gave in your post were all of people being selfishly motivated for their own gain.
In light of the examples of history (perhaps including those in the bible itself), how can you say that religion has made anyone a better person than they would have been? To me, it looks like religion has made the world a worse place than it might have been without it.
I'd think you would agree that people like Mother Theresa were able to successfully live out their faith with the goal of bringing glory to God while serving others. She's just the first example that pops into my head, but there are countless others. Again, it's not about "religion" making us "better people", that's a selfish manner of thinking. My relationship with God is not about me, it's about him.
"Many people mistake our work for our vocation. Our vocation is the love of Jesus."
"There is always the danger that we may just do the work for the sake of the work. This is where the respect and the love and the devotion come in - that we do it to God, to Christ, and that's why we try to do it as beautifully as possible."
~ Mother Theresa
Every time I hear about how we are naturally selfish and corrupt, I hear the utterer trying to apologize for their own faults by expanding them upon all others. As a counselor, you should be familiar with the mechanism called "projection".
I'm very familiar with projection. I can assure you that is not what's happening here. I'm merely presenting what God has communicated to us through the Bible. Could it be that your skepticism and cynicism is a projection of something within you? Why don't you come over he and lie on this couch and tell me about your mother... ;)
Yet, again, the absolutes get bent. When believers run up against a moral wall that divides them from their goals, they seek the counsel of a cleric. The cleric typically sympathizes with the believer's plight and very often finds a way to interpret the scripture to turn the question to the believer's favor. So you have your absolutes, but they are also flexible. What good then are they, that they can be molded to suit your needs? How is this better than situational ethics (logic, reason and compromise), other than to employ scholars in the service of the almighty?
Well, first of all, "clerics" are not required for us to interpret scripture or have a relationship with God. When Christ was crucified he tore the temple veil representing that his sacrifice has made the way for man to have a direct relationship with God, no human intermediary is required. As far as prooftexting or manipulating scripture for your own personal motives due to a presenting dilemma, well, I'm sure you already know my answer to this based on my previous comments. Scripture stands alone as authoritative regardless of how I "feel" about it or what I "want" it to say. If I'm seeking to find an "exception" in scripture to justify my own position then my heart is not in the right place.
I have had more than a third of a century (from teenage years) to develop my philosophy and unbeliefs, and you are obviously quite steadfast in yours, so yes, there can be little doubt of the mexican stand-off. Does it trouble you? As hoary and mulish as I may be, I still find merit in these discussions, because they draw things out into the light that I had not bothered to look at. You do teach me things, though they are almost certainly not the things you intend. I hope you in some way also benefit, it would be a shame to think this only leads you to despair.
Fret not my friend. I think there is extreme merit in these discussions and I appreciate the respectful way in which many of us here are able to engage each other on such topics.
As far as me being troubled or in "despair" the answer to your question is both yes and no. I do seek to consistently and genuinely live out my faith and thus I do wish to see other's come into relationship with Christ (you know that whole "go ye therefore" thing in the Bible). However, do I judge others and base my entire relationship with them on evangelistic purposes? No. One of the greatest gifts God has given us is free will, in fact, without free will everything we are talking about falls apart. I respect, just as God has designed it to be, that people have the freedom and the ability to reject him and live their life as they see fit. I love, value, relate to, and learn from others regardless of their spiritual beliefs. It would be foolish of me to limit my relationships with people solely on their spirituality or lack thereof. My goal is to accept people as they are, treat them with dignity and respect, and seek out how I might serve or support them in the context of our relationship.
Besides, if I do happen to get down about it, I know a pretty good therapist. ;)
Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to address the questions/comments that had been made. :)
Mitthrawnuruodo
Sep 12, 03:54 PM
Are you streaming that over your network?.....cool...I'll have to try it out when I get out of class...:) Wait a minute...
What do you mean by streaming over my network...? Are you speaking about shared libraries...? If so then: no, I'm not streaming... :o
I've had my AirPort Express hooked up to my stereo for so long that "streaming", for me means playing over remote speakers using AirTunes...
If I was wrong, and got your hopes up needlessly (I've not tried shared libraries, yet), I'm sincerely sorry... :o :o :o
Edit: I just tried accessing my girlfriend's library over our network, and you're quite right, the cover art browsing view does not work (actually no cover art is showing). Again sorry... :o
What do you mean by streaming over my network...? Are you speaking about shared libraries...? If so then: no, I'm not streaming... :o
I've had my AirPort Express hooked up to my stereo for so long that "streaming", for me means playing over remote speakers using AirTunes...
If I was wrong, and got your hopes up needlessly (I've not tried shared libraries, yet), I'm sincerely sorry... :o :o :o
Edit: I just tried accessing my girlfriend's library over our network, and you're quite right, the cover art browsing view does not work (actually no cover art is showing). Again sorry... :o
TorontoLRT
Nov 23, 04:27 PM
That's actually pretty impressive.
TheWatchfulOne
Nov 25, 12:27 PM
Haha, Kesha who?
Comment again when you are 18, if she is still around in 6 years:-)
Maybe the Beatles should have worn meat suits...
Is this close enough for you?
http://buythebutchercover.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/The-Beatles-Butcher-Cover.jpg
Comment again when you are 18, if she is still around in 6 years:-)
Maybe the Beatles should have worn meat suits...
Is this close enough for you?
http://buythebutchercover.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/The-Beatles-Butcher-Cover.jpg
OdduWon
Jul 23, 12:26 AM
this document reading feature just coincides with the wireless rumors. If the Ipod can load web pages. why wouldn't it be able to translate Word, PDF and other popular formats. I would by one, but this sounds as if it would be more delicate than the 5g that I own, the 5g is definitely on the breakable side. could you imagine how much more screen you have to crack, and more pixels to go dead?
true, there is more to break. apple should make it's own brand of cases. the agent 18 that i have is great but it have defects in the viewing area and ( at certain angles ) an multi color look that looks like gas on water. in the sun this is annoying. apple should make cases that fit perfectly and are economical enough that they can be replaced or repaire. though this might make the ipod look fragile if they have to create a seperate case to protect it. but anything is better that the lame leather case that comes with the nano
true, there is more to break. apple should make it's own brand of cases. the agent 18 that i have is great but it have defects in the viewing area and ( at certain angles ) an multi color look that looks like gas on water. in the sun this is annoying. apple should make cases that fit perfectly and are economical enough that they can be replaced or repaire. though this might make the ipod look fragile if they have to create a seperate case to protect it. but anything is better that the lame leather case that comes with the nano
2nyRiggz
Sep 12, 03:57 PM
Wait a minute...
If I was wrong, and got your hopes up needlessly, I'm sincerely sorry... :o :o :o
Indeed:cool: .....oh well...my house mates lost the ablum art:)
Note: I'm in class messing around in itunes....boring class:)
Bless
If I was wrong, and got your hopes up needlessly, I'm sincerely sorry... :o :o :o
Indeed:cool: .....oh well...my house mates lost the ablum art:)
Note: I'm in class messing around in itunes....boring class:)
Bless
ipodtoucher
Mar 8, 08:36 AM
Here's number 3 of the series, it's an on-going series that I hope to continue for a while.
Stephen
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5098/5496313990_f91e6df25c_b.jpg
Stephen
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5098/5496313990_f91e6df25c_b.jpg
IntelliUser
Apr 4, 01:18 PM
No- how ridiculous. Atheism is not a religion.
Dogmatic belief in the nonexistence of God can be considered a religion.
Agnostic atheism cannot though.
Dogmatic belief in the nonexistence of God can be considered a religion.
Agnostic atheism cannot though.
GGJstudios
Nov 24, 12:42 PM
It's not every Beatles song and they only have the publishing rights.
The publishing rights are what was being discussed and it's every song in the Beatles catalog. There are other songs by the Beatles and the individual artists which are not part of the catalog being discussed. I wasn't referring to those, or the mechanical rights.
The publishing rights are what was being discussed and it's every song in the Beatles catalog. There are other songs by the Beatles and the individual artists which are not part of the catalog being discussed. I wasn't referring to those, or the mechanical rights.
liketom
Sep 6, 08:15 AM
wooohoo first!
but not the last :D this is a great update - a bit of a balls up on the stores mind but good still :)
now where are them iPods ?:rolleyes:
but not the last :D this is a great update - a bit of a balls up on the stores mind but good still :)
now where are them iPods ?:rolleyes:
daneoni
Aug 24, 08:08 PM
My guess is that the recall won't expire. Apple can't deny someone a new battery because they 'didn't know' they had a bad battery and found out a year or so later. The previous recall from (someone said) 2005 is still valid. I'm sure in a year or so you'll want a new battery.
My battery falls within the parameters but my battery is fine. Full charge and does not get hot at all. As soon as I notice something I'll file for a new battery. Until then, I'll continue using my battery as normal.
Dang! you're right...i knew i shoulda waited........then again its better to be safe than sorry. Im sure the exploding batteries were fine as well initially. if i run out of juice i'll just get a new one.
Will this recall ever expire?
The reason im asking is that my 3k550 A1079 12" PB battery only has been through 18 battery loadcycles and still has 100% capacity according to cocounut battery...
Im wondering If I should get it replaced right now or wait untill my current battery starts running out of juice? What would you guys do?
edit: My pb warps every once in a while, could a new battery fix the problem?
Just because its fine now doesn't mean it'll stay that way. Im sure the exploding ones were fine as well....initially. Better to be safe than sorry.
My battery falls within the parameters but my battery is fine. Full charge and does not get hot at all. As soon as I notice something I'll file for a new battery. Until then, I'll continue using my battery as normal.
Dang! you're right...i knew i shoulda waited........then again its better to be safe than sorry. Im sure the exploding batteries were fine as well initially. if i run out of juice i'll just get a new one.
Will this recall ever expire?
The reason im asking is that my 3k550 A1079 12" PB battery only has been through 18 battery loadcycles and still has 100% capacity according to cocounut battery...
Im wondering If I should get it replaced right now or wait untill my current battery starts running out of juice? What would you guys do?
edit: My pb warps every once in a while, could a new battery fix the problem?
Just because its fine now doesn't mean it'll stay that way. Im sure the exploding ones were fine as well....initially. Better to be safe than sorry.
.jpg "Assassins+creed+2+feathers")
imutter
Mar 25, 07:17 PM
You guys need to find a different forum to talk about Asbergers and autism I can suggest some if you need them .......I hope not that you have a child or family member with a PDD.
.jpg "Assassins+creed+2+feather+")
SPEEDwithJJ
Oct 14, 01:27 AM
Thanks for the info! I went to ikea today and picked one up in black/brown. I'll post some pics of my setup tomorrow. This desk is awesome, its changed my workspace/mac setup forever! :D
You're very welcome. :) I've one (a "Corner desk-left") in beech veneer (with 6 silver A-legs) & I personally feel that these Galant desks are just fabulous. :)
You're very welcome. :) I've one (a "Corner desk-left") in beech veneer (with 6 silver A-legs) & I personally feel that these Galant desks are just fabulous. :)
Xibalba
Mar 14, 05:31 PM
I'm still very happy with my late 2008 MacBook but I am very ready for the next iMac revision...
And of course my iPads on order...
And of course my iPads on order...
skunk
Mar 29, 04:54 PM
And to look at it in a slightly different way ...
Would it have helped the United States to have some country intervene and determine the outcome in our civil war?Best ask the French. They have form.
Would it have helped the United States to have some country intervene and determine the outcome in our civil war?Best ask the French. They have form.
frozencarbonite
Aug 3, 12:33 PM
So do you have to be connected to an unknown network (like in a coffee shop or bookstore) for this to work?
I'm actually not in the city, so I don't have anyone around me that would be close enough to connect. Could it still work though? :confused:
I'm actually not in the city, so I don't have anyone around me that would be close enough to connect. Could it still work though? :confused:
Evangelion
Sep 14, 05:21 AM
Personally I'm getting tired of Apple and their color choices. You have to pay more for black? What if you want 8 GB but you don't want black? What then? I'm not liking the approach Apple is taking on the color choices of their products.
I guess that if they hand't released black model at all, everybody would be happy. Same thing with MacBooks. Had Apple only released the two white models, no-one would have complained. But when the announced a pricier third moder, the BlackBook, the whining started.
Don't want to pay extra? Then don't.
I guess that if they hand't released black model at all, everybody would be happy. Same thing with MacBooks. Had Apple only released the two white models, no-one would have complained. But when the announced a pricier third moder, the BlackBook, the whining started.
Don't want to pay extra? Then don't.
Doctor Q
Nov 27, 02:23 PM
agree that the mono mixes are better. but leave the stereo ones alone.I hope the Beatles catalog will include both versions. For example, the mono version of Blue Jay Way was much different than the stereo version, so I'll have to get both.
Mitthrawnuruodo
Sep 12, 03:50 PM
It works great, "Dark Side" and "The Wall" play as intended.He-he... I'm testing "The Wall", too... :)
Did the "Gapless Determination" detect your The Wall album or did you, like me, have to set the Gapless Album tag yourself...?
Did the "Gapless Determination" detect your The Wall album or did you, like me, have to set the Gapless Album tag yourself...?
whatever
Aug 29, 08:57 AM
At that price, I hope Apple considers preinstalling Vista on its machines.
240 bucks for Boot Camp is ludacris, when you'll probably hardly use it anyway...
Why the **** would Apple ever pre-install Windows on a Mac.
If they went that route then they might as well just cancel all develop on OS X, because they would need that money to pay Microsoft.
I honestly feel that Boot Camp is one of the worst things that Apple could ever do, but they had to appease the little kids. But just wait until the first virus hits your Windows partition and screws up the boot sector of your drive and you're unable to start either OS.
God, some people!
240 bucks for Boot Camp is ludacris, when you'll probably hardly use it anyway...
Why the **** would Apple ever pre-install Windows on a Mac.
If they went that route then they might as well just cancel all develop on OS X, because they would need that money to pay Microsoft.
I honestly feel that Boot Camp is one of the worst things that Apple could ever do, but they had to appease the little kids. But just wait until the first virus hits your Windows partition and screws up the boot sector of your drive and you're unable to start either OS.
God, some people!
ArizonaKid
Aug 8, 02:24 PM
Continuing On...
The Register had a good article that reflects how I feel:
Whatever happened to... Mac OS X Leopard? (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/08/mac_os_x_leopard_preview/)
I don't like the Microsoft bashing either...it's just something that gets to me. Microsoft bashing is a waste of energy. Who cares what company did what first, as a consumer I don't care about originality. Just give me something that works. Whatever company can implement the idea the best to provide a benefit to ME, gets my business. Just shut up and innovate (like Apple has been doing), the products will speak for themselves.
I don't see iTunes making any references to Windows Media Player in their advertising. They don't have to. That's what is great about being No 1, you really don't care that much about who is below you making noise. I just wish that same mentality was applied to the OS.
The Register had a good article that reflects how I feel:
Whatever happened to... Mac OS X Leopard? (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/08/mac_os_x_leopard_preview/)
I don't like the Microsoft bashing either...it's just something that gets to me. Microsoft bashing is a waste of energy. Who cares what company did what first, as a consumer I don't care about originality. Just give me something that works. Whatever company can implement the idea the best to provide a benefit to ME, gets my business. Just shut up and innovate (like Apple has been doing), the products will speak for themselves.
I don't see iTunes making any references to Windows Media Player in their advertising. They don't have to. That's what is great about being No 1, you really don't care that much about who is below you making noise. I just wish that same mentality was applied to the OS.
BRLawyer
Sep 13, 06:25 AM
I have 3 USB 1 ports and 2 FireWire ports. Does that mean if I buy a new 8Gb Nano, it won't work with my system? :(
Your iMacG5 doesn't have USB 2 ports? As far as I know, ALL iMac G5s had USB 2 ports...even previous iBook G4s had that already...I think you're mistaken, sorry.
Your iMacG5 doesn't have USB 2 ports? As far as I know, ALL iMac G5s had USB 2 ports...even previous iBook G4s had that already...I think you're mistaken, sorry.
