OutThere
Apr 9, 08:30 AM
The fact that a big sticking point in all of this was the social conservative nonsense about abortions and planned parenthood is just ridiculous. If this is all that many of our politicians can think about in times like these, we're ********** doomed.
MacNut
Apr 25, 11:21 AM
Trump is a good businessman... which may be good for corporations if he gets elected. IMO though, what we need is a President who looks out for the people, not business.
Either way, I don't see a Republican candidate winning at the moment. Obama, even with "low" ratings, has enough to win re-election.To be honest I don't think we will ever find a president that works for the people again. They love and need their rich donors to get elected.
Either way, I don't see a Republican candidate winning at the moment. Obama, even with "low" ratings, has enough to win re-election.To be honest I don't think we will ever find a president that works for the people again. They love and need their rich donors to get elected.
LimeiBook86
Jul 14, 04:56 AM
Yes, the DVD-RW installation went fine for me :) It seems to work with iDVD 3 so I hope it works with your application. Good Luck!
Machead III
Jan 6, 09:50 AM
Hmm...
I wasn 't buying any of the in depth analysis people were making over the New Year splash, but now...
We can be pretty sure the two images represent colours and styles involved in a new theme - whether that theme is simply a logo for iTV (most likely), Leopard (still pretty likely) or an iPhone/new iPod (unlikely, just because... it doesn't look very relevant) is unknown.
I hope it's Leopard tbh. I couldn't give a sh�t about iTV.
I wasn 't buying any of the in depth analysis people were making over the New Year splash, but now...
We can be pretty sure the two images represent colours and styles involved in a new theme - whether that theme is simply a logo for iTV (most likely), Leopard (still pretty likely) or an iPhone/new iPod (unlikely, just because... it doesn't look very relevant) is unknown.
I hope it's Leopard tbh. I couldn't give a sh�t about iTV.
more...
whoodie
Mar 23, 10:19 PM
Anything new to report guys?
kamil97
Apr 19, 06:55 AM
I'm not buying a tablet until there is one that runs mac OS X (the modbook is too expensive) :D
more...
Mac-Addict
Oct 26, 04:25 PM
Writing this from Leopard, Its such a great upgrade I loveee it and OMFG the queue was insane xD Gald to say I was 4th coming away with 2 shirts (Sorry if you didnt get one xD Heh I waited 3 hours :P Which flew by) The amount of people that pushed pissed me off. But in the end whatever. All my photos came out pretty god damn crap which I am not happy about. heres one of the queue (At like 4, its got a hell of a lot bigger later on.)http://tinyurl.com/3ywg7e
FleurDuMal
Sep 22, 03:28 AM
Does anyone know if this fixes the SATA speed issue running XP in Bootcamp?
more...
tvguru
Sep 25, 10:40 AM
Can't believe aperture doesn't support more RAW types yet.
Until it supports more/all of the raw types, it will never be a real 'pro' application imho
Aperture only uses the RAW formats that OS X uses. When 1.4.8 comes out it will support more.
Until it supports more/all of the raw types, it will never be a real 'pro' application imho
Aperture only uses the RAW formats that OS X uses. When 1.4.8 comes out it will support more.
liavman
Mar 25, 09:00 PM
Here is some interesting data...
Kodak has 1.62B in cash and 1.24B in debt for a net spoils of 380 million
Gross Profit per year is 1.95Billion with an EBITDA of 732 Million. The accounting reported earnings are negative, so it is all about some charges, not real money going forward.
Kodak's current market cap is 914.20. It went up 20% after this news, so it is currently 1.1 Billion.
If Apple is really interested in Kodak's intellectual property, it seems to be cheaper to buy the company out right than licensing the intellectual property.
Apple should simply buy them out paying the shareholders 50% premium for around 1.7 Billion cash and be done with it. Keep the intellectual property portfolio, collect some yearly money from Samsung and others which Kodak has already won. May be even from RIM if the ruling will be in Kodak's favor. But that is not a gating factor for the decision. The major issue to resolve is what to do with their current 18000 employees!! That is like 1.5 B to 2 B a year in expense. May be Apple will have use for 1000 of those people at best. Apple will have to spin off any manufacturing and sales of what Kodak currently does today into a separate company while keeping the intellectual property.
Having said all this, something does not look right. Why are the earnings negative for a company with a revenue of 7 Billion, Gross profit of 2 Billion and EBITDA of of 3/4th of a billion, and why is the market cap so low for such a company. I know its future is bleak which begs the question. Why is it still even in business. If its future strategy is going to be just a patent holding company and not any useful economic activity out of those 18000 people, Apple can do a much better job of being that patent holding company.
Kodak has 1.62B in cash and 1.24B in debt for a net spoils of 380 million
Gross Profit per year is 1.95Billion with an EBITDA of 732 Million. The accounting reported earnings are negative, so it is all about some charges, not real money going forward.
Kodak's current market cap is 914.20. It went up 20% after this news, so it is currently 1.1 Billion.
If Apple is really interested in Kodak's intellectual property, it seems to be cheaper to buy the company out right than licensing the intellectual property.
Apple should simply buy them out paying the shareholders 50% premium for around 1.7 Billion cash and be done with it. Keep the intellectual property portfolio, collect some yearly money from Samsung and others which Kodak has already won. May be even from RIM if the ruling will be in Kodak's favor. But that is not a gating factor for the decision. The major issue to resolve is what to do with their current 18000 employees!! That is like 1.5 B to 2 B a year in expense. May be Apple will have use for 1000 of those people at best. Apple will have to spin off any manufacturing and sales of what Kodak currently does today into a separate company while keeping the intellectual property.
Having said all this, something does not look right. Why are the earnings negative for a company with a revenue of 7 Billion, Gross profit of 2 Billion and EBITDA of of 3/4th of a billion, and why is the market cap so low for such a company. I know its future is bleak which begs the question. Why is it still even in business. If its future strategy is going to be just a patent holding company and not any useful economic activity out of those 18000 people, Apple can do a much better job of being that patent holding company.
more...
Eidorian
Jun 17, 06:52 PM
Try harder. You can do better.What do you mean?
Brometheus
Apr 19, 03:09 PM
What does ANY of this have to do to Apple rejecting a Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist from the App Store?
Nothing, directly. I was responding to a previous comment as you can see. There is an indirect connection to the cartoonist issue. My feeling is that there's a general failure to understand why Apple has a restrictive policy regarding what types of apps can appear in the app store. My post addressed the issue regarding the prohibition of pornography, instead of the issue of what defines an app with defamatory content as was the case with the cartoonist. There's also, in my opinion, a failure to appreciate that the lack of consistency in the app approval process is a result of Apple being unable to anticipate every scenario and nuance that is presented by certain apps, and the fact that Apple hires people to review apps. You can't realistically expect different people to always agree on situations that are slightly different. In order to respond to the explosion of submitted apps, Apple must have had to hire a lot of new reviewers. That means that you may have less control over the quality and experience level of the people that you have working as reviewers.
Nothing, directly. I was responding to a previous comment as you can see. There is an indirect connection to the cartoonist issue. My feeling is that there's a general failure to understand why Apple has a restrictive policy regarding what types of apps can appear in the app store. My post addressed the issue regarding the prohibition of pornography, instead of the issue of what defines an app with defamatory content as was the case with the cartoonist. There's also, in my opinion, a failure to appreciate that the lack of consistency in the app approval process is a result of Apple being unable to anticipate every scenario and nuance that is presented by certain apps, and the fact that Apple hires people to review apps. You can't realistically expect different people to always agree on situations that are slightly different. In order to respond to the explosion of submitted apps, Apple must have had to hire a lot of new reviewers. That means that you may have less control over the quality and experience level of the people that you have working as reviewers.
more...
Howardchief
Apr 5, 05:15 PM
This is all they have now
MagSafe power port
Gigabit Ethernet port
Mini DisplayPort
Two USB 2.0 ports (up to 480 Mbps)
Audio in/out
Kensington lock slot
Does that Audio in/out not work with headsets?
MagSafe power port
Gigabit Ethernet port
Mini DisplayPort
Two USB 2.0 ports (up to 480 Mbps)
Audio in/out
Kensington lock slot
Does that Audio in/out not work with headsets?
SuperCachetes
Mar 12, 12:02 PM
No four door cars!
"Koup" is a play on words, dude. ;)
http://image.motortrend.com/f/roadtests/coupes/26800650+pheader/112_0907_15l+2010_kia_forte_koup+front_three_quarters_view.jpg
I agree with JohnHenry, it is a snazzy-looking car and probably the first Kia I ever would've considered.
"Koup" is a play on words, dude. ;)
http://image.motortrend.com/f/roadtests/coupes/26800650+pheader/112_0907_15l+2010_kia_forte_koup+front_three_quarters_view.jpg
I agree with JohnHenry, it is a snazzy-looking car and probably the first Kia I ever would've considered.
more...
redeye be
Jun 2, 03:09 AM
I first thought this whole Folding thing had to do with laundry.
Once they've learnt enough i guess they would be able to use the knowledge in other fields of science, maybe even the cleaning sciences if you find this more important than the health aspect.
So you were seriously interseted in a widget about folding laundry?
:p :D ;)
Once they've learnt enough i guess they would be able to use the knowledge in other fields of science, maybe even the cleaning sciences if you find this more important than the health aspect.
So you were seriously interseted in a widget about folding laundry?
:p :D ;)
vincenz
Mar 28, 09:10 AM
Well, a little over 2 months to go :)
more...
roadbloc
May 6, 06:56 PM
JOEG4?The guy is not a moron,he know what he wrote.Let us respect ourselves here.To call someone a moron is not good,I think you should apologize to the guy in question
I think someone needs a new spacebar.
I think someone needs a new spacebar.
snberk103
Mar 17, 10:47 PM
In response to all the "Recommend Me a Camera/Lens/Editor etc" threads, I offer this. Comments or additions?
...
Buy A New and More Expensive Camera Because It'll Make Better Pictures
...
Dale
This can be expanded to include buying gear in general, like strobes and backdrops, etc...
... I have noticed I feel a bit intimidated by portrait type photography. I don't have the right equipment for it (flashes, strobes, backdrops, studio...), and I'm not sure I want to go that route. ...
I think you need to read that bit above again.
You don't need much gear at all to get started doing great photography - you just need to be good with people and have reasonable photo skills. If you are have that, then all you need is a reasonably sharp and long-ish lense and a window. See Lloyd Erlick (http://www.heylloyd.com/) for example. I don't think he is still active, but he was shooting 4x5 BW portraits by window light. I think some of his portraits are the best I have seen. I've learned from him to try and keep my portraits simple. I tell my students that doing portraiture is both the easiest and the most difficult kind of photography there is. Easy because you can make great portraits with window light, and one good lense on a camera. If you want to get fancy you can add a reflector :) . Difficult, because you need to work with people.
... I also don't care for sports in general, so that's not a likely path for me, either....
Good decision. If you don't love the stuff you shoot, it shows.
One of the best rock-n-roll photographers you will not have heard of in North America (if not the world), is Dee Lippingwell (http://www.deelippingwell.com/). She had a daytime job, but loved music. So she approached an entertainment weekly and offered to take photos, in order to get the press passes into the events. She then quit the daytime job to do the photography full time. Still loves the music and the music biz.
I've sat through a couple of seminars she has done (short on technical advice, but huge on rock-n-roll stories!
Don't let the website fool you. She doesn't actually need to advertize much. She was one of less than a dozen photographers that Mick Jagger personally invited to shoot the big SARS concert in Toronto a few years ago. I have the honour of calling her a friend, and in one of her band shots on the website you can see my former studio reflected in the subject's sunglasses.
She loves what she does, it shows, and her clients know that.
So keep banging away. It gets easier, then more difficult, then it plateaus into sort of easy again. Well, not really - but you love what you do so much you don't notice that it's difficult.
... of the above are imho, of course....
PS: Thanks Dale for the OP!
...
Buy A New and More Expensive Camera Because It'll Make Better Pictures
...
Dale
This can be expanded to include buying gear in general, like strobes and backdrops, etc...
... I have noticed I feel a bit intimidated by portrait type photography. I don't have the right equipment for it (flashes, strobes, backdrops, studio...), and I'm not sure I want to go that route. ...
I think you need to read that bit above again.
You don't need much gear at all to get started doing great photography - you just need to be good with people and have reasonable photo skills. If you are have that, then all you need is a reasonably sharp and long-ish lense and a window. See Lloyd Erlick (http://www.heylloyd.com/) for example. I don't think he is still active, but he was shooting 4x5 BW portraits by window light. I think some of his portraits are the best I have seen. I've learned from him to try and keep my portraits simple. I tell my students that doing portraiture is both the easiest and the most difficult kind of photography there is. Easy because you can make great portraits with window light, and one good lense on a camera. If you want to get fancy you can add a reflector :) . Difficult, because you need to work with people.
... I also don't care for sports in general, so that's not a likely path for me, either....
Good decision. If you don't love the stuff you shoot, it shows.
One of the best rock-n-roll photographers you will not have heard of in North America (if not the world), is Dee Lippingwell (http://www.deelippingwell.com/). She had a daytime job, but loved music. So she approached an entertainment weekly and offered to take photos, in order to get the press passes into the events. She then quit the daytime job to do the photography full time. Still loves the music and the music biz.
I've sat through a couple of seminars she has done (short on technical advice, but huge on rock-n-roll stories!
Don't let the website fool you. She doesn't actually need to advertize much. She was one of less than a dozen photographers that Mick Jagger personally invited to shoot the big SARS concert in Toronto a few years ago. I have the honour of calling her a friend, and in one of her band shots on the website you can see my former studio reflected in the subject's sunglasses.
She loves what she does, it shows, and her clients know that.
So keep banging away. It gets easier, then more difficult, then it plateaus into sort of easy again. Well, not really - but you love what you do so much you don't notice that it's difficult.
... of the above are imho, of course....
PS: Thanks Dale for the OP!
Heilage
Apr 12, 01:14 PM
I don't think opinions should be illegal. It rings a nasty little bell labeled "thought crime" in my mind.
iJohnHenry
Apr 8, 08:14 PM
It's not the job of the government (or government funded agencies) to teach people how to not get knocked up and give out birth control. I don't have any objections to this. I don't pay taxes so Sally doesn't pop out another unit.
But another unit is just what the 'system' requires of Sally, poor girl.
You could do with a crash course in Economics, not that I agree with what they are trying to achieve.
But another unit is just what the 'system' requires of Sally, poor girl.
You could do with a crash course in Economics, not that I agree with what they are trying to achieve.
andy42
Mar 21, 08:59 PM
1,469€/L for 95 (that was cheap for today)
davidjearly
Dec 18, 10:10 AM
Not half as sad as the machine of mediocrity that is Simon Bloody Cowell's monopoly on our christmas number ones.
So the frig what if a bunch of people want to feel like they've accomplished a small victory by bumping that rubbish off the top spot? It's harmless fun.
Frig? Really? Ok then.
It's not about the small victory and believe me, I have no particular tendency for Joe or the xfactor in general.
The bottom line is that the Christmas number one is a popularity contest. It is meant to be what record is the most popular at that time of year. In recent times, that just happens to be the xfactor winner. Big deal. The sad part is a bunch of people rallying round another (pretty poor) song just to make a point. What is the point exactly? The irony lies in the lyric to the RATM track: '...I don't do what you tell me', all the while trying to tell as many people as possible to buy the RATM track.
So the frig what if a bunch of people want to feel like they've accomplished a small victory by bumping that rubbish off the top spot? It's harmless fun.
Frig? Really? Ok then.
It's not about the small victory and believe me, I have no particular tendency for Joe or the xfactor in general.
The bottom line is that the Christmas number one is a popularity contest. It is meant to be what record is the most popular at that time of year. In recent times, that just happens to be the xfactor winner. Big deal. The sad part is a bunch of people rallying round another (pretty poor) song just to make a point. What is the point exactly? The irony lies in the lyric to the RATM track: '...I don't do what you tell me', all the while trying to tell as many people as possible to buy the RATM track.
Koodauw
Jan 19, 09:59 PM
Does this help?
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/16527
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/16527
maflynn
Mar 8, 12:14 PM
My vote is for smugmug :)
0 comments:
Post a Comment