No USB ports on Ipad!
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: Yewbuntu Rokz on 23 Mar 2010 15:32 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann(a)t-online.de> writes: > nospam wrote: > >> In article <vq1iq5luma5rl8gk01bs4mm0v4dqk0pmnq(a)4ax.com>, chrisv >> <chrisv(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Ye Gods, you are fscking *stupid*. >> >> and you are rude, obnoxious and incapable of intelligent debate. > > For having an "intelligent debate" one needs intelligence on all sides. > You as a fanboi cult member don't qualify Yes my friend Peter this mostly of the truth for these Apple dorkz. for me my Ubuntu rockzaz! Is it the truth that you are programming the Gnome widgets and things? This is so totally rocking for me but I prfer CLI. This week I showed my colleagues billy boyz how to be ls'ing with a pipe for sort! Try his in dummarse Apple OSX!
From: Mocassin joe on 23 Mar 2010 15:36 "nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:230320101156576761%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... > In article <hob2k7$t4h$02$2(a)news.t-online.com>, Peter K�hlmann > <peter-koehlmann(a)t-online.de> wrote: > >> Amazon does not attribute all kinds of capabilities to its machine. > > neither does apple. I think for Jobs to tout it as "revolutionary" and "magical" says they do. > >> It is a eBook reader. And for that task, it is *better* than the iPad. > > except when the books have colour in them, which many do. or when > ambient light is low. or when you want higher contrast than the kindle > screen, for those with vision that's not perfect. but other than that. > >> Too bad that the iPad isn't doing anything particularly well > > nonsense. No - true.
From: Lloyd Parsons on 23 Mar 2010 16:17 In article <810d8716-e23c-4580-9b98-d068e8d68aae(a)g10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, Rex Ballard <rex.ballard(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 20, 6:16�pm, Lloyd Parsons <lloydpars...(a)mac.com> wrote: > > In article <ctKdnW0vQLhr3jjWnZ2dnUVZ_h6jn...(a)bresnan.com>, > > �GreyCloud <m...(a)cumulus.com> wrote: > > > Lloyd Parsons wrote: > > > > In article <ScSdna2FdZZouDjWnZ2dnUVZ_j-dn...(a)supernews.com>, > > > > �Rick <n...(a)mail.invalid> wrote: > > > >> On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 12:05:52 -0700, KDT wrote: > > > > >> ... and the return rates are a non-issue ... > > > >> <http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS5214623279.html> > > > > > I'd have to agree. �I have Ubuntu Netbook Remix on my Netbook and it is > > > > quite good. �If it had Netflix capability I would never run W7 on it > > > > again. > > Have you looked at any of the Movie vending services designed for > Linux? No, didn't even know there was any and a google search didn't show up any. > There are several services that only require an MPEG4 player > (commercial software, but can often be downloaded from the service > provider). Ironically, there are several Linux powered MPEG4 player > devices on the market already. > > > > win7 must be pretty bad. �What does Netflix need in order for it to run > > > on Ubuntu? > > NetFlix is just one vendor > But is my preferred vendor for lots of reasons. For streaming, because it does a superb job. > http://www.mplayerhq.hu/design7/news.html > > http://www.yolinux.com/TUTORIALS/LinuxTutorialVideo.html > > http://linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2001/09/06/crossover_partone.html > > http://www.governmentsecurity.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=2514 > > The specific NetFlix question is deliberately loaded and biased. > NetFlix made a deal to use Microsoft's technology exclusively. > Without SilverLight, you can't play it. > > http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS9198444724.html > I know that. Did a lot of reading about the different efforts, all not very successful. The only one that was even close was to use VMWare and Windows. But on a netbook, I wouldn't think that would be viable. > > BlockBuster uses a Linux based player for their video on demand. > http://openboxeebox.com/new-blockbuster-vod-box-runs-linux/ > That's actually quite interesting, thanks for the link. But even Blockbuster doesn't do streaming to a Linux computer, and it doesn't seem that they do any HD streaming. They do have newer movies that you pay for ($3.99 pretty reasonable for new releases). > Flash can play movies from several services > > In case Flash didn't come with your distribution. > http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/alternates/ > I'm not impressed with Flash based movies at all, on any platform. > > > > You need Silverlight and drm. �The Moonlight project is behind one > > version level with the current Silverlight, and doesn't do the DRM. � > > There is ongoing work, but at the moment the luck isn't working well. > > > > And no, W7 isn't so bad, in fact it is the best MS has done. > > I supposed it depends on your definition and criteria of "Best". > Windows 2000 was much more efficient, gave outstanding performance for > the resources consumed, and could run in as little as 64 Meg of RAM > and use as much as 3 Gigabytes. Windows 2000 server could use 8 > Gigabytes. Windows 7 consumes absurd amounts of resources, and wastes > most of that on nonproductive eye-candy designed to entertain you so > that you won't be as annoyed by the absurdly slow disk I/O. > > I went to the MarketPro show in Meadowlands New Jersey this week-end. > The hot seller wasn't Windows 7, it was Windows XP professional. It > seems that many people are not that happy with Windows 7 either. This > may be a boon for Microsoft, since they will be able to collect > revenue for the OEM version AND the Windows XP "Upgrade". > W7 on my Atom based, 1Gb netbook performs better than I had expected. Is it the best Windows? Seems to me that it is, but then I don't use it or the netbook much. Unless I'm away from home, I use my 27" iMac. > > �But online, windows is still windows and all the malware writers love to > > flock to it. > > Windows, even Windows 7 has some very well-known back doors that > Microsoft insists on keeping open and unlocked - so they can audit for > piracy and see where competitive threats are coming from and spot > emerging markets and kill them before they get too entrenched. > > Windows 7 does seem to have made several good improvements. They seem > to have cleaned up their garbage collection so that it doesn't stop > multi-media or 3D animation in sudden "pauses". It's also much faster > in games than Vista, and much more reliable than Vista. > > Unfortunately, it still doesn't compare to a Mac as shown by the > actual profits and revenues of Apple compared to the PC divisions of > Windows-only PC manufacturers. People are still willing to spend > $1800 for a Mac Notebook but they are mostly buying Windows 7 laptops > for around $450. Given the total costs of parts, assembly, inventory, > shipping, and retailer costs, it looks like Windows 7 will be another > money loser for Retailers and OEMs alike. > > Has anybody played with the Windows 7 hypervisor to see if you could > run Linux and Windows concurrently using a dual-partition > configuration? > > Rex Ballard > http://www.open4success.com -- Lloyd
From: Mocassin joe on 23 Mar 2010 16:28 "nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:230320101232334867%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... > In article <9B8qn.78117$wr5.47817(a)newsfe22.iad>, Mocassin joe > <joemocasanto(a)aol.com> wrote: > >> > if the built-in space is never filled, why do you need more? >> >> What if it is though? What makes you even think it will never be filled? > > because the best selling ipods (nano) are not the largest capacity > ipods (classics). in fact, the ipad with the least capacity is as big > as the highest capacity ipod nano. also, the top complaints on the ipod > touch and iphone are not the lack of a card slot. So then you subscribe to the theory that it's nothing more than a big iPod. I don't think Steve Jobs would appreciate that. But you didn't answer my question; what if the built-in space is exceeded?
From: none of your buisiness on 23 Mar 2010 16:28
nospam wrote: Goodbye Oxretard PLONK! |