CaoCao
Apr 25, 07:12 PM
Is anyone mad as the two *******s who actually beat this person up? I am. They should be charged with aggravated assault.
How about attempted murder?
How about attempted murder?
sikuss
Apr 8, 07:17 PM
16 Blocks
http://pic.leech.it/i/7d0f6/a6317ca0125698104.jpg
I love this movie
http://pic.leech.it/i/7d0f6/a6317ca0125698104.jpg
I love this movie
bretm
Sep 30, 09:13 AM
Thats not apart of what a home should be. Homes are for eating, sleeping, loving, and relaxing. A screening room is for... Well, none of those.
I guess you are still in the lets all commute to work and congest the highways and burn all the electricity and gas we can boat. I've gone the route of live and work at home. Much less stress. Much more time for lovin.
I guess you are still in the lets all commute to work and congest the highways and burn all the electricity and gas we can boat. I've gone the route of live and work at home. Much less stress. Much more time for lovin.
JayMysterio
Dec 6, 07:59 PM
the kill streak rewards are so low because its practically impossible to get more then 11 kills in one game with the ****** spawns. (unless you get lucky) 25 was feasible in Modern Warfare because it was a much better game and strategic players who knew how to play could get 25 kills cause they were fighting dip *****. in Black Ops everyone (dip ***** and good players alike) seems to be forced into the same run and gun strategy.
This goes back to Treyarch's seeming desire to reduce the trenched in camping snipers. The real reason that 25 was feasible was because of stacking killstreaks. If you've seen the vids of people getting nukes in record time, it was all based on opening grenade spam salvo, hoping that gets enough for a killstreak, working to a copter, which lead to a nuke. Not necessarily anything based on skill.
Treyarch has wisely spaced the spawns far enough so opening grenade spams don't work ( unless it's Nuketown and the opposing team runs as a pack into a rolling holy frag grenade ), so if one does lucky with the opening it only leads to an RC XD or perhaps a SAM turret ( hardline pro changing of it is becoming tired, but they claim a fix is coming ), but no cheap additions to a more lethal killstreak.
The spawning issue which is infuriating at times, but does have a point. It completely destroys camping. Treyarch seemed to make a decision to nerf the whole snipe/camp thing, making sniping more difficult, and camping a risky & questionable proposition. Running & gunning is the way Black Ops seems to go, if you want to camp, stack killstreaks, modern warfare is the way to go. The amount of times I have seen someone going XX kills & 0 deaths I can count on one hand, while in MW2 I had done it quite a few times.
I think Black Ops has become a nice alternative, and not just a continuation of modern warfare. It gives players choices.
This goes back to Treyarch's seeming desire to reduce the trenched in camping snipers. The real reason that 25 was feasible was because of stacking killstreaks. If you've seen the vids of people getting nukes in record time, it was all based on opening grenade spam salvo, hoping that gets enough for a killstreak, working to a copter, which lead to a nuke. Not necessarily anything based on skill.
Treyarch has wisely spaced the spawns far enough so opening grenade spams don't work ( unless it's Nuketown and the opposing team runs as a pack into a rolling holy frag grenade ), so if one does lucky with the opening it only leads to an RC XD or perhaps a SAM turret ( hardline pro changing of it is becoming tired, but they claim a fix is coming ), but no cheap additions to a more lethal killstreak.
The spawning issue which is infuriating at times, but does have a point. It completely destroys camping. Treyarch seemed to make a decision to nerf the whole snipe/camp thing, making sniping more difficult, and camping a risky & questionable proposition. Running & gunning is the way Black Ops seems to go, if you want to camp, stack killstreaks, modern warfare is the way to go. The amount of times I have seen someone going XX kills & 0 deaths I can count on one hand, while in MW2 I had done it quite a few times.
I think Black Ops has become a nice alternative, and not just a continuation of modern warfare. It gives players choices.
lordonuthin
Apr 3, 10:28 PM
Glad you are back home and getting going again! Yes it seems we should get our numbers up again :)
the Rebel
May 4, 12:14 AM
FYI, I just looked up the US Department of Transportation statistics.
Trucks outnumber cars in some states, but cars outnumber trucks in other states. Overall they say that passenger vehicles in the United States are 58% cars and 42% trucks, but the total number of trucks continues to increase whereas the total number of cars has actually decreased slightly.
Trucks outnumber cars in some states, but cars outnumber trucks in other states. Overall they say that passenger vehicles in the United States are 58% cars and 42% trucks, but the total number of trucks continues to increase whereas the total number of cars has actually decreased slightly.
elctropro
Jan 1, 01:26 AM
My understanding is that AT&T is pretty far along in its upgrade from HPSA (3G) network to HPSA+ (faster 3G). They're doing this to maximize their existing investment in their infrastructure, and they should be able to employ LTE a little faster than Verizon has been, since LTE is a more streamlined upgrade from HPSA+. They claim that this is best for customers long-term, because when LTE (4G) coverage gives out, users can fall back on widespread HPSA+ coverage with similar performance. Whereas with Verizon, when you move out of an area with 4G coverage, you notice a HUGE drop in speed going to their ancient EV-DO technology.
Choppaface
Oct 4, 09:45 PM
Apple needs to start working on a new business model while the studios are still suing their customers and the TV boom is still on. If they dont they're going to be beaten overseas. Enough with the legal rhetoric damn it, evolve your business model or you'll lose.
Northgrove
May 3, 02:31 PM
Here's my take on it.
One of the carriers source of income is data charges. Within that category of data sales is:
1) Data used via smartphone for web access.
2) Data used via tethering your phone & laptop.
3) Data used via a laptop air card bought from the carrier.
When you use method 2 illegally, the carrier loses out on that data sale. It's been like this for years, yet not been a problem as large as it is now.
Yes, hmm, I think where this arguments ends is that they have set their prices so that they don't actually make a profit from their data charges alone, and need to somehow "compensate" for this by creating artificial fees. I guess the fierce competition drives them there. What I'm saying is just that I think charging for the way you use data isn't very logical, but charging for how much data you use is. Hm, if that made any sense. :)
One of the carriers source of income is data charges. Within that category of data sales is:
1) Data used via smartphone for web access.
2) Data used via tethering your phone & laptop.
3) Data used via a laptop air card bought from the carrier.
When you use method 2 illegally, the carrier loses out on that data sale. It's been like this for years, yet not been a problem as large as it is now.
Yes, hmm, I think where this arguments ends is that they have set their prices so that they don't actually make a profit from their data charges alone, and need to somehow "compensate" for this by creating artificial fees. I guess the fierce competition drives them there. What I'm saying is just that I think charging for the way you use data isn't very logical, but charging for how much data you use is. Hm, if that made any sense. :)
JohnBossu
Mar 19, 06:22 AM
Even though I own two iPhone 4's I never experienced being a meat sandwich so that survey is mostly bullshiznit.
Honestly, I don't buy the iPhone to show off but because it is a photography tool for my art studio.
I believe there are plenty of good cameras in the market at the same price with a iPhone, you picked iPhone instead?
yeah iPhone is so overrated then.
Honestly, I don't buy the iPhone to show off but because it is a photography tool for my art studio.
I believe there are plenty of good cameras in the market at the same price with a iPhone, you picked iPhone instead?
yeah iPhone is so overrated then.
iliketomac
Nov 23, 05:41 PM
Has this preliminary list been published somewhere, or is this secret inside information?
I have it... just posted it above... there will be "red" signs everywhere in the retail stores tomorrow and specialists will be wearing red shirts...
btw, MBP's are not on sale since it's not on the list... just MB's (from $1099 down to $998, etc.... up to $1499 which goes down to $1398)
iMac's are on sale too.... see the posting above... I'm wondering about the Mini since it's not on that "Joy to the Wallet" sale list.
I have it... just posted it above... there will be "red" signs everywhere in the retail stores tomorrow and specialists will be wearing red shirts...
btw, MBP's are not on sale since it's not on the list... just MB's (from $1099 down to $998, etc.... up to $1499 which goes down to $1398)
iMac's are on sale too.... see the posting above... I'm wondering about the Mini since it's not on that "Joy to the Wallet" sale list.
jayducharme
Oct 6, 10:32 AM
The only drawback for Verizon is that they still don't have the iPhone ... yet.
I like how the commercial gives a little taste of the coming augmented reality craze.
I like how the commercial gives a little taste of the coming augmented reality craze.
ZLurker
Sep 12, 07:29 AM
I'm in Washington D.C. (8:24am EST) and just tried going into iTMS and there's a black page, with white text, announcing "It's Showtime. The iTunes Store is being updated." Here come the movies!
hmmmm,
i just tried the same with the swedish store, and its down :)
maby this will be a world event afterall!!
hmmmm,
i just tried the same with the swedish store, and its down :)
maby this will be a world event afterall!!
Schmye Bubbula
Mar 24, 03:50 PM
Ten years, and TheWormyFruit� still hasn't FTFF (http://tinyurl.com/66wkbe3)!
rva1
Jul 27, 02:08 PM
Chevrolet announced the Volt will be priced at $41,000 before tax credits. You can choose to lease it for $350/month.
http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f70/its-official-chevrolet-volt-41-000-chevrolet-begins-taking-orders-94080/
The Nissan Leaf list for about $25k to $26k and is an ALL electric vehicle. GM better get their head out of the sand.
http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f70/its-official-chevrolet-volt-41-000-chevrolet-begins-taking-orders-94080/
The Nissan Leaf list for about $25k to $26k and is an ALL electric vehicle. GM better get their head out of the sand.
SFVCyclone
Nov 16, 08:09 PM
Its probably feasible but like not not gonna happen...
Popeye206
May 3, 02:15 PM
Just like communism!
Love your screen name! Reminds me of someone else here. :p
As for this article. I'm sure it's here so we can see whats going on in e industry. Looks to me, Androids free-for-all is about to end for the average user.
Of course, on the iPhone and Android devices, the people who want around the system will find a way.
Love your screen name! Reminds me of someone else here. :p
As for this article. I'm sure it's here so we can see whats going on in e industry. Looks to me, Androids free-for-all is about to end for the average user.
Of course, on the iPhone and Android devices, the people who want around the system will find a way.
kdarling
Oct 6, 11:35 PM
Seriously, what is it with verizon?! They didn't want they iphone b/c it came with features out the box that Apple wasn't going to cripple so verizon could charge their premiums for it..
Well if Verizon hadn't been so crazy to try to corn hole Apple over the features of the iPhone and cause Apple to walk from the discussions, it would be a nearly bankrupt AT&T with their nose pressed against the glass saying that the iPhone sucks...
You might want to read articles like this one (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/01/29/verizon_passed_on_exclusive_5_year_iphone_deal.html).
It was Apple that wanted extra control and money. And they didn't walk away for a very lonnng time. They spent a year, off and on, trying to get Verizon to agree to their terms.
There was no animosity. No fights. None of the fantasy drama you read about on fanboy sites.
Verizon almost certainly never even saw an iPhone. (Even ATT didn't until months later.) Perhaps if they had, things could've turned out differently.
Well if Verizon hadn't been so crazy to try to corn hole Apple over the features of the iPhone and cause Apple to walk from the discussions, it would be a nearly bankrupt AT&T with their nose pressed against the glass saying that the iPhone sucks...
You might want to read articles like this one (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/01/29/verizon_passed_on_exclusive_5_year_iphone_deal.html).
It was Apple that wanted extra control and money. And they didn't walk away for a very lonnng time. They spent a year, off and on, trying to get Verizon to agree to their terms.
There was no animosity. No fights. None of the fantasy drama you read about on fanboy sites.
Verizon almost certainly never even saw an iPhone. (Even ATT didn't until months later.) Perhaps if they had, things could've turned out differently.
donlphi
Sep 25, 02:27 PM
According to the new features list for Aperture 1.5
"Run Aperture on any Intel-based Mac. Any desktop, including Mac mini, iMac, and Mac Pro. Or any notebook, including MacBook and MacBook Pro.
"
Technically my POWERMAC G4 can run iMovie, Keynote, and other mac software. RUNNING and FUNCTIONING (at a reasonable speed) are two totally different things. iPhoto takes a day to get going. I can't imagine aperture.
Anyway... I don't want to ruin anybody's happy day, but the reality is, if you don't have the latest and greatest Apple Machine, the current software runs pretty slow.
Go to the Apple store (yes, this means some of you will have to leave your apartment) and try running this software on a mac mini. Don't get depressed when it takes your entire lunch break to start the software. Forget about moving stacks of photos around and editing. As I mentioned... I had problems with the G5 QUAD and the original aperture at my Apple Store in Seattle. THEN AGAIN... they haven't updated half the things in the store. SLOPPY SLOPPY SLOPPY.
Just a thought.
"Run Aperture on any Intel-based Mac. Any desktop, including Mac mini, iMac, and Mac Pro. Or any notebook, including MacBook and MacBook Pro.
"
Technically my POWERMAC G4 can run iMovie, Keynote, and other mac software. RUNNING and FUNCTIONING (at a reasonable speed) are two totally different things. iPhoto takes a day to get going. I can't imagine aperture.
Anyway... I don't want to ruin anybody's happy day, but the reality is, if you don't have the latest and greatest Apple Machine, the current software runs pretty slow.
Go to the Apple store (yes, this means some of you will have to leave your apartment) and try running this software on a mac mini. Don't get depressed when it takes your entire lunch break to start the software. Forget about moving stacks of photos around and editing. As I mentioned... I had problems with the G5 QUAD and the original aperture at my Apple Store in Seattle. THEN AGAIN... they haven't updated half the things in the store. SLOPPY SLOPPY SLOPPY.
Just a thought.
Edge100
Oct 23, 12:26 PM
New investments in technologies and products would be by far the best use of the money. With Apple's cash, they could set up a research arm similar to Xerox PARC or the old Bell Labs and place themselves in the forefront of new technology for a long time. Instead, they seem to be notably stingy with their R&D dollars. Purchasing technologies by buying out smaller companies could also be advantageous, and Apple does do some of this, but not much -- not enough to make even a dent in their cash hoard.
I'm not so sure that Apple needs to re-invent the wheel all the time. It seems to me that Apple is (historically) pretty good at introducing new features, long before other PC manufacturers.
While I agree that a dedicated research arm could, in the long term, create a lot of great, innovative products and technologies, I think they have the possibility, if not properly run, to become cash cows that produce little or nothing of any profit-making value. Researchers have a way of remaining focused on research, not profits.
I still think that buying up other small, but influential companies such as Digidesign would be a great thing for Apple. Think of all the products that Apple currently sells that were bought, rather than developed in-house:
iTunes
Final Cut Pro
Shake
Logic (and, by extension, Garageband)
LiveType
Heck, even MacOS X was, in many ways, 'bought' rather than developed by Apple.
I'm not so sure that Apple needs to re-invent the wheel all the time. It seems to me that Apple is (historically) pretty good at introducing new features, long before other PC manufacturers.
While I agree that a dedicated research arm could, in the long term, create a lot of great, innovative products and technologies, I think they have the possibility, if not properly run, to become cash cows that produce little or nothing of any profit-making value. Researchers have a way of remaining focused on research, not profits.
I still think that buying up other small, but influential companies such as Digidesign would be a great thing for Apple. Think of all the products that Apple currently sells that were bought, rather than developed in-house:
iTunes
Final Cut Pro
Shake
Logic (and, by extension, Garageband)
LiveType
Heck, even MacOS X was, in many ways, 'bought' rather than developed by Apple.
aristobrat
Oct 6, 06:32 PM
I think the biggest problem is when Apple had the chance to change the game by not doing subizided cost they instead give in and just make it worse by forcing a much larger than average subsudize on there phone ($400 vs $250).
Unlock phones puts the network and the phone separete.
I'm not sure why you think Apple's original iPhone sales model was changing the game.
The customer paid the full price of the iPhone, the iPhone was still locked to a specific carrier, and the carrier agreed to pay Apple monthly for every iPhone customer they had.
On top of that, AT&T created a special, cheaper data plan to lure customers in, as the full-priced phone was very off-putting to some.
Sounds like the original iPhone ended up costing AT&T more than the subsidy on the iPhone 3G/3GS did.
And why did Apple change its original sales model? Because they weren't selling nearly as fast as Apple had hoped.
I agree with you that being able to buy any phone and have it work on any network would be awesome. Logistically, I just don't ever see it happening.
Unlock phones puts the network and the phone separete.
I'm not sure why you think Apple's original iPhone sales model was changing the game.
The customer paid the full price of the iPhone, the iPhone was still locked to a specific carrier, and the carrier agreed to pay Apple monthly for every iPhone customer they had.
On top of that, AT&T created a special, cheaper data plan to lure customers in, as the full-priced phone was very off-putting to some.
Sounds like the original iPhone ended up costing AT&T more than the subsidy on the iPhone 3G/3GS did.
And why did Apple change its original sales model? Because they weren't selling nearly as fast as Apple had hoped.
I agree with you that being able to buy any phone and have it work on any network would be awesome. Logistically, I just don't ever see it happening.
iJohnHenry
Apr 27, 05:28 PM
Only if they are walking around naked. There are still going to be stalls right?
Right.
Eyes were made for looking, so men look. Sorry.
But I bet if an unwelcome advance were made in a unisex washroom, any male with balls would come forward, and make life more complicated for the insurgent.
I know I would.
Right.
Eyes were made for looking, so men look. Sorry.
But I bet if an unwelcome advance were made in a unisex washroom, any male with balls would come forward, and make life more complicated for the insurgent.
I know I would.
gorgeousninja
Apr 17, 06:24 AM
Everything on the original iPhone was already in use by other phones. Apple simply combined them all together in one phone and made it simpler to use. It revolutionized yeah, by simply bringing that stuff to the front of peoples minds.
oh so they just 'brought all those things together, and made it easier to use'..
Isn't that just a very ungracious way of saying that Apple introduced a phone the like of which no-one had seen before and thus revolutionized the market then?
oh so they just 'brought all those things together, and made it easier to use'..
Isn't that just a very ungracious way of saying that Apple introduced a phone the like of which no-one had seen before and thus revolutionized the market then?
mgguy
Mar 3, 09:35 PM
I heard somewhere that federal employees are not able to collectively bargain for their benefits package. If this is true, why are recent states' attempts to restrict unionized bargaining seen as being so draconian, and why isn't there an outcry to give federal employees the same "rights"?
No comments:
Post a Comment