PodHead
Nov 26, 07:00 AM
Bought my new Macbook early on Friday. I still haven't gotten a confirm e-mail?! Are they slow about shipping:confused:
SevenInchScrew
Nov 28, 05:16 PM
But think of it this way. The average amount of kills you get per napalm strike, mortar team and valkyrie rockets are get on average same amount of kills as rc-xd.
I disagree. At least in the many games I've played so far, getting multi-kills with the RC-XD is pretty rare, whereas the Napalm and Valkyrie are pretty much a 2-3 kill, at least.
Getting 3 kills per rc car is also nothing rare in a domination or hq game.
Then my previous statement is given more credence. If 3-4 people on a team are still standing around, all huddled up, even AFTER the call-out for the RC-XD, then they deserve to get multi'd.
....and how it guarantees kills
They can be stopped, in many ways, whereas most other killstreaks can't. Plus, there really isn't any other offensive Killstreaks in the lower kill range, as they are mostly only defensive. If they made it a 4-5 killstreak, people who aren't as good at the game would never get to do anything fun like that. And then, as well, only the people who ARE good at the game would get to possibly add kills to their total.
I think it all really boils down to how people play the game. Despite the size of the maps, you can't just run around on the offensive all the time. Listen for the call-outs from the other teams killstreaks, and respond defensively when appropriate. Spy planes or choppers coming? Shoot them down. RC, Napalm, Mortar, Dogs or Valkyrie Rockets? Get indoors and hide, and defend your position for a few seconds.
The only killstreak with a limited counter is the SR71. If someone has a Counter Spy Plane, they can jam the Blackbird, otherwise nothing can stop it. But really, that person has already killed your team 7-8 times, so you've sort of brought it upon yourself.if we are talking about killstreaks: the huey chopper gunner red highlighting needs to go
Make a Custom Class with Ghost, problem solved. Hell, equip that same class with the Strela, and not only will the various Choppers not shoot you, but you can then bring it down so it stops killing your team as well.
I disagree. At least in the many games I've played so far, getting multi-kills with the RC-XD is pretty rare, whereas the Napalm and Valkyrie are pretty much a 2-3 kill, at least.
Getting 3 kills per rc car is also nothing rare in a domination or hq game.
Then my previous statement is given more credence. If 3-4 people on a team are still standing around, all huddled up, even AFTER the call-out for the RC-XD, then they deserve to get multi'd.
....and how it guarantees kills
They can be stopped, in many ways, whereas most other killstreaks can't. Plus, there really isn't any other offensive Killstreaks in the lower kill range, as they are mostly only defensive. If they made it a 4-5 killstreak, people who aren't as good at the game would never get to do anything fun like that. And then, as well, only the people who ARE good at the game would get to possibly add kills to their total.
I think it all really boils down to how people play the game. Despite the size of the maps, you can't just run around on the offensive all the time. Listen for the call-outs from the other teams killstreaks, and respond defensively when appropriate. Spy planes or choppers coming? Shoot them down. RC, Napalm, Mortar, Dogs or Valkyrie Rockets? Get indoors and hide, and defend your position for a few seconds.
The only killstreak with a limited counter is the SR71. If someone has a Counter Spy Plane, they can jam the Blackbird, otherwise nothing can stop it. But really, that person has already killed your team 7-8 times, so you've sort of brought it upon yourself.if we are talking about killstreaks: the huey chopper gunner red highlighting needs to go
Make a Custom Class with Ghost, problem solved. Hell, equip that same class with the Strela, and not only will the various Choppers not shoot you, but you can then bring it down so it stops killing your team as well.
Chundles
Sep 12, 08:03 AM
Film content from Fox and Dreamworks?!
Look at the german Quicktime page, bottom left, under "iTunes Videos": Transporter 2 from Fox and Red Eye from Dreamworks!!
http://www.apple.com/de/quicktime/mac.html
They appear to be movie trailers.
Look at the german Quicktime page, bottom left, under "iTunes Videos": Transporter 2 from Fox and Red Eye from Dreamworks!!
http://www.apple.com/de/quicktime/mac.html
They appear to be movie trailers.
GadgetAddict
Apr 29, 01:55 PM
What stage will this be stable enough to use as your main OS? :apple:
When it is publicly released.
When it is publicly released.
puuukeey
Jan 9, 01:26 PM
someone posted the whole thing on youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDfRvcjBQlM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDfRvcjBQlM
zacman
May 2, 11:34 AM
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/5716/iphoneo.jpg
pistolero
Apr 5, 06:07 PM
I don't know why you people don't like this. Apple announced iAds like a year ago, and I still haven't seen a single one. I'm simply curious about seeing at least one iAd to see what all the fuss is about. This App allows you to see an iAd so you can know what it is, as no one has actually really implemented them yet. This is probably the only place that has iAds in.
You will only see iAds if the apps you use have implemented them. Most Paid apps don't have them, only free apps with ad support. iAds are not banners on safari or pop ups screens. They're like interactive applets within the app you're using. iAds are usually seen in free news apps such as the guardian or huffington post. So if you mostly use paid apps you will never see a iAd.
You will only see iAds if the apps you use have implemented them. Most Paid apps don't have them, only free apps with ad support. iAds are not banners on safari or pop ups screens. They're like interactive applets within the app you're using. iAds are usually seen in free news apps such as the guardian or huffington post. So if you mostly use paid apps you will never see a iAd.
mr.steevo
Oct 3, 03:08 PM
Hi,
Your Widget.
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/status/macworldexpo2007countdown.html
s.
Your Widget.
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/status/macworldexpo2007countdown.html
s.
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
BoyBach
Oct 17, 01:51 PM
I think the humble DVD-9 is going to be the 'top dog' for movies for quite a while yet. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, plus HD televisions with 780/1080i/p etc resolutions are difficult for the average consumer to understand, never mind get excited about enough to pay out thousands of pounds/dollars for - unless they're cimema-philes or geeks. (No offence meant.)
These massive storage mediums are only useful for computer users for the foreseeable future, where photo & music collections can be backed up to fewer discs.
My unimportant view on the topic, but I'm always right :p
These massive storage mediums are only useful for computer users for the foreseeable future, where photo & music collections can be backed up to fewer discs.
My unimportant view on the topic, but I'm always right :p
Rocketman
Jul 21, 12:49 PM
I want someone to make a utility that replaces the improved bar display and algorithm with a randomized display and algorithm. That way you stop looking for bars to make your life better and just make the damn call and see if it goes through or not. Pass/fail.
Ignorance is bliss. Sometimes.
Maybe Apple could make that an Easter Egg. Those were the days, when Easter Eggs were common. Fun times.
Rocketman
Ignorance is bliss. Sometimes.
Maybe Apple could make that an Easter Egg. Those were the days, when Easter Eggs were common. Fun times.
Rocketman
charlituna
Apr 15, 11:10 PM
I am more curious how the labels are going to try to renegotiate contracts with Apple once Steve moves on.
I am not too sure Tim Cook or anyone of his pay grade is as tough as Steve is when it comes to these label execs.
Layered Hairstyles For Long
Layered Hairstyles For Long
Meagan Good#39;s long side swept
Long Hair Styles With Side
Long hair styles with side
Side+braids+for+long+hair
prom hairstyles long hair to
I am not too sure Tim Cook or anyone of his pay grade is as tough as Steve is when it comes to these label execs.
Anonymous Freak
Oct 10, 07:04 PM
I'm sorry, but with the release of the "true video" iPod "imminent" for months now, I'm just not going to pay any attention whatsoever until I have one in my hands.
Just like the iPhone, PowerBook G5 (and more recently, Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro, although that release hasn't been "imminent" often enough yet,) etc.
I'm starting to doubt page 1 rumors just as much as I doubt Page 2 rumors. Unless you (MacRumors, not the 'source' website of the rumor,) have credible, reliable, direct sources, it belongs on Page 2. If you don't have direct sources, (as rumors on other websites would be,) it does not belong on page 1. By your own standards.
Just because it's getting a lot of talk, and Engadget claims their sources are good, is no reason to upgrade it to page 1 status. (Heck, the iWalk got a lot of talk back in the day, and SpyMac claimed their sources were good. That didn't make it true.)
Just like the iPhone, PowerBook G5 (and more recently, Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro, although that release hasn't been "imminent" often enough yet,) etc.
I'm starting to doubt page 1 rumors just as much as I doubt Page 2 rumors. Unless you (MacRumors, not the 'source' website of the rumor,) have credible, reliable, direct sources, it belongs on Page 2. If you don't have direct sources, (as rumors on other websites would be,) it does not belong on page 1. By your own standards.
Just because it's getting a lot of talk, and Engadget claims their sources are good, is no reason to upgrade it to page 1 status. (Heck, the iWalk got a lot of talk back in the day, and SpyMac claimed their sources were good. That didn't make it true.)
AhmedFaisal
Apr 13, 11:05 AM
So tell me since you seem to be so wise, what would you do to fix this problem? Rather than tear down the current solution how about telling us what you would do to FIX it? We clearly can't get rid of screening as that leaves us open for attack using planes as missles.
Very simple. The way MOSSAD has done it for decades on El Al planes. 2 armed Sky Marshals on the plane. Problem solved. And it's cheaper and less intrusive. The problem is that the airlines don't want to give up 2 business class seats behind the cockpit.
Very simple. The way MOSSAD has done it for decades on El Al planes. 2 armed Sky Marshals on the plane. Problem solved. And it's cheaper and less intrusive. The problem is that the airlines don't want to give up 2 business class seats behind the cockpit.
pudrums
Apr 10, 08:53 AM
Kalter Hauch
http://www.filmempfehlung.com/_bilder/_cover/kalter_hauch.jpg
http://www.filmempfehlung.com/_bilder/_cover/kalter_hauch.jpg
iMeowbot
Sep 12, 12:30 AM
Maybe, but to impact the market, you need a critical mass. Didn't iTMS have 200,000-300,000 songs when it opened?
Yes, but there was hardly any content at all when they started offering videos.
Yes, but there was hardly any content at all when they started offering videos.
slb
Oct 3, 11:50 PM
They might get laughed at but apple will be the ones laughing when their the first to debut santa rosa with 800mhz fsb and nand flash. Hopefully this is whats going to happen
This is what I'm waiting for before considering a Core 2 Mac purchase. However, the current version of the Merom is drop-in replaceable with the Core Duo, so it's strange for Apple to not have something ready for the holidays. I believe they'll quietly update the MacBooks and MacBook Pros sometime in November with Core 2s.
This is what I'm waiting for before considering a Core 2 Mac purchase. However, the current version of the Merom is drop-in replaceable with the Core Duo, so it's strange for Apple to not have something ready for the holidays. I believe they'll quietly update the MacBooks and MacBook Pros sometime in November with Core 2s.
RawBert
Apr 29, 01:20 PM
Damn, I can't wait for the public release of this.
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 21, 01:53 PM
Very true. At the same time I will read and form an opinion of the topic all on my own. I'm sure I'm not alone there, but then again I am sure many will take the popular vote route and just form their opinion based on that. Either way, a post that is good for you and me may not be good for others. I've had a fair share of PMs about my posts, both in support of and against. It is all subjective, as you say, and this rating system will be similar.
well sometimes there is an article about different kind of processor, chips or whatever. some stuff that I don't know anything about. So then I like to look at the votes and see if this is something that is good or bad for Apple. I like to think that majority of the people voting have the same love of apple products and have more insight on this issue than I do.
well sometimes there is an article about different kind of processor, chips or whatever. some stuff that I don't know anything about. So then I like to look at the votes and see if this is something that is good or bad for Apple. I like to think that majority of the people voting have the same love of apple products and have more insight on this issue than I do.
chuckles:)
Oct 10, 09:39 PM
yawn.
mrkramer
Nov 16, 08:25 AM
I'm sure that somewhere in their headquarters Apple keeps a build of OS X on AMD like they did with Intel. But Idon't think that anyone outside of Apple will see it at least for several years.
ozzyman500
Mar 19, 07:29 AM
How could you have it for ages? I think this guy is over exaggerating a little too much.
Surely
Apr 13, 01:34 PM
Yeah the name is slightly awkward :D
And that logo.......I guess the arrow is showing you where to stick it?:eek::D
And that logo.......I guess the arrow is showing you where to stick it?:eek::D
Tommyg117
Oct 11, 08:33 AM
yeah, it'll come at the same time as the iphone.
No comments:
Post a Comment