samiwas
Mar 4, 12:44 PM
The way 5p talks is the reason so many middle- and lower-class people (who are watching all of their livelihoods disappear) still side with the GOP. His words are carefully selected, and phrases carefully crafted, to make people feel that if they give up more, they will end up receiving more benefit. They eat that crap up and choose these people, only to watch more get taken away. It's been working for years, while things are only getting worse for them. Then they are told to "stay the course" because these policies will help them in the long run. Meanwhile, those at the top keep getting more and more, and those at the bottom get less and less. But "stay the course" and you will benefit, we promise you.
<edit>
And as for the anti-gay measure tacked on...what the hell does that have to do with unions? Who do these random things get thrown onto bills that have absolutely no relation whatsoever to the issue at hand? Is it because the writers of these bills know that their scaremongering tactics won't work on that piece of drivel, so they try to hide it inside something else? Do they think that people are really too stupid to see that? They put it in something that's more likely to get passed so that it appears there is actually support for it. It's sad really. I feel bad for these people.
<edit>
And as for the anti-gay measure tacked on...what the hell does that have to do with unions? Who do these random things get thrown onto bills that have absolutely no relation whatsoever to the issue at hand? Is it because the writers of these bills know that their scaremongering tactics won't work on that piece of drivel, so they try to hide it inside something else? Do they think that people are really too stupid to see that? They put it in something that's more likely to get passed so that it appears there is actually support for it. It's sad really. I feel bad for these people.
twoodcc
Aug 17, 06:55 PM
Hmm, I have a machine with 3 cards and one of them runs at 90c while the others run at 70+. the other machine with 3 cards all run at 70c
at least that is runable. my system will crash once the one card gets to 104-105C
That is weird :confused:
yeah it is. i've closed the case, but it's still laying down
at least that is runable. my system will crash once the one card gets to 104-105C
That is weird :confused:
yeah it is. i've closed the case, but it's still laying down
jelloshotsrule
Sep 7, 11:51 PM
i get the feeling a lot of people are going to jump on the bash kanye west bandwagon since he trashed george bush.
the racism that is apparent in this thread is frightening though
the racism that is apparent in this thread is frightening though
quagmire
Aug 3, 08:44 PM
Never going to happen car dealer have bribe our politcal leaders to the point that nothing will ever be passes against the
As it stands manufactures can not legally open and run there own dealership and the laws make it very difficult for a manufacture to remove an agreement to sell to one dealler ship
I know that and it sucks because all the blame for one bad dealer experience goes to the manufactures.
Dealerships have way too much power. You can thank them for the Pontiac G3 and G5.
As it stands manufactures can not legally open and run there own dealership and the laws make it very difficult for a manufacture to remove an agreement to sell to one dealler ship
I know that and it sucks because all the blame for one bad dealer experience goes to the manufactures.
Dealerships have way too much power. You can thank them for the Pontiac G3 and G5.
more...
twoodcc
Dec 10, 04:11 PM
Yeah, that is not good. Thermal paste perhaps?
well it could be. i didn't reapple any. and the max temp on any core has been 89 C
well it could be. i didn't reapple any. and the max temp on any core has been 89 C
hob
Jan 9, 01:35 PM
Command + R are my new friends. Although I'm not sure they like me hitting them so much... :rolleyes:
Oh, and in reply to the guy who is going to give up at 8,
Yes?
please don't put spoilers on here if you do take a look. That would not make me happy after all this waiting! :)
You think I'd be that harsh?! I'm almost offended :P
I'm just trying this this time round... not sure I'll want to do it again. But maybe... depends how good the pay-off is in comparison. I have a feeling the stream will be horrendous to watch until tomorrow at the earliest... Which I can't wait for!
Oh, and in reply to the guy who is going to give up at 8,
Yes?
please don't put spoilers on here if you do take a look. That would not make me happy after all this waiting! :)
You think I'd be that harsh?! I'm almost offended :P
I'm just trying this this time round... not sure I'll want to do it again. But maybe... depends how good the pay-off is in comparison. I have a feeling the stream will be horrendous to watch until tomorrow at the earliest... Which I can't wait for!
more...
KnightWRX
Apr 29, 07:24 PM
Read my post. I didn't say he was right about them being the same kernal. I simply said he was right about the naming conventions.
The version in question isn't simply the gui version number, but the code base version as a whole.
Windows 95/98 don't share a code base with Windows NT. You are aware that the NT line is a complete rewrite, 32 bit from the ground-up and a completely different kernel/system architecture ?
It's like saying OS X and classic are the same code base...
The Win32 sub-system (which is only 1 sub-system in NT) might share some code, that's about it.
The only way it makes sense is by using the actual version numbers that MS gave us, which are quite easily found. ;) Not only in Windows but in several sources through the net. I'll believe the info MS gives us vs someone from macrumors.
No, because then as pointed out by your MS friend, it would be Windows NT 6.1 ;) Your blog post even says it doesn't make sense, so I don't see how "MS gave you info" when your "source" says it doesn't make any sense.
Again, only way it actually makes sense is from a marketing perspective and as being the 7th release in the Windows NT line-up.
The version in question isn't simply the gui version number, but the code base version as a whole.
Windows 95/98 don't share a code base with Windows NT. You are aware that the NT line is a complete rewrite, 32 bit from the ground-up and a completely different kernel/system architecture ?
It's like saying OS X and classic are the same code base...
The Win32 sub-system (which is only 1 sub-system in NT) might share some code, that's about it.
The only way it makes sense is by using the actual version numbers that MS gave us, which are quite easily found. ;) Not only in Windows but in several sources through the net. I'll believe the info MS gives us vs someone from macrumors.
No, because then as pointed out by your MS friend, it would be Windows NT 6.1 ;) Your blog post even says it doesn't make sense, so I don't see how "MS gave you info" when your "source" says it doesn't make any sense.
Again, only way it actually makes sense is from a marketing perspective and as being the 7th release in the Windows NT line-up.
Nekbeth
Apr 25, 04:00 PM
Thanks for your advice dejo, but I'm not stepping away because of lack of fundamentals. Interaction with other developers is an additional learning source (the main is all kind of documentation), of course I need to learn more about fundamentals of objective C just like you did when you had 3 months programming, but that ain't stopping me from asking help in forums. Some people help you, some don't, you just have to deal with that.
btw, thanks for pointing my error, your right.. those are declaration for cancelTime: and cancelIt: , I got confuse with the parameter :D
btw, thanks for pointing my error, your right.. those are declaration for cancelTime: and cancelIt: , I got confuse with the parameter :D
more...
Pressure
Nov 16, 08:17 AM
And people thought Apple could never ever go Intel, so why not? Athlon 64 x2 cores have dropped in price,ati has a bunch of video chips it could mate and this machine would kill any integrated graphic solution if both Apple & Ati were wanting to do this. It would make sense. Rumors:)
Perhaps but they are not competing right now on either products or road maps.
You don't change vendor like the wind blows.
Perhaps but they are not competing right now on either products or road maps.
You don't change vendor like the wind blows.
DrFrankTM
Sep 12, 11:38 AM
Engadget is reporting that Woz will be in the audience today. When is the last time Woz showed up at anything Apple? This event could be bigger than we thought if it gets Woz to show up.
Apple's 30th birthday party? A bit late, for sure, but it's not like they did much on April 1st.
Apple's 30th birthday party? A bit late, for sure, but it's not like they did much on April 1st.
more...
Liquorpuki
Mar 7, 12:21 AM
Why is Apple the only tech company that makes unique products? All the other big ones seem to just drop in behind Apple after they invent something... Examples:
�Phones that are designed to simply compete with the iPhone.
�Pretty much every non-Apple tablet.
�iMac lookalikes.
�I've even seem some unibody copy cats...
Why don't they try and come up with something of their own instead of trying to "make a better Apple product"? Its annoying... :mad:
You know... tech consists of much more than just smartphones and personal computers
Look at mobile gaming. Apple being in the market is actually screwing it up
�Phones that are designed to simply compete with the iPhone.
�Pretty much every non-Apple tablet.
�iMac lookalikes.
�I've even seem some unibody copy cats...
Why don't they try and come up with something of their own instead of trying to "make a better Apple product"? Its annoying... :mad:
You know... tech consists of much more than just smartphones and personal computers
Look at mobile gaming. Apple being in the market is actually screwing it up
Lancetx
Oct 6, 04:53 PM
Obviously YMMV, but I've never had any significant issues at all with AT&T's service in the nearly 2 1/2 years since I switched to them for the original iPhone. The same has continued since I upgraded to the 3GS as well. Verizon doesn't have the iPhone and won't be getting it anytime soon (if ever), so they're not on my radar screen anyway. And even if they did ever add the iPhone at some point, I doubt I'd ever switch because my own personal experience with Verizon's service several years ago was that it was absolutely dreadful.
more...
lordonuthin
Aug 16, 06:21 PM
well here's something weird going on. when i stand my computer up, the temps go up. and when i lay it down, they go back down. here is a youtube video of it. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXCSPXOOZ5U)
but i do have a theory. the only thing i can think of is the cpu cooler isn't air tight, even though i screwed it as tight as i could. oh well, i guess i'll check it laid down
That is weird :confused:
but i do have a theory. the only thing i can think of is the cpu cooler isn't air tight, even though i screwed it as tight as i could. oh well, i guess i'll check it laid down
That is weird :confused:
NoSmokingBandit
Nov 14, 09:47 PM
MW2's plot wasn't too ludicrous. You infiltrate a Russian terrorist cell, you're commanding officer betrays you, starts a war between the US and Russia. The only ludicrous part that I can remember is a nuke blowing apart the ISS.
There are many things wrong with MW2's plot. Instead of typing them all out i'll just copypasta them.
�As the mission opens, we�re treated to General Shepherd reciting a litany of Makarov�s excesses over a montage of shocking headlines. Makarov is an internationally known figure of menace, then, with a Russian military record. So when he confidently machineguns his way through the airport without even bothering to put on a mask, are we to believe that the Russian authorities weren�t able to identify him from security camera footage?
Instead, Russia blames a nobody CIA agent found dead at the scene who was killed by a point-blank pistol shot to the head. That doesn�t raise any red flags at all? The obvious conclusion is that the whole thing was an American plot, and that a full-scale invasion of the continental US is the appropriate response. The transition to the Takedown favela mission begets more confusion, such as: how did Shepherd tie the shell casings to Rojas? Meticulous analysis of the cutscene indicates that he actually re-created a 3D model of a shell casing from security camera footage, which was sufficiently hi-rez to make a match against a big bullet database. So the Russians, who had the actual shell casings to analyze, couldn�t figure that out? The security footage was crisp enough to recreate minute detail on a spent shell casing, but not of sufficient quality to identify Makarov�s face. Conclusion: Makarov�s face is smaller than a bullet.
�When the warriors of 141 get to South America, they make short work of tracking down their man. Unfortunately, HQ won�t send a helicopter to extract them from the favela so Soap rings up his old pal Nikolai on a payphone. Luckily, the Russian informant just so happens to be tooling around Rio in a chopper and pops right over to pick them up. The mission itself, dashing weaponless across rooftops and frantically leaping to safety, was brilliant fun in the heat of the moment. But upon reflection, we must concede that nothing about the scenario makes a bit of sense. But look, it�s Nikolai!!
�With his newfound freedom, Price�s first order of business is to launch a nuclear warhead at the east coast of the United States, with the goal of snuffing out the Russian invasion. Of course, he wasn�t planning to nuke America outright. When a nuclear explosion occurs in space, the only effect is an EMP blast that destroys all unshielded electronics in its line of sight.
While it made for an intensely dramatic scene as the burst rippled across America and demolished the ISS, there�s no way Price could have launched a missile from a Russian nuclear sub by himself. Did he just ring up Nikolai on a payphone to get the launch codes? How did he singlehandedly defeat the physical safety measures? You don�t just push the glowy red button with the mean face on it. There are elaborate control systems in place to prevent just such unauthorized launches.
http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb/GamesRadar/us/Games/M/Modern%20Warfare%202/Everything%20else/plot%20holes/Finished/112009_modernwarfare2_obs06--article_image.jpg
Above: Two people have to turn launch keys simultaneously to fire a real nuclear missile
One more thing: how did Price get it to detonate in space, anyhow? We�re pretty sure that wasn�t part of the missile�s original instructions. Regardless, if the Russians were serious about their �kill America� plan from the get-go, they probably would have launched HEMP and nuclear strikes of their own as a precursor to the invasion.
�Once the Russians have been successfully repelled, Shepherd and Task Force 141 get down to the business of mopping up Makarov. Shepherd calls out two potential hiding places, the �last safe havens on earth for Makarov and his men.� Incidentally, no one stopped to wonder how Shepherd suddenly uncovered these safe havens or, if he knew about them all along, why they weren�t investigated after the airport massacre. But wait! Intel gathered at one of the safehouses links Makarov to Shepherd: cue the shocking murder of Ghost and Roach at Shepherd�s hands.
Devastated, Price and Soap moan about how they�re all alone in the world with no one to turn to. Umm, guys? Aren�t you technically still officers in the British Armed Forces? Sure Shepherd was calling the duo �terrorists,� but America�s credibility on the world stage was shot to hell after the airport incident. Someone over at SAS would remember the heroes who gunned down Zakhaev and send help. No? OK, better just grab Nikolai and go after the bad guy yourselves.
Theres more you can read on your own, but these are the biggest imo.
http://www.gamesradar.com/f/modern-warfare-2s-glaring-plot-holes-exposed/a-20091120123332495077/p-1
There are many things wrong with MW2's plot. Instead of typing them all out i'll just copypasta them.
�As the mission opens, we�re treated to General Shepherd reciting a litany of Makarov�s excesses over a montage of shocking headlines. Makarov is an internationally known figure of menace, then, with a Russian military record. So when he confidently machineguns his way through the airport without even bothering to put on a mask, are we to believe that the Russian authorities weren�t able to identify him from security camera footage?
Instead, Russia blames a nobody CIA agent found dead at the scene who was killed by a point-blank pistol shot to the head. That doesn�t raise any red flags at all? The obvious conclusion is that the whole thing was an American plot, and that a full-scale invasion of the continental US is the appropriate response. The transition to the Takedown favela mission begets more confusion, such as: how did Shepherd tie the shell casings to Rojas? Meticulous analysis of the cutscene indicates that he actually re-created a 3D model of a shell casing from security camera footage, which was sufficiently hi-rez to make a match against a big bullet database. So the Russians, who had the actual shell casings to analyze, couldn�t figure that out? The security footage was crisp enough to recreate minute detail on a spent shell casing, but not of sufficient quality to identify Makarov�s face. Conclusion: Makarov�s face is smaller than a bullet.
�When the warriors of 141 get to South America, they make short work of tracking down their man. Unfortunately, HQ won�t send a helicopter to extract them from the favela so Soap rings up his old pal Nikolai on a payphone. Luckily, the Russian informant just so happens to be tooling around Rio in a chopper and pops right over to pick them up. The mission itself, dashing weaponless across rooftops and frantically leaping to safety, was brilliant fun in the heat of the moment. But upon reflection, we must concede that nothing about the scenario makes a bit of sense. But look, it�s Nikolai!!
�With his newfound freedom, Price�s first order of business is to launch a nuclear warhead at the east coast of the United States, with the goal of snuffing out the Russian invasion. Of course, he wasn�t planning to nuke America outright. When a nuclear explosion occurs in space, the only effect is an EMP blast that destroys all unshielded electronics in its line of sight.
While it made for an intensely dramatic scene as the burst rippled across America and demolished the ISS, there�s no way Price could have launched a missile from a Russian nuclear sub by himself. Did he just ring up Nikolai on a payphone to get the launch codes? How did he singlehandedly defeat the physical safety measures? You don�t just push the glowy red button with the mean face on it. There are elaborate control systems in place to prevent just such unauthorized launches.
http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb/GamesRadar/us/Games/M/Modern%20Warfare%202/Everything%20else/plot%20holes/Finished/112009_modernwarfare2_obs06--article_image.jpg
Above: Two people have to turn launch keys simultaneously to fire a real nuclear missile
One more thing: how did Price get it to detonate in space, anyhow? We�re pretty sure that wasn�t part of the missile�s original instructions. Regardless, if the Russians were serious about their �kill America� plan from the get-go, they probably would have launched HEMP and nuclear strikes of their own as a precursor to the invasion.
�Once the Russians have been successfully repelled, Shepherd and Task Force 141 get down to the business of mopping up Makarov. Shepherd calls out two potential hiding places, the �last safe havens on earth for Makarov and his men.� Incidentally, no one stopped to wonder how Shepherd suddenly uncovered these safe havens or, if he knew about them all along, why they weren�t investigated after the airport massacre. But wait! Intel gathered at one of the safehouses links Makarov to Shepherd: cue the shocking murder of Ghost and Roach at Shepherd�s hands.
Devastated, Price and Soap moan about how they�re all alone in the world with no one to turn to. Umm, guys? Aren�t you technically still officers in the British Armed Forces? Sure Shepherd was calling the duo �terrorists,� but America�s credibility on the world stage was shot to hell after the airport incident. Someone over at SAS would remember the heroes who gunned down Zakhaev and send help. No? OK, better just grab Nikolai and go after the bad guy yourselves.
Theres more you can read on your own, but these are the biggest imo.
http://www.gamesradar.com/f/modern-warfare-2s-glaring-plot-holes-exposed/a-20091120123332495077/p-1
more...
JDOG_
Oct 19, 10:04 AM
This is great news, and that's a lot of macs! I can't help but think part of this is a big group of people waiting to buy a PC until it comes with Vista. Maybe I'm giving them too much credit, but if I could wait a couple months on the purchase to avoid an imminent ~$150+ O.S. upgrade I would. :cool:
Arcus
Oct 28, 11:10 PM
And now somebody is probably thinking im going to do this the illegal way.. But NO, several of my friends run OSX so no problem in getting OSX.
Thye paid for it . You didnt. How is your friends having OSX helping you get it legally.
Thye paid for it . You didnt. How is your friends having OSX helping you get it legally.
more...
KnightWRX
Apr 27, 08:08 PM
The only thing that I'm missing is to restart the Timer (or use another one). Invalidating my Timer only pauses it, even = nil or releasing it, my Timer just continues where it left.
What makes you think that ? Once you invalidate a timer, it's done and gone. Look, I implemented a timer that updates on screen with minutes:seconds and it gets reset properly when I invalidate it (take a peek at the screenshot).
A screenshot like this goes a long way. Console output with NSLog to know what gets called and when is even better.
If you posted up the full code of your viewController, we might even be able to point you in the right direction. The more you are specific, the better we can help.
I'm thinking you don't quite grasp what an NSTimer object is. It's not an actual timer as in a chicken timer. It's just an object that's inserted into the run loop, waits for a specificied interval and then calls a method (depending either the NSInvocation or the target/selector you used when creating it). If you set its repeat to YES, it will call this method over and over again at the specified interval.
This specified method (in my screenshot that would be updateLabel) has to do some processing to display minutes:seconds on a label.
What makes you think that ? Once you invalidate a timer, it's done and gone. Look, I implemented a timer that updates on screen with minutes:seconds and it gets reset properly when I invalidate it (take a peek at the screenshot).
A screenshot like this goes a long way. Console output with NSLog to know what gets called and when is even better.
If you posted up the full code of your viewController, we might even be able to point you in the right direction. The more you are specific, the better we can help.
I'm thinking you don't quite grasp what an NSTimer object is. It's not an actual timer as in a chicken timer. It's just an object that's inserted into the run loop, waits for a specificied interval and then calls a method (depending either the NSInvocation or the target/selector you used when creating it). If you set its repeat to YES, it will call this method over and over again at the specified interval.
This specified method (in my screenshot that would be updateLabel) has to do some processing to display minutes:seconds on a label.
kresh
Oct 28, 07:23 PM
I don't think there are many out there who think all software should be free. I think these OSS advocates just want as much free stuff as possible, for many reasons.
People want OSS because it spurs innovation. Keep in mind that OS X is built on OSS, and that's one of the reasons it's more secure and more powerful than windows.
That's not to mention the fact that Apple has taken OS X from infancy to the mature OS that it is today at a record pace. This is, in no small part, due to the FREE code they're "stealing."
Apple doesn't sell operating systems for profit, they sell HARDWARE. These people over at OSx86 are trying to create a product that doesn't really exist: OS X on BIOS hardware.
That's just rationalization and obfuscation. Apple is not using anything outside of licensing stipulations. The GUI belongs to Apple. They are not giving OSx86 a license to Aqua thus it is theft.
That fact just can't be gotten around.
And to all those who seem to believe that Apple just has to open OSX up to run on any hardware or they will be doomed, you are ignoring history.
Apple wen't down the road of the clones and it damn near put them out of business. It would be sheer stupidity to go down that road again and expect a different result.
If Apple opens OSX to any hardware, just how will they compete? They could not compete against the cloners because they were smaller and could adapt new hardware alot more quickly.
Apple would quickly see their hardware sales dry up, those sales lost to the Dells, Acers, HP, and the whole litanany of bargin basement hardware assemblers.
If you really think Apple can't survive unless they open up OSX, explain how they would compete and win, don't just make a broad unsubstantiated demand that they open it up.
And who cares about marketshare anyway? 80% of the market is made up of almost zero margin hardware sales, how much of that does Apple really want.
/end rant
People want OSS because it spurs innovation. Keep in mind that OS X is built on OSS, and that's one of the reasons it's more secure and more powerful than windows.
That's not to mention the fact that Apple has taken OS X from infancy to the mature OS that it is today at a record pace. This is, in no small part, due to the FREE code they're "stealing."
Apple doesn't sell operating systems for profit, they sell HARDWARE. These people over at OSx86 are trying to create a product that doesn't really exist: OS X on BIOS hardware.
That's just rationalization and obfuscation. Apple is not using anything outside of licensing stipulations. The GUI belongs to Apple. They are not giving OSx86 a license to Aqua thus it is theft.
That fact just can't be gotten around.
And to all those who seem to believe that Apple just has to open OSX up to run on any hardware or they will be doomed, you are ignoring history.
Apple wen't down the road of the clones and it damn near put them out of business. It would be sheer stupidity to go down that road again and expect a different result.
If Apple opens OSX to any hardware, just how will they compete? They could not compete against the cloners because they were smaller and could adapt new hardware alot more quickly.
Apple would quickly see their hardware sales dry up, those sales lost to the Dells, Acers, HP, and the whole litanany of bargin basement hardware assemblers.
If you really think Apple can't survive unless they open up OSX, explain how they would compete and win, don't just make a broad unsubstantiated demand that they open it up.
And who cares about marketshare anyway? 80% of the market is made up of almost zero margin hardware sales, how much of that does Apple really want.
/end rant
QuarterSwede
Apr 25, 01:27 PM
The phone will be the 4s. The start of production of the CDMA phone in Aug 2010 threw everything off kilter.
The 4s will be a 4 with the 3.7 screen, and a A5 chip. That is it. Period.
The 5 will be out in 2012 with Qualcomms 2nd gen Dual Band Chip which will be ready early 2012. It will will be a complete redesign with LTE. My money is on some type of new chassis with a new hybrid aluminum. The back glass will be gone for sure.
Apple will then produce 1 World iPhone. 5,6,7,8,9.... all Global Phones. :apple:
I'd say that's pretty plausible.
[EDIT] I don't know if I agree with all the names though, but honestly that matters not.
The 4s will be a 4 with the 3.7 screen, and a A5 chip. That is it. Period.
The 5 will be out in 2012 with Qualcomms 2nd gen Dual Band Chip which will be ready early 2012. It will will be a complete redesign with LTE. My money is on some type of new chassis with a new hybrid aluminum. The back glass will be gone for sure.
Apple will then produce 1 World iPhone. 5,6,7,8,9.... all Global Phones. :apple:
I'd say that's pretty plausible.
[EDIT] I don't know if I agree with all the names though, but honestly that matters not.
iRobby
Mar 25, 12:07 AM
Happy Birthday Mac OS X!! But OMG I am so terrified because I have been so slow compared to all of you. This summer I'll be getting my first Mac machine (a 2011 iMac 27" Quad Core) in my house since Apple IIe.
So Mac OS X Lion will take my virginity!! The reason I'm so terrified is because I'm not switching from Windows 7 or Windows Vista but from Windows XP! yes this Dell is from 2005!! So it'll probably be a great task playing catch up! HELP!!
So Mac OS X Lion will take my virginity!! The reason I'm so terrified is because I'm not switching from Windows 7 or Windows Vista but from Windows XP! yes this Dell is from 2005!! So it'll probably be a great task playing catch up! HELP!!
rhett7660
Apr 22, 10:15 AM
Boy I can't wait to see this used on some of the posts by certain members. This is going to be down right comical. Nothing like seeing a -54 on a post. :D
skunk
Apr 25, 03:01 PM
Or, more simply, you could just remove the injunction against posting "+1".
virus1
Sep 12, 08:33 AM
s*** this is so exciting! im probably not the first one to notice that it says "the itunes store" not the itunes music store.... !!!
*LTD*
Apr 10, 11:59 PM
Did they copy Apple to get 90% of the market?
No, they licensed out their OS to everyone and anyone who could slam together a box and then set about strong-arming box-makers to use Windows and only Windows.
Plus, PCs were and are cheap.
The success of Windows has NOTHING to do with its quality as an OS, and has everything to do with MS' comfortable universal licensing racket.
No, they licensed out their OS to everyone and anyone who could slam together a box and then set about strong-arming box-makers to use Windows and only Windows.
Plus, PCs were and are cheap.
The success of Windows has NOTHING to do with its quality as an OS, and has everything to do with MS' comfortable universal licensing racket.
