AppliedVisual
Nov 4, 04:03 PM
got mine today. get it home. open it up. and.
no earphones! the box is only held together with a sticker so i'm thinking they got jacked somewhere along the line. or maybe they where just missed on the assembly line. anyway. tech support said i should have a new pair at my door by tuesday.
anyone else have issues?
Hahahaa... Oh, wait, that really isn't funny. Well, yeah it is.
Oh well, it happens... Probably missed during the packaging.
no earphones! the box is only held together with a sticker so i'm thinking they got jacked somewhere along the line. or maybe they where just missed on the assembly line. anyway. tech support said i should have a new pair at my door by tuesday.
anyone else have issues?
Hahahaa... Oh, wait, that really isn't funny. Well, yeah it is.
Oh well, it happens... Probably missed during the packaging.
cytoxyn
Oct 9, 04:13 PM
no themes that i can find
DJsteveSD
Apr 7, 12:52 PM
TEmpest
TEmpest
TEMPEST!
TEmpest
TEMPEST!
gmidgley
Oct 26, 03:32 AM
I wouldn't expect them to, they are a supplier of apple products and not an apple store, why not head to birmingham or solihull, its only 60 mins away!
Gary
Gary
more...
agentkow
Jan 5, 12:37 AM
Bingo.
Crap, so that means the 2% of people at my school who use Macs will get it...never.
Crap, so that means the 2% of people at my school who use Macs will get it...never.
mrgreen4242
Nov 29, 03:10 PM
Your argument is kind of self-annihilating:
You say competition is tough... implying that there are a multitude of capable actors. i.e. Supply is high. This, in turn, would imply that capable actors are (or should be) a dime a dozen. However, Hollywood acts as though the A-List is all there is... which, if doing so, constricts supply to a significantly smaller population, therefore creating an artificially high demand for which they, subsequently, have to pay through the nose for... which WE now have to pay through the nose for. And for what? For a non-sensical, elitist, Movie Star ecosystem (an industry which alone brings in millions, if not billions).
If there are as many struggling good actors as you say there are (and I hope there are), I for one would LOVE to see them. I'm sick of the same 8 actors... Ben Stiller, Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Julia Roberts, Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn, Steve Carell, Johnny Depp... At least one of these seem to be in 90% of films these days. Some fresh blood would be nice... and easier on the checkbook.
-Clive
Juat to play devils advocate, nearly all the names on your list are relative newcomers to the "A-List". Excepting Pitt, Roberts, and MAYBE Depp, none of those people were big in the '90's. They did mostly smaller budget, less successful films. Up till the mid-90's Pitt was in only handful of OK movies, and really didn't get HUGE 'till after Fight Club or Interview with a Vampire.
What has Julie Roberts been in lately? Not seen her around in a year or two, in anything big at least. Depp was doing TV through the middle of the last decade, and only got MEGA famous in the late 90's.
Sure, those people are big ATM, but they weren't 10 years ago and they won't be in 10 years either. Yes, Hollywood relies to heavily on a big name to sell a crappy product, but they DO rotate those big names somewhat frequently.
Also, while paying someone, say, $20million for a movie is pretty nuts, there's a few things to consider. One, some movies NEED to give you a reason to go see it; doesn't mean they're BAD movies but more that they are a hard sell. Two, that's a fairly small portion of the budget. Let's say we can make a movie for $100m and we pay Tom Cruise $25m to be in it. We could pay some smaller, but equally talented unkown actor a mere $1m to do the same job.
So $100m cost vs. $81m cost. $81m is still a LOT of money to invest in something (and lets face it, movies are simply an investment). Spending a "little" more on Cruise isn't a bad insurance policy for your investment, especially if you (a studio) are doing 10 major movies this year, representing a billion dollars all together.
So, while I'm not trying to defend the studios business methods or choices, I can certainly see why they make them.
You say competition is tough... implying that there are a multitude of capable actors. i.e. Supply is high. This, in turn, would imply that capable actors are (or should be) a dime a dozen. However, Hollywood acts as though the A-List is all there is... which, if doing so, constricts supply to a significantly smaller population, therefore creating an artificially high demand for which they, subsequently, have to pay through the nose for... which WE now have to pay through the nose for. And for what? For a non-sensical, elitist, Movie Star ecosystem (an industry which alone brings in millions, if not billions).
If there are as many struggling good actors as you say there are (and I hope there are), I for one would LOVE to see them. I'm sick of the same 8 actors... Ben Stiller, Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Julia Roberts, Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn, Steve Carell, Johnny Depp... At least one of these seem to be in 90% of films these days. Some fresh blood would be nice... and easier on the checkbook.
-Clive
Juat to play devils advocate, nearly all the names on your list are relative newcomers to the "A-List". Excepting Pitt, Roberts, and MAYBE Depp, none of those people were big in the '90's. They did mostly smaller budget, less successful films. Up till the mid-90's Pitt was in only handful of OK movies, and really didn't get HUGE 'till after Fight Club or Interview with a Vampire.
What has Julie Roberts been in lately? Not seen her around in a year or two, in anything big at least. Depp was doing TV through the middle of the last decade, and only got MEGA famous in the late 90's.
Sure, those people are big ATM, but they weren't 10 years ago and they won't be in 10 years either. Yes, Hollywood relies to heavily on a big name to sell a crappy product, but they DO rotate those big names somewhat frequently.
Also, while paying someone, say, $20million for a movie is pretty nuts, there's a few things to consider. One, some movies NEED to give you a reason to go see it; doesn't mean they're BAD movies but more that they are a hard sell. Two, that's a fairly small portion of the budget. Let's say we can make a movie for $100m and we pay Tom Cruise $25m to be in it. We could pay some smaller, but equally talented unkown actor a mere $1m to do the same job.
So $100m cost vs. $81m cost. $81m is still a LOT of money to invest in something (and lets face it, movies are simply an investment). Spending a "little" more on Cruise isn't a bad insurance policy for your investment, especially if you (a studio) are doing 10 major movies this year, representing a billion dollars all together.
So, while I'm not trying to defend the studios business methods or choices, I can certainly see why they make them.
more...
Mike84
Apr 28, 11:24 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
In the U.S. complaint, Samsung accuses Apple of violating patents that "relate to fundamental innovations that increase mobile device reliability, efficiency, and quality, and improve user interface in mobile handsets and other products.
LOL
Can that be any more VAGUE?! They might as well be suing for the fact that samsung made phones before apple.
Anyone who thinks Apple's reason to sue was bad should just look at that!
Do you realize the complaint goes into WAY more detail about how Apple has apparently infringed on their patents?
Do you realize you are quoting a summary in an article?
In the U.S. complaint, Samsung accuses Apple of violating patents that "relate to fundamental innovations that increase mobile device reliability, efficiency, and quality, and improve user interface in mobile handsets and other products.
LOL
Can that be any more VAGUE?! They might as well be suing for the fact that samsung made phones before apple.
Anyone who thinks Apple's reason to sue was bad should just look at that!
Do you realize the complaint goes into WAY more detail about how Apple has apparently infringed on their patents?
Do you realize you are quoting a summary in an article?
medea
Jul 8, 08:58 PM
hmm, that's no good, anyone know of an app that might do this then?
more...
jprokos
May 6, 12:55 AM
Would someone please report which brand optical drive the 2011 iMacs are using.
jazz9
Feb 2, 07:30 AM
Mine for the month.
I got it from interfacelift fairly recently so it should be on, or near, the front page.
Found link if anyone wants it- http://interfacelift.com/wallpaper_beta/details/2450/raein.html
I got it from interfacelift fairly recently so it should be on, or near, the front page.
Found link if anyone wants it- http://interfacelift.com/wallpaper_beta/details/2450/raein.html
more...
oMc
Dec 13, 08:20 PM
1st one is vmware
2nd one is dropbox
Thank you.
2nd one is dropbox
Thank you.
3N16MA
Apr 28, 07:35 PM
So Samsung believed Apple was violating it's patents all this time but decided to do nothing about it. Now that they have been pushed they decide to act. Sounds to me they are trying to find whatever they can to bite back at Apple.
more...
pewtermoose
Oct 6, 10:01 AM
What I've been waiting for is true javascript support for wysiwyg textarea editors. I run a Mac blog site and I have to ask users to use Firefox. It seems a little sucky to do that for a Mac specific blogger site. Since Safari 1.3 Apple said they included the nessesary "hooks" for these editors, but no one has been successful in getting any of them to work in Safari.
I downloaded the latest nightly build of Webkit and it still doen't work :(
WYSIWYG support is there and is improving all the time. The developers realize this is is an area of concern and it is on their compatibility hit list (http://webkit.org/projects/compat/hitlist.html). The latest TinyMCE development sources work very well in the WebKit nightlies.
If you discover a bug in your website, please report it using the guide (http://webkit.org/quality/reporting.html) on webkit.org. Bugs can't get fixed if the developers don't know about them.
I downloaded the latest nightly build of Webkit and it still doen't work :(
WYSIWYG support is there and is improving all the time. The developers realize this is is an area of concern and it is on their compatibility hit list (http://webkit.org/projects/compat/hitlist.html). The latest TinyMCE development sources work very well in the WebKit nightlies.
If you discover a bug in your website, please report it using the guide (http://webkit.org/quality/reporting.html) on webkit.org. Bugs can't get fixed if the developers don't know about them.
motulist
Apr 7, 10:30 PM
Overpriced. These games are ancient and most of them don't offer much gameplay at all. Plus it cost atari essentially nothing to put this app out. If they made it $0.99 for the hundred pack then it'd be no-brainer, we'd buy it just for the nostalgia alone. I could conceivably see paying up to $4.99 for the hundred pack for the very small handful of games that are actually worth playing. But $14.99 for these junky games? No way.
p.s., I'm not saying all old games are bad, quite the contrary, there are a lot of fantastic old games that still hold up well, but the atari era of games were especially crappy.
p.s., I'm not saying all old games are bad, quite the contrary, there are a lot of fantastic old games that still hold up well, but the atari era of games were especially crappy.
more...
Lykos1986
Dec 7, 11:38 AM
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=263028&d=1291674609
May I have the original?
May I have the original?
miles01110
Apr 17, 09:18 PM
Great. What is the point of this story?
more...
applemike
Feb 5, 06:16 AM
ok i resized it to post on here. enjoy
Thanks for the image
Thanks for the image
kicko
Apr 19, 01:16 PM
try seesmic
also a brand new tweetdeck has been promised to be ready soon.
also a brand new tweetdeck has been promised to be ready soon.
jsw
Feb 15, 10:14 AM
This thread getting out of hand and off-course, me thinks.
I thought we were trying to give one of the new mods a chance to try out thread locking. :)
I thought we were trying to give one of the new mods a chance to try out thread locking. :)
mi5moav
Sep 27, 08:07 AM
Well, finally Apple has the only option for my web mail needs.
Less then $499 a year
No stinking contextual ads
IMAP and POP access
Drag and Drop functionality
Inline Image support
Digital Signatures
Able to Label Mail
Email Encryption
No Banner Ads
Slick Interface
Helps Support AAPL stock
Less then $499 a year
No stinking contextual ads
IMAP and POP access
Drag and Drop functionality
Inline Image support
Digital Signatures
Able to Label Mail
Email Encryption
No Banner Ads
Slick Interface
Helps Support AAPL stock
Thanatoast
Nov 29, 02:12 PM
I can't believe the movie studios didn't learn *anything* from the online music debacle pre-iTS :rolleyes:
iBuferd
Jul 10, 01:26 AM
I talked to my AT&T rep today and he said that he is going to be in the west store over by Taylor's Crossing launch day Friday. I will be at that store instead. ;)
mif
Dec 3, 10:39 AM
No offense like Schneiderman said, but that could give some people nightmares
Don't worry. Original model was over 18. First picture is total clone of her. Second is modified (morphed), so it is not her anymore but my own.
Don't worry. Original model was over 18. First picture is total clone of her. Second is modified (morphed), so it is not her anymore but my own.
jackiecanev2
Jun 27, 11:11 AM
Anything, anyone? I've gotten some offers for some high-spec mini's... someone's gotta have something they don't need anymore. Also might have some stuff for trade...
No comments:
Post a Comment