jettredmont
Oct 23, 10:42 AM
just to clear up the confusion, is this a legal or technical restriction? Can you still do this with the basic edition technically, but illegally. Or are there technical restrictions being applied?
No one will know that until they try installing Windows on a VM.
And, yes, the detection of a VM is simple, given a handful of VM vendors: just look for the VM "hardware" signatures they use. On activation, if any matching hardware is found, pop up a dialog stating "This license of Windows is not applicable to a virtual machine, such as <Parallels or VMWare or Virtual PC>. Activation failed. Please see www.microsoft.com/suckyoudry to enhance your license to allow activation on this virtual machine."
That is precisely what Activation is for: detecting invalid hardware (usually, hardware on which this copy of Windows was not activated, but in thi case also VM hardware) and stopping full use of the product on it. We can't say for certain that they will do this until it happens or someone from MS breaks the code of silence regarding this issue. But they certainly have the means to do it.
No one will know that until they try installing Windows on a VM.
And, yes, the detection of a VM is simple, given a handful of VM vendors: just look for the VM "hardware" signatures they use. On activation, if any matching hardware is found, pop up a dialog stating "This license of Windows is not applicable to a virtual machine, such as <Parallels or VMWare or Virtual PC>. Activation failed. Please see www.microsoft.com/suckyoudry to enhance your license to allow activation on this virtual machine."
That is precisely what Activation is for: detecting invalid hardware (usually, hardware on which this copy of Windows was not activated, but in thi case also VM hardware) and stopping full use of the product on it. We can't say for certain that they will do this until it happens or someone from MS breaks the code of silence regarding this issue. But they certainly have the means to do it.
cleanup
Sep 14, 09:17 AM
Yet, I'm sad nobody else understood it.
I got it, though I don't know precisely what structure it is!
Thanks. Watch for my YouTube™ unboxing later. :p
In the style of SchneiderMan? :)
I got it, though I don't know precisely what structure it is!
Thanks. Watch for my YouTube™ unboxing later. :p
In the style of SchneiderMan? :)
puckhead193
Sep 14, 10:12 AM
Halo Reach. Got it at Best Buy and it came with a free $20 gift card and a blow-up blade :D
http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/halo-reach-leaked.jpg
http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/halo-reach-leaked.jpg
APPLENEWBIE
Jul 10, 02:47 PM
As someone who uses MS word as the default word processor... a 'word processing' mode in Pages sounds dandy... some of use just don't have the time or inclination (energy) to learn pages which is so very different (not worse) than word....
more...
Popeye206
Apr 28, 10:10 AM
So the iPhone went from being pummeled by Android to now just being badly beaten.
That is Awesome.
Why do you keep comparing a single phone model to an entire platform used on 20 some devices?
Oh... that's right... it's all you can hang your hat on. Sorry... let's talk pummeled or badly beaten when any single Android phone outsells the iPhone.
That is Awesome.
Why do you keep comparing a single phone model to an entire platform used on 20 some devices?
Oh... that's right... it's all you can hang your hat on. Sorry... let's talk pummeled or badly beaten when any single Android phone outsells the iPhone.
bursthead
Apr 22, 06:21 PM
I don't see how this is going to work... How are they going to keep the same battery life in this form factor? At this price point, or are they going to increase the prices? I'm not going to go back to my 3GS battery life.
more...
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 26, 05:07 PM
What a freaking RIP-OFF. You could buy 20 new songs a year for that instead (well not on Apple anymore sine they royally screwed everyone on some BS basis of "85 cents songs" to offset the "$1.29" ones except that as most of us predicted, there are hardly any 85 cents songs in existence yet a heck of lot of $1.29 ones. In other words, all they did was jack up prices to cover crap artists who can't sing and don't write their own songs and make farting noises and call it art.)
Meanwhile, what good would this service do? Do you seriously think they're going to let you access your music that you did NOT buy from iTunes??? (i.e. your CD collection dumped to iTunes) NO WAY. You'd have to UPLOAD the entire library first. How LONG would that take? Ridiculous. Then you miss a payment and they delete it all.... It's far more likely it's only for songs you already bought (in which case you could already just 'buy' them again and download them for free; in other words the service is worthless).
What most people would prefer I think is a flat fee music-on-demand service where you can listen to ANY music you want from the entire library. Pandora, Sonus, etc. already offer this service so Apple's "retrieve your own library online" is stupid, IMO. You could rent some storage somewhere and just upload your music there and download it anywhere on the Net WITHOUT APPLE even being involved. The whole thing strikes me as a cash grab from Apple to make you pay for the music you already paid for ALL OVER AGAIN. Bought 100 songs? 5 years you bought 'em again. No value.
My entire music library is only 70GB in AAC without music videos. That would almost fit on an iPod Touch 64GB or USB 64GB stick as it is, let alone my Netbook which has 160GB on it and my MBP which has 500GB. So the ONLY way this service could be useful is if I could access ALL MY MOVIES from anywhere on the Net. That would require 2.6TB of storage, though. I don't see Apple covering that and I wouldn't even want to TRY to upload all those movies from my own library (and Apple doesn't even sell (let alone in good quality) 40% of them and 95% of the HD ones.
No, a flat fee for unlimited rentals (music and movies) would be a good deal. I don't see Apple offering that any time soon, if EVER.
Meanwhile, what good would this service do? Do you seriously think they're going to let you access your music that you did NOT buy from iTunes??? (i.e. your CD collection dumped to iTunes) NO WAY. You'd have to UPLOAD the entire library first. How LONG would that take? Ridiculous. Then you miss a payment and they delete it all.... It's far more likely it's only for songs you already bought (in which case you could already just 'buy' them again and download them for free; in other words the service is worthless).
What most people would prefer I think is a flat fee music-on-demand service where you can listen to ANY music you want from the entire library. Pandora, Sonus, etc. already offer this service so Apple's "retrieve your own library online" is stupid, IMO. You could rent some storage somewhere and just upload your music there and download it anywhere on the Net WITHOUT APPLE even being involved. The whole thing strikes me as a cash grab from Apple to make you pay for the music you already paid for ALL OVER AGAIN. Bought 100 songs? 5 years you bought 'em again. No value.
My entire music library is only 70GB in AAC without music videos. That would almost fit on an iPod Touch 64GB or USB 64GB stick as it is, let alone my Netbook which has 160GB on it and my MBP which has 500GB. So the ONLY way this service could be useful is if I could access ALL MY MOVIES from anywhere on the Net. That would require 2.6TB of storage, though. I don't see Apple covering that and I wouldn't even want to TRY to upload all those movies from my own library (and Apple doesn't even sell (let alone in good quality) 40% of them and 95% of the HD ones.
No, a flat fee for unlimited rentals (music and movies) would be a good deal. I don't see Apple offering that any time soon, if EVER.
mattster16
Sep 30, 09:47 AM
It's interesting how cell service works. Here's a simplistic summary:
Only a certain number of users can use a tower at any given time. There is only a certain range of frequencies that can be used. All towers use these same frequencies. This means that each tower must not overlap the others in terms of coverage area and frequenceis. To ensure this, companies actually use different frequency ranges on adjacent towers. Further limiting how many users can use each tower.
The solution to this is to create smaller cell sites that cover a smaller area (and therefore will have fewer users at any given time). The problem with this is that each new cell site requires a new tower. With all the opposition to new tower construction it can take months or years to get approval to build one.
With the massive growth in cell usage companies are having to create smaller and smaller cell sites. Because of the way the system works putting up one new tower requires the reconfiguration of all the adjacent towers. Their signal area must be changed, their frequencies must be changed and it all must be integrated together.
When you get a dropped call, it's usually because you are moving into another cell site (serviced by a new tower). Your call must be handed off to the new tower. If this new tower is at capacity or overloaded, failures happen.
This is why it sucks for very high density areas.
Luckily in Minneapolis we have very good AT&T coverage. I get very fast 3G speeds and <1% dropped calls everywhere I go. Thank you urban sprawl for spreading everyone out.. When I was in NYC I noticed by data speeds were much slower. I didn't make enough calls to have any problems with that though.
Only a certain number of users can use a tower at any given time. There is only a certain range of frequencies that can be used. All towers use these same frequencies. This means that each tower must not overlap the others in terms of coverage area and frequenceis. To ensure this, companies actually use different frequency ranges on adjacent towers. Further limiting how many users can use each tower.
The solution to this is to create smaller cell sites that cover a smaller area (and therefore will have fewer users at any given time). The problem with this is that each new cell site requires a new tower. With all the opposition to new tower construction it can take months or years to get approval to build one.
With the massive growth in cell usage companies are having to create smaller and smaller cell sites. Because of the way the system works putting up one new tower requires the reconfiguration of all the adjacent towers. Their signal area must be changed, their frequencies must be changed and it all must be integrated together.
When you get a dropped call, it's usually because you are moving into another cell site (serviced by a new tower). Your call must be handed off to the new tower. If this new tower is at capacity or overloaded, failures happen.
This is why it sucks for very high density areas.
Luckily in Minneapolis we have very good AT&T coverage. I get very fast 3G speeds and <1% dropped calls everywhere I go. Thank you urban sprawl for spreading everyone out.. When I was in NYC I noticed by data speeds were much slower. I didn't make enough calls to have any problems with that though.
more...
Cheerwino
Apr 14, 10:43 AM
I think you are all wrong. On the BMW model names "ix" stands for a fuel injection engine and four-wheel drive. I believe there is an OS M coming for certain BMW models.
+1
OS M-series would be awesome but I just can't afford the insurance. :eek:
+1
OS M-series would be awesome but I just can't afford the insurance. :eek:
spencers
Jan 31, 05:19 PM
4gb iPod
I remember owning one of those when it first came out. Survived a trip to Philmont quite well!
I remember owning one of those when it first came out. Survived a trip to Philmont quite well!
more...
xPismo
Jul 24, 09:06 PM
Wave your hands in the air controls?
Wait, I've seen that before somewhere?! Hmmmmm.
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:bn96IEhi_WyiUM:http://hugereviews.com/images/Movies/Minority%2520Report/wpeA.jpg
As long as I don't have to wear those gloves. uuugh.
Wait, I've seen that before somewhere?! Hmmmmm.
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:bn96IEhi_WyiUM:http://hugereviews.com/images/Movies/Minority%2520Report/wpeA.jpg
As long as I don't have to wear those gloves. uuugh.
JackSYi
Jul 24, 09:56 PM
I would like a bluetooth mouse, however, changing the batteries is such a hassle.
more...
txmatt
Apr 19, 02:04 PM
But my point is that even if we get a 40% boost in our CPU, it is near useless.
For example, lets say you have 100/100 in a test. Having a theoretical 40% boost will give you a 140/100. I mean, thats cool. Overkill. That is currently the CPU we have. We have enough to accomplish our tasks, and any more would be an overkill in the things we need our computer to process.
On the other hand, on the GPU side, you have a 80/100 (which is what the NVIDIA 320m is) and we see a 30% performance drop, that will result to a 42.5/100. At lower levels, difference between a 80/100 and 42.5/100 is the difference between a pass and a fail.
Of course, having a better CPU might be fulfilling to you and might give you the sense that you are the "latest in tech," but seriously, it is not about the CPU any more, it is about SSDs, ergonomics, GPU, and ultimately, Software.
I had to finally register to comment on the hypocrisy in this and many other threads like it. Because some people want frame rates for gaming on an MBA, then your needs for GPU performance are valid, and others who don't game but could use CPU performance have invalid needs? Rubbish.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
For example, lets say you have 100/100 in a test. Having a theoretical 40% boost will give you a 140/100. I mean, thats cool. Overkill. That is currently the CPU we have. We have enough to accomplish our tasks, and any more would be an overkill in the things we need our computer to process.
On the other hand, on the GPU side, you have a 80/100 (which is what the NVIDIA 320m is) and we see a 30% performance drop, that will result to a 42.5/100. At lower levels, difference between a 80/100 and 42.5/100 is the difference between a pass and a fail.
Of course, having a better CPU might be fulfilling to you and might give you the sense that you are the "latest in tech," but seriously, it is not about the CPU any more, it is about SSDs, ergonomics, GPU, and ultimately, Software.
I had to finally register to comment on the hypocrisy in this and many other threads like it. Because some people want frame rates for gaming on an MBA, then your needs for GPU performance are valid, and others who don't game but could use CPU performance have invalid needs? Rubbish.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
countach
Oct 24, 09:16 AM
In Australia, I'm getting the 15-inch with 2GB, 2.33GHz, 160GB HD, shipping on/before 1 Nov, arriving to Brisbane on/before 8 Nov. I couldn't justify spending an extra $A818.40 (edu price) for an extra GB of RAM nor an extra $A140.80 for the 200GB HD. Reviews of the 200GB HD at tomshardware.com say performance is very average, and I would have felt about queasy about such bleeding-edge HD technology.
I agree about the memory, but IMHO the 200GB is a no brainer. But then I like all my multimedia, you can't have too much space.
I agree about the memory, but IMHO the 200GB is a no brainer. But then I like all my multimedia, you can't have too much space.
more...
kiljoy616
Apr 26, 12:25 PM
this is APPLE we are talking about. nothing is free and nothing is cheap.
No one is expecting it to be free, but there better be more than what can be done for less. Apple likes to throw stuff and hope fanboys will pay without question. I am all for paying but not if there is nothing there but what other are offering for less or even free.
Reminds me of the New York Times and wanting payed subscription. Sure I will pay if there is benefit like them actually doing news and not just copy paste stories. You want my money you have to offer me real quality and substance as I figure most who are not from the Apple fanboys club will agree. :rolleyes:
Those who are use to playing for nothing are different to those like me who only pay for quality and substance because I can go somewhere else for the same service. :cool:
No one is expecting it to be free, but there better be more than what can be done for less. Apple likes to throw stuff and hope fanboys will pay without question. I am all for paying but not if there is nothing there but what other are offering for less or even free.
Reminds me of the New York Times and wanting payed subscription. Sure I will pay if there is benefit like them actually doing news and not just copy paste stories. You want my money you have to offer me real quality and substance as I figure most who are not from the Apple fanboys club will agree. :rolleyes:
Those who are use to playing for nothing are different to those like me who only pay for quality and substance because I can go somewhere else for the same service. :cool:
DavidLeblond
Apr 29, 03:39 PM
BEST new songs?
Why is Justin Bieber in that picture?
SHENANIGANS!
Why is Justin Bieber in that picture?
SHENANIGANS!
more...
rjohnstone
Apr 29, 03:55 PM
I will have to take a look at DoubleTwist, again.
Just an FYI though, it won't sync over DRM content. That stuff is locked to iTunes and any iPod associated with the account.
It's based on demand. If it's still popular its more expensive - no matter how old it is.
The price increase from Apple was mainly done to have the music be DRM free.
Just an FYI though, it won't sync over DRM content. That stuff is locked to iTunes and any iPod associated with the account.
It's based on demand. If it's still popular its more expensive - no matter how old it is.
The price increase from Apple was mainly done to have the music be DRM free.
yadmonkey
Mar 31, 01:48 PM
This was posted prematurely by a day, right?
snebes
Apr 23, 06:24 PM
The T-Mobile deal isn't a for sure thing. Likely, but the FTC could block it. Also, as the article states T-Mobile's towers use a different frequencies.
That doesn't mean that Apple wouldn't be testing handset for them now. Just being an optimist. If AT&T/T-Mobile purchase does go through, it doesn't mean that T-Mobiles 2G/3G network goes away. It will be around for many more years. AT&T may require their handsets to support the T-Mobile 3G bands as well as their own.
That doesn't mean that Apple wouldn't be testing handset for them now. Just being an optimist. If AT&T/T-Mobile purchase does go through, it doesn't mean that T-Mobiles 2G/3G network goes away. It will be around for many more years. AT&T may require their handsets to support the T-Mobile 3G bands as well as their own.
iSingandiDance
Nov 10, 06:17 PM
Many Porn sites are smart enough to provide HTML5 alternative.Not the free ones. Instead, they offer a mobile solution that can be had at a nominal fee.
Snowy_River
Jul 25, 01:17 PM
Snowy,
I do think hayesk is on the right track. While the idea of a touchless experience is neat, try it right now. pick up your iPod and make movements over the surface as if it would be touchless. If you don't have an iPod, pick up something else approximately that size. Assume that the "field" where it senses your fingers is going to be less than a centimeter above the surface.
What happened?
If you were like me, you still occasionally brushed or accidentally touched the surface anyway, especially making circular scrollwheel movements. You didn't? I applaud your superior fine motor skills. Now try that same excersise while driving. Or jogging. Bet it was harder.
Heck, even just holding the thing in your hand or pulling it out of your pocket will get fingerprints on it and be touched. Touching the surface will be unavoidable. But what Apple can do with this technology is give it a thicker, more substantial, more scratch-resistant, possibly more smudge resistant surface on which the user can touch and interact with the UI.
Well, while I'll admit that some touching is unavoidable, I could easily hover my finger over the controls on my iPod or on the track pad on my PB. I only glanced off the surface once in a mock navigation of the iPod to get to a playlist and start playing. How much better is that than having tones of sweep marks and finger prints from scrolling and tapping?
I do think hayesk is on the right track. While the idea of a touchless experience is neat, try it right now. pick up your iPod and make movements over the surface as if it would be touchless. If you don't have an iPod, pick up something else approximately that size. Assume that the "field" where it senses your fingers is going to be less than a centimeter above the surface.
What happened?
If you were like me, you still occasionally brushed or accidentally touched the surface anyway, especially making circular scrollwheel movements. You didn't? I applaud your superior fine motor skills. Now try that same excersise while driving. Or jogging. Bet it was harder.
Heck, even just holding the thing in your hand or pulling it out of your pocket will get fingerprints on it and be touched. Touching the surface will be unavoidable. But what Apple can do with this technology is give it a thicker, more substantial, more scratch-resistant, possibly more smudge resistant surface on which the user can touch and interact with the UI.
Well, while I'll admit that some touching is unavoidable, I could easily hover my finger over the controls on my iPod or on the track pad on my PB. I only glanced off the surface once in a mock navigation of the iPod to get to a playlist and start playing. How much better is that than having tones of sweep marks and finger prints from scrolling and tapping?
ChazUK
Apr 22, 08:27 AM
How are they different? They are both round with a 3D look and have a triangle with the same alignment and angles in the middle. They even perform the same function, to start playback of media content. Are you really going to nitpick about the colors? That's not different enough, Apple should definetely sue.
If you clear your cache and refresh, you'd see the image you are hotlinking to isn't displaying. ;)
Its just a low res image saying go to "my digital life". I think that's what Olly is getting at. :D
If you clear your cache and refresh, you'd see the image you are hotlinking to isn't displaying. ;)
Its just a low res image saying go to "my digital life". I think that's what Olly is getting at. :D
Stevesbodyguard
Apr 28, 03:51 PM
I held one earlier today and it felt .0001 oz. heavier. Perhaps it is just my super human ability to weigh things instantly that told me this....but still....:cool:
SuperCachetes
Dec 30, 11:53 AM
People pay to watch her eat! :eek:
Yes, and even I think this is weird, on two levels. One is the "watching her eat". The other is paying for the privilege.
This will be a thread hand-grenade, but let's face it - depending on her/your/our healthcare situation, you kindof are paying for this. What we have here with this woman is a pending and unnatural liability on the healthcare system and insurance network due to her socially- and personally-irresponsible whim.
Who's paying for her bypass surgeries, ER trips, and specialized healthcare infrastructure in order to deal with a person of her size? We are. The cost to sustain her life will with all probablity be more than an average person's: so your premiums (or taxes, if you're in a socialized-medicine country) go up. I'm all for personal freedoms and not letting people tell others what to do with their bodies, but I don't want to subsidize stupid behavior like this. I say make her carry her own weight, and I mean that both literally and figuratively.
Yes, and even I think this is weird, on two levels. One is the "watching her eat". The other is paying for the privilege.
This will be a thread hand-grenade, but let's face it - depending on her/your/our healthcare situation, you kindof are paying for this. What we have here with this woman is a pending and unnatural liability on the healthcare system and insurance network due to her socially- and personally-irresponsible whim.
Who's paying for her bypass surgeries, ER trips, and specialized healthcare infrastructure in order to deal with a person of her size? We are. The cost to sustain her life will with all probablity be more than an average person's: so your premiums (or taxes, if you're in a socialized-medicine country) go up. I'm all for personal freedoms and not letting people tell others what to do with their bodies, but I don't want to subsidize stupid behavior like this. I say make her carry her own weight, and I mean that both literally and figuratively.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий