rezenclowd3
Dec 8, 02:25 AM
Actually, Sony explained that the damage is not unlocked or progressive as one dives deeper into the game. It's just that as one goes further into the game, one is able to FINALLY collect more premium cars which do have the better damage engine.
As far as the cars...I really want more already...but not more of the same version. I REALLY want a Triumph TR6 and Datsun 240Z...theres a Triumph Spitfire, which is not near as collectible. Also should have the Brabham fan car as well IMO, plus some Can-Am cars. Stupid having 40 or so of the same body style.
Also, can one set a stick to look around? Racing without the ability to look around is for earlier generations, not THIS generation.
As far as the cars...I really want more already...but not more of the same version. I REALLY want a Triumph TR6 and Datsun 240Z...theres a Triumph Spitfire, which is not near as collectible. Also should have the Brabham fan car as well IMO, plus some Can-Am cars. Stupid having 40 or so of the same body style.
Also, can one set a stick to look around? Racing without the ability to look around is for earlier generations, not THIS generation.
Chundles
Jul 27, 10:00 AM
So are we really going to get ALL of these new toys come WWDC? Leopard preview, Merom laptops, Core2/Woodcrest Mac Pros, Core2 Imacs (oh, and maybe a movie download add to iTunes) That sounds like an awful lot of stuff to cover in such a short period of time. What do people think about timelines for introduction here?
Rule 1 of Apple Events:
You never get all the marbles.
Rule 1 of Apple Events:
You never get all the marbles.
HBOC
Apr 7, 10:24 PM
haha. Now they will have to upsell more BS to make up for this loss. I can see them advertising to connect your PS3 or XBOX 360 to your TV/monitor and hook up an ethernet cable for $149 again... :rolleyes:
NightFox
Apr 19, 01:37 PM
why? iphones outselling itouches by so much makes sense to me.
Just really basing it on my own experience - I'm the only one of my close friends/family to own an iPhone, but I can count 5 iPod Touches in that same group. Also thought their would be a lot of iPod Touches owned by children rather than iPhones.
Just really basing it on my own experience - I'm the only one of my close friends/family to own an iPhone, but I can count 5 iPod Touches in that same group. Also thought their would be a lot of iPod Touches owned by children rather than iPhones.
Carlson-online
Jul 20, 11:47 AM
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
yes, its known as reverse hyper threading. AMD are working on it
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
yes, its known as reverse hyper threading. AMD are working on it
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
Multimedia
Sep 19, 11:29 AM
I missed you guys this morning. ;)
SeaFox
Aug 5, 06:04 PM
I can't believe it's only two days away, how time flies.
I'll be expecting the new Mac Pro to show up (order now, shipping in 6-8 weeks) and new displays (to match the Mac Pro's new enclosure, and becuase they haven't been updated in waaaay too long).
I don't think anything iPod-related will happen, but I'd really like them to update the Shuffle if they're going to.
I'll be expecting the new Mac Pro to show up (order now, shipping in 6-8 weeks) and new displays (to match the Mac Pro's new enclosure, and becuase they haven't been updated in waaaay too long).
I don't think anything iPod-related will happen, but I'd really like them to update the Shuffle if they're going to.
mdriftmeyer
Apr 25, 03:57 PM
I'm interested in who funded this research project much to do about nothing and when will this research extend to all the Telcos, corporations and more.
Glen Quagmire
Aug 23, 03:32 PM
This will likely suck, because the interconnect Intel is using is just too damn slow. Putting four cores in the same package will just make the situation worse, because a lot of applications are significantly limited by memory performance.
The Woodcrest processors have been put through their paces pretty well on the supercomputing lists, and their Achille's heal is the memory subsystem. Current generation AMD Opterons still clearly outscale Woodcrest in real-world memory bandwidth with only two cores. Unless Intel pulls a rabbit out of their hat with their memory architecture issues when the quad core is released, AMDs quad core is going to embarrass them because of the memory bottleneck. And AMD is already starting to work on upgrading their already markedly superior memory architecture.
In two years' time, Intel will release Nehalem its next micro-architecture - to replace Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest. It is supposed to ditch the FSB in favour of Intel's own interconnect, named CSI. Two years after Nehalem will come another micro-architecture.
In some respects, I'm quite happy to have ordered a Woodcrest Mac Pro, especially if the slow FSB does slow things down when Woodcrest's successor is released. If the Mac Pro can last me three or four years, I'll be in time for the post-Nehalem generation, which should be fairly spectacular.
The Woodcrest processors have been put through their paces pretty well on the supercomputing lists, and their Achille's heal is the memory subsystem. Current generation AMD Opterons still clearly outscale Woodcrest in real-world memory bandwidth with only two cores. Unless Intel pulls a rabbit out of their hat with their memory architecture issues when the quad core is released, AMDs quad core is going to embarrass them because of the memory bottleneck. And AMD is already starting to work on upgrading their already markedly superior memory architecture.
In two years' time, Intel will release Nehalem its next micro-architecture - to replace Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest. It is supposed to ditch the FSB in favour of Intel's own interconnect, named CSI. Two years after Nehalem will come another micro-architecture.
In some respects, I'm quite happy to have ordered a Woodcrest Mac Pro, especially if the slow FSB does slow things down when Woodcrest's successor is released. If the Mac Pro can last me three or four years, I'll be in time for the post-Nehalem generation, which should be fairly spectacular.
Multimedia
Aug 18, 11:54 PM
So the webpages at Apple.com suggest the improvement of Xeon vs Quad G5 in FCP of 1.3- 1.4 times as fast as the Quad G5.
However, notice that it is footnoted that these results were obtained using a Beta version of FCP:
On The Mac Pro Performance Page (http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html) In the first section "Film and Video" footnote under the Bar Charts:
"Testing conducted by Apple in July 2006 using preproduction Mac Pro units and shipping Power Mac G5 Quad units. Mac Pro testing conducted with a beta version of Final Cut Pro."What does this mean for us: new version of FCP required for multiple core utilization?
I just took advanatage of the crossgrade, will it soon need an upgrade as well? I hope it is an update/download not as a version upgrade/purchase.I'm sure it will be a free download update not more money. But I'm not surprised. That's why I'm waiting until December 10 to mail in my Crossgrade form and DVD. I wanted to get all the updates until the offer expires December 20 on the install DVDs I get with my Crossgrade. Thanks for pointing out that detail. :)
I think it's safe to point out that when this MultiCore version of Final Cut Pro is released, that FCP performance will also improve on the Quad. The same will also likely be true when Leopard ships.
However, notice that it is footnoted that these results were obtained using a Beta version of FCP:
On The Mac Pro Performance Page (http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html) In the first section "Film and Video" footnote under the Bar Charts:
"Testing conducted by Apple in July 2006 using preproduction Mac Pro units and shipping Power Mac G5 Quad units. Mac Pro testing conducted with a beta version of Final Cut Pro."What does this mean for us: new version of FCP required for multiple core utilization?
I just took advanatage of the crossgrade, will it soon need an upgrade as well? I hope it is an update/download not as a version upgrade/purchase.I'm sure it will be a free download update not more money. But I'm not surprised. That's why I'm waiting until December 10 to mail in my Crossgrade form and DVD. I wanted to get all the updates until the offer expires December 20 on the install DVDs I get with my Crossgrade. Thanks for pointing out that detail. :)
I think it's safe to point out that when this MultiCore version of Final Cut Pro is released, that FCP performance will also improve on the Quad. The same will also likely be true when Leopard ships.
acslater017
Mar 26, 02:07 PM
From the developer builds and such, there doesn't appear to be anything compelling or major to warrant anything more than a minor upgrade.
Yeah, disappearing scroll bars. A full size screen. Woo.
The UI and basic functionalities have stayed the same since Leopard, sprinkled with a bit of iOS features. Snow Leopard was a tune up, to establish the Intel line completely and such.
Yet retained most, if not all of the Leopard UI elements.
Personally, it just looks like a rough merge of iOS into the OS X environment without any refinement.
If we have to fork out $120 or something, forget it.
I guess my Leopard PowerPC Macs still look up to date then :)
New window management system, viewing options
New way to download, install and view apps (app store + launchpad)
New touch controls
New way to save and revise files
Various UI improvements
Dead simple wireless file sharing
Honestly, what were you imagining? Is apple not addressing every basic area of personal computing with Lion? Many of the changes are in mundane areas but are radically different...
Yeah, disappearing scroll bars. A full size screen. Woo.
The UI and basic functionalities have stayed the same since Leopard, sprinkled with a bit of iOS features. Snow Leopard was a tune up, to establish the Intel line completely and such.
Yet retained most, if not all of the Leopard UI elements.
Personally, it just looks like a rough merge of iOS into the OS X environment without any refinement.
If we have to fork out $120 or something, forget it.
I guess my Leopard PowerPC Macs still look up to date then :)
New window management system, viewing options
New way to download, install and view apps (app store + launchpad)
New touch controls
New way to save and revise files
Various UI improvements
Dead simple wireless file sharing
Honestly, what were you imagining? Is apple not addressing every basic area of personal computing with Lion? Many of the changes are in mundane areas but are radically different...
bibbz
Jun 14, 06:19 PM
bibbz,
Phew!
You are doing all of us a great service here with this information.
The salesman just called me from the store I was in today.
He is telling me that there is no guarantee of the iPhone even
if you get the pin -- but he admitted he was not certain. All he
knew was that there was something like 9500 pins nationwide.
Told him that I had just read your message and that you were
saying if I got a PIN I have a guarantee of a phone.
He warned me that Radio Shack does not want the word
"guarantee" used.
I am putting a lot of faith in what you are saying here.
I will be at my Radio Shack store early tomorrow.
What?!
No white phone?
Can you verify bibbz?
The info i stated is directly from my DM.
We havent been told no white ones. I even asked specifically on the call, and no one had heard that.
Phew!
You are doing all of us a great service here with this information.
The salesman just called me from the store I was in today.
He is telling me that there is no guarantee of the iPhone even
if you get the pin -- but he admitted he was not certain. All he
knew was that there was something like 9500 pins nationwide.
Told him that I had just read your message and that you were
saying if I got a PIN I have a guarantee of a phone.
He warned me that Radio Shack does not want the word
"guarantee" used.
I am putting a lot of faith in what you are saying here.
I will be at my Radio Shack store early tomorrow.
What?!
No white phone?
Can you verify bibbz?
The info i stated is directly from my DM.
We havent been told no white ones. I even asked specifically on the call, and no one had heard that.
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
fluidinclusion
Aug 11, 07:42 PM
I probably won't buy a phone without GPS capabilities. I will pay for the option, however.
dustinsc
Mar 22, 12:52 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Well, minus the screen size too. Equal to isn't going to cut it against an Apple product. Just look at how the Zune fared.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Well, minus the screen size too. Equal to isn't going to cut it against an Apple product. Just look at how the Zune fared.
kresh
Sep 19, 11:34 AM
The thing is Apple is shooting itself in the foot because it knows that all the Prosumers research enough that they know there is better available. Apple is losing alot of sales by not being prepared. I would think that Apple would get 2nd priority to Dell on shipments so they should have a good stock of C2D.
Where's your proof that Apple is losing a lot of sales by not being prepared?
If everone that ever visited MacRumors got mad and purchased a Dell, that would not be a lot.
Are you just making this up?
Where's your proof that Apple is losing a lot of sales by not being prepared?
If everone that ever visited MacRumors got mad and purchased a Dell, that would not be a lot.
Are you just making this up?
H. Flower
Apr 11, 08:56 PM
How about using more than one bloody core to render a timeline or do an export to the eternally-broken Compressor?
How about properly recognizing file attributes on import?
�stability?
�QMaster having better than coin-flip reliability?
�better R3D support (as well as other cameras)?
�GPGPU/OpenCL?
etc etc
- native video support (years behind in this)
- viewing upsized or downsized video without degradation
- proper render management
- removal of "insufficient content" and "cannot split a transition" errors
and on and on and on
The major thing, though, is they HAVE to start utilizing multiple cores. It's not and as video gets larger, rendering gets more taxing.
How about properly recognizing file attributes on import?
�stability?
�QMaster having better than coin-flip reliability?
�better R3D support (as well as other cameras)?
�GPGPU/OpenCL?
etc etc
- native video support (years behind in this)
- viewing upsized or downsized video without degradation
- proper render management
- removal of "insufficient content" and "cannot split a transition" errors
and on and on and on
The major thing, though, is they HAVE to start utilizing multiple cores. It's not and as video gets larger, rendering gets more taxing.
mozmac
Nov 29, 09:21 AM
Dirty mother farters. How dare you try to claim a share of the music players. You see, they do more than just music. Would if someone bought one without putting any music on it!
whatever
Nov 29, 10:45 AM
So they say.... :rolleyes:
Yes, Microsoft went to Universal, because Universal refused to allow their music to be added to the Microsoft Marketplace. Microsoft then offered the dollar to other companies.
Boycotting Universal and these companies is not the answer.
I recommend that we buy more music from the iTunes Music store and when it comes time for the new iTunes contract, Jobs will be able to present the numbers and then threaten to walk away from the table (I hate to call this the Walmart model, but when you selling more product than anyone else, you'll have to play ball). The industry will not risk losing a growing revenue strain.
There are currently over 67 million iPods out there. The music industry's accountants (notice that I specify their accountants) are not that stupid. They now that if 10% of those people buy one .99 song from iTunes a year, they'll make more money than they would if they imposed a $1.00 tax on every new media device sold.
And those are the numbers that Apple will present to them.
Yes, Microsoft went to Universal, because Universal refused to allow their music to be added to the Microsoft Marketplace. Microsoft then offered the dollar to other companies.
Boycotting Universal and these companies is not the answer.
I recommend that we buy more music from the iTunes Music store and when it comes time for the new iTunes contract, Jobs will be able to present the numbers and then threaten to walk away from the table (I hate to call this the Walmart model, but when you selling more product than anyone else, you'll have to play ball). The industry will not risk losing a growing revenue strain.
There are currently over 67 million iPods out there. The music industry's accountants (notice that I specify their accountants) are not that stupid. They now that if 10% of those people buy one .99 song from iTunes a year, they'll make more money than they would if they imposed a $1.00 tax on every new media device sold.
And those are the numbers that Apple will present to them.
p0intblank
Aug 5, 03:55 PM
I can't wait for Monday. I'll be working that day, so I am going to try to watch the keynote before reading any updates. I even have the Quicktime Events page bookmarked. :D I figured I would be more surprised by taking this route.
This is the first WWDC I'm really looking forward to, mainly because of what we're going to see... Leopard in action! :D
Edit: Peace, that's not entirely true. None of us know whether Apple will release Cinema Displays with iSights built-in. I'd say it is unlikely, but you never know until it actually happens.
This is the first WWDC I'm really looking forward to, mainly because of what we're going to see... Leopard in action! :D
Edit: Peace, that's not entirely true. None of us know whether Apple will release Cinema Displays with iSights built-in. I'd say it is unlikely, but you never know until it actually happens.
nagromme
Mar 22, 01:01 PM
Widescreen is great for movie watching, and the spec-lover in me is all over that... but it’s not very flexible for portrait use. (Which is how you hold a tablet one-handed, and is how you see the most content on a web page or scrolling document.)
A 10.1” 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75” taller... but .5” narrower than an iPad. I don’t think I’d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though—which seems to save a few bucks—is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on “real” tablets. (Not that I’d settle for Android’s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don’t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
A 10.1” 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75” taller... but .5” narrower than an iPad. I don’t think I’d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though—which seems to save a few bucks—is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on “real” tablets. (Not that I’d settle for Android’s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don’t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
Nuvi
Apr 11, 12:01 AM
Uh, iMovie was botched?
Yes, its crap. The first version followed the basic principles of NLE but the new version is pathetic.
However, Randy came up with FCP for Macromedia so he has what it takes if Jobs and other consumer oriented guys can keep their ***** away from the mix.
Yes, its crap. The first version followed the basic principles of NLE but the new version is pathetic.
However, Randy came up with FCP for Macromedia so he has what it takes if Jobs and other consumer oriented guys can keep their ***** away from the mix.
macman2790
Sep 19, 07:36 AM
apple store isn't down yet. I don't expect it today like a lot of people do
leekohler
Apr 27, 03:01 PM
Wait until he tells us which right-wing fringe website he was on so you can go read the instructions and try to recreate this silly pointless endeavor.
(edit) Whack-a-doodle website with Illustrator instructions (http://www.nkyvoice.com/2011/04/long-form-birth-certificate.html). Is this it Fivepoint?
Or is it this other nutty site (http://www.patrioticdissent.net/2011/04/obama-long-form-birth-certificate-fake.html)?
Oh boy. Fivepoint, you wouldn't have happened to visit any such site, now would you?
The birthers have moved on to say that because Obama "doesn't have allegiance to America" or some BS like that, he is now no longer a natural born citizen (http://www.birthers.org/). :rolleyes:
Oh boy.
EDIT- Oh looky! Fivepoint, you never disappoint.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
And why are you concerning yourself with this? Because you're unbiased?
(edit) Whack-a-doodle website with Illustrator instructions (http://www.nkyvoice.com/2011/04/long-form-birth-certificate.html). Is this it Fivepoint?
Or is it this other nutty site (http://www.patrioticdissent.net/2011/04/obama-long-form-birth-certificate-fake.html)?
Oh boy. Fivepoint, you wouldn't have happened to visit any such site, now would you?
The birthers have moved on to say that because Obama "doesn't have allegiance to America" or some BS like that, he is now no longer a natural born citizen (http://www.birthers.org/). :rolleyes:
Oh boy.
EDIT- Oh looky! Fivepoint, you never disappoint.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
And why are you concerning yourself with this? Because you're unbiased?
No comments:
Post a Comment