mygoldens
Apr 27, 08:22 AM
Ok, somebody go slap the lawyers that are initiating the lawsuit!
Apple tracking everyone, ya right, like they have to?!
Apple tracking everyone, ya right, like they have to?!
laidbackliam
Aug 7, 10:39 AM
I'd like to see your "Mac" model bumped up past the iMac. I think a lot of people, myself included, would pay a premium for the ability to upgrade. In fact, I wouldn't care if they didn't offer a completely new model as long as they offer some "affordable" manifestations of the Mac Pro. So how's this (and go easy on me here because I rarely delve into the technical aspect of things):
-Squire
yes, but i see the price point being under the iMac still. but again, this is just something i'd LIKE to see, and don't expect. and i know some people would pay a premium. but i'm not some people.
-Squire
yes, but i see the price point being under the iMac still. but again, this is just something i'd LIKE to see, and don't expect. and i know some people would pay a premium. but i'm not some people.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 05:12 PM
Yeah, Apple is definitely copying Microsoft now... it's pretty undeniable. Time Machine is virtually identical to Microsoft's backup system for Vista.
"Previous Docs" from Wikipedia:
...
System Restore, Shadow Copy, and Backup in Vista now run on the same technology (so they are considerably different than the XP versions).
iChat basically got the remote screen sharing feature that Microsoft shipped with XP in 2001...
Mail and iCal got a bunch of features from Outlook 2007 and Windows Live Calendar/Mail.
Dashboard's ability to clip web pages is straight out of Active Desktop.
the Spotlight improvements were things that Indexing Server in XP/2000/2003 already did. ...
Spaces is virtual desktops just like the powertoy MS released years ago
...
Core Animation looks like Apple's response to all the DX and WPF (Avalon) animation tools in Vista.
Bingo !
"Previous Docs" from Wikipedia:
...
System Restore, Shadow Copy, and Backup in Vista now run on the same technology (so they are considerably different than the XP versions).
iChat basically got the remote screen sharing feature that Microsoft shipped with XP in 2001...
Mail and iCal got a bunch of features from Outlook 2007 and Windows Live Calendar/Mail.
Dashboard's ability to clip web pages is straight out of Active Desktop.
the Spotlight improvements were things that Indexing Server in XP/2000/2003 already did. ...
Spaces is virtual desktops just like the powertoy MS released years ago
...
Core Animation looks like Apple's response to all the DX and WPF (Avalon) animation tools in Vista.
Bingo !
CellarDoor
Aug 8, 06:29 AM
In nine months or less......... we'll have those
Top Secret features in our machines - too bad
for Redmond they won't be revealed until then.
Core graphics and Quartz Extreme will be amazing.
Love Time Machine, Spaces, etc.
Is this a poem? Lovely.
Top Secret features in our machines - too bad
for Redmond they won't be revealed until then.
Core graphics and Quartz Extreme will be amazing.
Love Time Machine, Spaces, etc.
Is this a poem? Lovely.
mactoday
Apr 6, 11:22 AM
I still don't think this means new MacBook Airs in June. Can anyone really see Apple releasing new hardware before Lion is released?
I bet you that you'll see Air's refresh before June.
I bet you that you'll see Air's refresh before June.
MacRumors
Apr 6, 01:20 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/motorola-xoom-tablet-sales-approximately-100000-units-so-far/)
Business Insider reports (http://www.businessinsider.com/motorola-xoom-sales-2011-4) on a research note from Deutsche Bank estimating sales of Motorola's Android-based Xoom tablet at only about 100,000 units since its late February launch, based on Android developer statistics (http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html) showing that only 0.2% of Android devices accessing the Android Market during the second half of March had the Android 3.0 "Honeycomb" operating system installed. The Xoom is currently the only device on the market running Honeycomb.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/06/141346-android_platform_breakdown_040111_500.jpg
vanessa hudgens 2011 leaked
Vanessa Hudgens New Leaked
Vanessa Hudgens Regrets Her
vanessa hudgens 2011 leaked
vanessa hudgens leaked photos
vanessa hudgens 2011 leak.
VANESSA HUDGENS LEAKED 2011
Vanessa Hudgens New Leaked
thu 3/17/2011. Vanessa Hudgens
.jpg "More Vanessa Hudgens Nude")
More Vanessa Hudgens Nude
vanessa hudgens 2011 leaked
Vanessa Hudgens Leaked Photos
vanessa hudgens 2011 leaked
Business Insider reports (http://www.businessinsider.com/motorola-xoom-sales-2011-4) on a research note from Deutsche Bank estimating sales of Motorola's Android-based Xoom tablet at only about 100,000 units since its late February launch, based on Android developer statistics (http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html) showing that only 0.2% of Android devices accessing the Android Market during the second half of March had the Android 3.0 "Honeycomb" operating system installed. The Xoom is currently the only device on the market running Honeycomb.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/06/141346-android_platform_breakdown_040111_500.jpg
jholzner
Jul 27, 03:54 PM
Maybe not way too low, but a bit low, especially when you compare specs to the $799 mini. The problem with MAC by itself as a name is that people will ask "what kind of mac" and the response is "Mac". It's a bad slapstick routine. It's like Ford selling a car called the Ford.
Actually, it'd be like Ford selling a car named Model. Instead, they used to use Model-T etc. What model is it? It's a T model. What Mac is it? it's a mini...and i(Mac) etc.
Actually, it'd be like Ford selling a car named Model. Instead, they used to use Model-T etc. What model is it? It's a T model. What Mac is it? it's a mini...and i(Mac) etc.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 07:10 PM
Did anyone else think it was odd that many of the features seemed so poorly presented. We didn't actually get to see anything new in Spotlight. And no new features of the actual Dashboard were even discussed.
It just doesn't seem that Leopard is as far along as Tiger was when previewed even though Leopard is suppose to ship in the spring just as Tiger did.
Maybe they moved the spotlight bar to the top left and don't want MS to do the same before the Vista release ;)
It just doesn't seem that Leopard is as far along as Tiger was when previewed even though Leopard is suppose to ship in the spring just as Tiger did.
Maybe they moved the spotlight bar to the top left and don't want MS to do the same before the Vista release ;)
blesscheese
Mar 26, 09:16 AM
Wait until the first revision comes up! as always, the desperates install the new OS that come full of bugs and then complains starts "I lost all my data".
Just my 2cents.
Not to mention that this sort of upgrades just make you buying a new machine to run the system as it should.
I agree...btw, before they release the new OS, shouldn't they fix the flaws in the old one first? Oh well, no chance of that now, "the new OS is far better than the old one..." (shades of M$ hyping Windows 95 as "the best ever," and then to market Win98, talking about how crappy Win95 was).
Is it me, or has Snow Leopard felt more like a marketing tool to get Apple's hands more fully into my wallet? The 10.6.6 update just to put the App Store icon in my dock was a bit over the top.
Just my 2cents.
Not to mention that this sort of upgrades just make you buying a new machine to run the system as it should.
I agree...btw, before they release the new OS, shouldn't they fix the flaws in the old one first? Oh well, no chance of that now, "the new OS is far better than the old one..." (shades of M$ hyping Windows 95 as "the best ever," and then to market Win98, talking about how crappy Win95 was).
Is it me, or has Snow Leopard felt more like a marketing tool to get Apple's hands more fully into my wallet? The 10.6.6 update just to put the App Store icon in my dock was a bit over the top.
Bye Bye Baby
Jul 21, 03:33 AM
With all these new technologies with 4, 8 and eventually 24-core capacities (some time in the not too distant future) all running at 64-bit, we musn't forget that software also has tobe developed for these machienes in order to get the most out of the hardware. At the moment we aren't even maximising core-duo, let alone a quad core and all the rest!!!!
Besides, for 90% of what non-pro users do, these advances will help very little. Internet will still run at the same spead and my ipod will still chug along with USB2 etc.
Pros with pro apps acn rejoice, only if software keeps the pace!!!
Let's hope so!!!
Besides, for 90% of what non-pro users do, these advances will help very little. Internet will still run at the same spead and my ipod will still chug along with USB2 etc.
Pros with pro apps acn rejoice, only if software keeps the pace!!!
Let's hope so!!!
portishead
Apr 12, 12:54 PM
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
People just love to complain. Yes Apple has been a little behind in the NLE business lately. They can't be on top all the time. Avid has made fantastic strides lately, and so has Adobe, although I would never advise using Premiere. You have to remember though Avid made a lot of bad moves, from nearly dropping Mac support to their closed hardware system. Just recently have they finally started to look like they got it together. FCP is being updated today, so all this nonsense about apple neglecting the pro market can stop. You may not like the update, but from what I've heard (not much) it's going to be pretty amazing.
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
People just love to complain. Yes Apple has been a little behind in the NLE business lately. They can't be on top all the time. Avid has made fantastic strides lately, and so has Adobe, although I would never advise using Premiere. You have to remember though Avid made a lot of bad moves, from nearly dropping Mac support to their closed hardware system. Just recently have they finally started to look like they got it together. FCP is being updated today, so all this nonsense about apple neglecting the pro market can stop. You may not like the update, but from what I've heard (not much) it's going to be pretty amazing.
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:50 PM
I had a Casio Personal Diary in the late 80's that had the exact same grid.
Im not a troll either without Apple I wouldn't have a job.
Well, I am not saying apple invented the icon grid. :rolleyes:
I am specifically pointing to the post where you say iOS's icon grid copies PalmOS. Back-tracing?
Im not a troll either without Apple I wouldn't have a job.
Well, I am not saying apple invented the icon grid. :rolleyes:
I am specifically pointing to the post where you say iOS's icon grid copies PalmOS. Back-tracing?
Padraig
Aug 12, 04:13 AM
If there is a phone on the way i'm guessing that we can be sure of few things.
1) Can't see it being a clamshell. Perhaps a slider, but in all likelyhood it will be a candybar - fits in with apple designs aesthetic, simple, elegant design.
2) It will have to be GSM, UMTS being included as well. There is no way Apple is releasing a CDMA only phone, the market is tiny.
3) I'm sure Apple will release this by themselves, rather than partnering up with a specific carrier. This would allow people who are already tied into contracts to purchase the phone, without having to switch networks. Also couldn't invisage Apple agreeing to something like Vodafone's software.
1) Can't see it being a clamshell. Perhaps a slider, but in all likelyhood it will be a candybar - fits in with apple designs aesthetic, simple, elegant design.
2) It will have to be GSM, UMTS being included as well. There is no way Apple is releasing a CDMA only phone, the market is tiny.
3) I'm sure Apple will release this by themselves, rather than partnering up with a specific carrier. This would allow people who are already tied into contracts to purchase the phone, without having to switch networks. Also couldn't invisage Apple agreeing to something like Vodafone's software.
spazzcat
Mar 22, 01:36 PM
Sorry, completely forgot about that.
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
Apple should've been the ones to buy Palm.
Apples multitasking is way better they anything out there. On these devices battery rules all...
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
Apple should've been the ones to buy Palm.
Apples multitasking is way better they anything out there. On these devices battery rules all...
HecubusPro
Aug 26, 06:05 PM
I'm not sure if this is old news, but I only had heard last week that the UK Dell site was listing (not selling) Core 2 Duo systems. When I heard about that, I checked the US site, but no Core 2 Duo computers were yet advertised there. Well, I checked again today, and Dell is starting to sell their Core 2 Duo desktops. I didn't see anything about estimated ship time.
It doesn't look like their notebooks are selling the new chips yet.
http://www.dell.com/content/products/results.aspx/desktops?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&~ck=anav&a=23~0~98591&navla=23~0~98591
It doesn't look like their notebooks are selling the new chips yet.
http://www.dell.com/content/products/results.aspx/desktops?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&~ck=anav&a=23~0~98591&navla=23~0~98591
dayne33
Aug 27, 01:58 PM
I was just checking out the CD vs C2D comparison at Anandtech, pretty interesting stuff.
My question is this, is Santa Rosa strictly the mobile platform? I'm a student holding off for an iMac revision, and am wondering if apple utilizes Conroe in the iMac, will the faster FSB's be supported? Is an updated platform already available for Conroe? (I guess I had more than one question:rolleyes: )
Thanks
My question is this, is Santa Rosa strictly the mobile platform? I'm a student holding off for an iMac revision, and am wondering if apple utilizes Conroe in the iMac, will the faster FSB's be supported? Is an updated platform already available for Conroe? (I guess I had more than one question:rolleyes: )
Thanks
Rt&Dzine
Feb 28, 08:05 PM
They still can not have valid sacramental marriage
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriage
Sure they can. There are other beliefs than Catholicism and Christianity.
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriage
Sure they can. There are other beliefs than Catholicism and Christianity.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 03:21 AM
But you ARE trying to control others Bill. It's quite obvious. There are no negative consequences inherent to being gay. I'm a 43 year old man, and quite happy. The only negative consequences I've suffered have been at the hands of people like you, who think you know how everyone should live and try to force your beliefs on us with laws. You absolutely want to control others, or at the very least, impose your punishments on us.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy
Hmm...but did they make any laws against you doing any of those things?
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
There are risks inherent in any sexual activity Bill, heterosexual or homosexual. I'm well aware of the risks of both. Apparently, you seem to feel that all gay men engage in sodomy, which is far from the truth. Also, many of these statistics are based on the results of promiscuous behavior. Gay people marrying would discourage promiscuity, which would most likely reduce those statistics. One would think you should be pro gay marriage rights in that case. But hey, we all know that's not what your real concern is. Your concern is to get everyone to conform to your rules.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
My handicap puts me in a minority full of people who think like Marxists. They'll tell you that they're the innocent, persecuted ones and that everyone else is the evil oppressor. Newsflash: Good and evil are on both sides. The "victims" aren't all good and the "persecutors" aren't all bad.
As I told you guys, I think that moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good. Moral liberty is not license. License causes chaos.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy
Hmm...but did they make any laws against you doing any of those things?
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
There are risks inherent in any sexual activity Bill, heterosexual or homosexual. I'm well aware of the risks of both. Apparently, you seem to feel that all gay men engage in sodomy, which is far from the truth. Also, many of these statistics are based on the results of promiscuous behavior. Gay people marrying would discourage promiscuity, which would most likely reduce those statistics. One would think you should be pro gay marriage rights in that case. But hey, we all know that's not what your real concern is. Your concern is to get everyone to conform to your rules.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
My handicap puts me in a minority full of people who think like Marxists. They'll tell you that they're the innocent, persecuted ones and that everyone else is the evil oppressor. Newsflash: Good and evil are on both sides. The "victims" aren't all good and the "persecutors" aren't all bad.
As I told you guys, I think that moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good. Moral liberty is not license. License causes chaos.
KnightWRX
Apr 8, 08:21 PM
Intel is not forcing anything.
Intel forced nVidia out of the chipset business. :p Which is what led to this whole GPU downgrade for Sandy Bridge equipped Macs with IGPs.
Intel forced nVidia out of the chipset business. :p Which is what led to this whole GPU downgrade for Sandy Bridge equipped Macs with IGPs.
ctakim
Apr 10, 08:33 PM
Sheesh, at least y'all should wait until we find out more specifics before you start being all so mean and rude to each other.
Will this also have an impact on Final Cut Express for those of us who are already using dumbed down software?:)
Will this also have an impact on Final Cut Express for those of us who are already using dumbed down software?:)
hob
Apr 5, 07:21 PM
Really? And yet, it seems to be good enough for the top directors in the industry.... some of the recent Academy nominated films were all edited on Final Cut, including the Cohen Brothers' "True Grit", and "Winter's Bone". Also, David Fincher and Francis Ford Coppola used FCP on their last films... these are all people that have access and can afford cutting their films on AVID and yet, they recently choose Final Cut Pro... so why do people even question it? :rolleyes:
Because those big name directors can afford a whole team of assistants to manage their assets? ;)
Because those big name directors can afford a whole team of assistants to manage their assets? ;)
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
mpolda
Jun 23, 02:38 PM
I just got a call from the manager of the Radio Shack I placed my preorder at. Even though I was first in line I'm being told I won't be getting my phone tomorrow. They screwed up the sku's and oversold the phones. This is a company-wide problem. He couldn't tell me when I'd be receiving it. I called the district manager and they're looking into it, but didn't have any additional info.
InuNacho
Mar 27, 12:34 AM
The dev is dead, too old to program anymore, or has long ago moved on to other companies and hobbies, etc. Maybe the source code depends on the PowerPlant framework, or is on a floppy disk that the dog chewed up. But thousands of Mac users still like using the old application a lot better than any of the new cr*plets.
Maybe you'll volunteer to rewrite a new app as good or better, in every regard, for free?
I'd love it if the people who say "PPC needs to die" and "PPC: the end is nigh" would rewrite every PPC application I use. They'd prove their point and I'd get a nifty application that hasn't been updated in 5-6 years.
Maybe you'll volunteer to rewrite a new app as good or better, in every regard, for free?
I'd love it if the people who say "PPC needs to die" and "PPC: the end is nigh" would rewrite every PPC application I use. They'd prove their point and I'd get a nifty application that hasn't been updated in 5-6 years.