Homy
Aug 6, 07:24 AM
MBP owners don't need to worry yet. AnandTech (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808&p=1)
"The biggest performance gains are associated with 3D rendering and media encoding tasks. While Core 2 Duo does look nice, as long as you've got a good notebook today you'll probably want to wait until Santa Rosa before upgrading (at the earliest). With Santa Rosa, clock speeds will go up slightly but more importantly we'll get access to a faster FSB. Unfortunately a side-effect of keeping Core 2 Duo fed with a faster FSB is that while performance may go up, battery life may go down. For Apple users this means that early adopters of the new MacBook or MacBook Pro won't be too pressured to upgrade again by the end of this year. Of course Apple has this way of making incremental changes irresistible."
"The biggest performance gains are associated with 3D rendering and media encoding tasks. While Core 2 Duo does look nice, as long as you've got a good notebook today you'll probably want to wait until Santa Rosa before upgrading (at the earliest). With Santa Rosa, clock speeds will go up slightly but more importantly we'll get access to a faster FSB. Unfortunately a side-effect of keeping Core 2 Duo fed with a faster FSB is that while performance may go up, battery life may go down. For Apple users this means that early adopters of the new MacBook or MacBook Pro won't be too pressured to upgrade again by the end of this year. Of course Apple has this way of making incremental changes irresistible."
Virtualball
Apr 19, 02:19 PM
Well if I'm wrong about the information, then I don't think anyone will argue about the fact that the Palm OS has been around since 1996, and the Apple iPhone uses a similar interface..
All I'm saying is that If there were devices using a similar interface before the iPhone came out I don't see how its fair to sue anyone for it..
http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/9153/palmtranicononpalmos.jpg
Sigh, you're entirely missing the point of this case. No one's arguing that there's been a grid of icons before, it's just that Samsung went the extra step. See, Android itself doesn't have a near-identical desktop, but TouchWiz does. TouchWiz is what you see here, the icons have been made into squares (like the iPhone), there's now a Dock with frequently used apps with a grey background to distinguish it (like the iPhone), it has a black background (meh) but it uses white dots to note the page it's on (like the iPhone). They went the extra mile to provide an iPhone-like experience for their Android devices.
All I'm saying is that If there were devices using a similar interface before the iPhone came out I don't see how its fair to sue anyone for it..
http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/9153/palmtranicononpalmos.jpg
Sigh, you're entirely missing the point of this case. No one's arguing that there's been a grid of icons before, it's just that Samsung went the extra step. See, Android itself doesn't have a near-identical desktop, but TouchWiz does. TouchWiz is what you see here, the icons have been made into squares (like the iPhone), there's now a Dock with frequently used apps with a grey background to distinguish it (like the iPhone), it has a black background (meh) but it uses white dots to note the page it's on (like the iPhone). They went the extra mile to provide an iPhone-like experience for their Android devices.
bretm
Apr 25, 03:54 PM
Ladies Ladies... they are storing information that should be private(yes, indeed), but let's not blow this out of proportion.
THEY ARE NOT FOLLOWING YOU!!!
The OS or iOS collects & stores this information like many platforms for specific reasons... Android, does indeed do the very same type of stored information of the 3 cell-tower's estimation of location.
The really REALLY bad news is that this information is stored in your iPhone & as well as the actual device(Mac or PC) you sync your iPhone too. The information get's logged correctly... but we are talking about Privacy.
THE iPHONE IS JUST NOT AS SECURE AS IT SHOULD BE!!!
The file should be stored(for technical specific reasons), but not with this lack of diligence on user privacy...
APPLE, you need a way to log this info in a much more secure atmosphere if the iOS does truly need this information for specific reasons.
I don't get this either. If someone can get the file off your computer, then they can get any file off your computer. Email, web browsing history, address book, whatever. My phone is password protected and so is my computer.
THEY ARE NOT FOLLOWING YOU!!!
The OS or iOS collects & stores this information like many platforms for specific reasons... Android, does indeed do the very same type of stored information of the 3 cell-tower's estimation of location.
The really REALLY bad news is that this information is stored in your iPhone & as well as the actual device(Mac or PC) you sync your iPhone too. The information get's logged correctly... but we are talking about Privacy.
THE iPHONE IS JUST NOT AS SECURE AS IT SHOULD BE!!!
The file should be stored(for technical specific reasons), but not with this lack of diligence on user privacy...
APPLE, you need a way to log this info in a much more secure atmosphere if the iOS does truly need this information for specific reasons.
I don't get this either. If someone can get the file off your computer, then they can get any file off your computer. Email, web browsing history, address book, whatever. My phone is password protected and so is my computer.
DStaal
Jul 20, 09:18 AM
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
Not on an application level, but we will on a system level.
Not on an application level, but we will on a system level.
shamino
Jul 21, 12:45 PM
I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
All I will say is that you are not a typical user. You are not even close to typical.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
All I will say is that you are not a typical user. You are not even close to typical.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
SuperCachetes
Mar 4, 12:02 AM
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions.
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
Invalid because it endorses something that could cause the collapse of society
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
Invalid because it endorses something that could cause the collapse of society
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
Bosunsfate
Aug 8, 12:46 AM
Well I for one was kind of disappointed. Leopard is sort of Apple's chance to prove they can out-Vista Vista, and I'm not really sure what we saw today does it. I've been following Vista somewhat closely, and it really does catch Windows up to OS X in terms of features and prettiness.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
I have seen plenty of beta Vista versions and they have nothing like Spaces or Time Machine....or frankly anything I saw today.
Why don't you point out something specific rather blather on with such nonsense.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
I have seen plenty of beta Vista versions and they have nothing like Spaces or Time Machine....or frankly anything I saw today.
Why don't you point out something specific rather blather on with such nonsense.
gnomeisland
Apr 27, 08:18 AM
I wish they would leave it on and let me use it. I consider it a feature. It would help me track hours at job sites automatically for billing. I thought of writing an app just for that.
That's an interesting idea.
I actually like Apple's response. I do think that being able to turn OFF the feature was an oversight on their part but I do wish there was a way to leave it on. I'd actually welcome a way to import that database into Aperture and use it geotag my photos. Yes, there are apps to do that but I have an iPhone 3G and so backgrounding those apps isn't really possible.
That's an interesting idea.
I actually like Apple's response. I do think that being able to turn OFF the feature was an oversight on their part but I do wish there was a way to leave it on. I'd actually welcome a way to import that database into Aperture and use it geotag my photos. Yes, there are apps to do that but I have an iPhone 3G and so backgrounding those apps isn't really possible.
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 07:58 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
LethalWolfe
Apr 10, 10:31 PM
Unless, like I posted earlier, the iPad app functions as a UI for the main application over the network. The Mac (or cluster of macs) takes care of the heavy lifting, and the iPad is used to make edits remotely, and broadcast to HDTV's.
AirPlay & AirEdit.
If you had a cluster of Mac Pro's using thunderbolt (or whatever...ethernet, fibre, etc) to talk to each other, and you used the iPad as a remote UI, you could edit, compress, and broadcast from anywhere.
Apple has all the pieces in place to do this. AirPlay, AppleTV, iPad, iTunes as a media hub for all the devices to communicate, Qmaster, etc...
This has been a long time coming. I remember in 2006-2007 hearing rumors that Apple was working on a tablet like controller for logic. It was to be used to edit the timeline, or act as a virtual mixer, etc. This has been brewing for years, and I think it's almost a reality.
Avid demo'd basically this last year at NAB. IIRC all the media was on servers in Virginia and the presenter did the demonstration on a laptop using a web app.
Lethal
AirPlay & AirEdit.
If you had a cluster of Mac Pro's using thunderbolt (or whatever...ethernet, fibre, etc) to talk to each other, and you used the iPad as a remote UI, you could edit, compress, and broadcast from anywhere.
Apple has all the pieces in place to do this. AirPlay, AppleTV, iPad, iTunes as a media hub for all the devices to communicate, Qmaster, etc...
This has been a long time coming. I remember in 2006-2007 hearing rumors that Apple was working on a tablet like controller for logic. It was to be used to edit the timeline, or act as a virtual mixer, etc. This has been brewing for years, and I think it's almost a reality.
Avid demo'd basically this last year at NAB. IIRC all the media was on servers in Virginia and the presenter did the demonstration on a laptop using a web app.
Lethal
iJon
Apr 5, 05:19 PM
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
Final Cut Pro supports Blu Ray authoring but it does the bare minimum only. A DVD Studio Pro like program would be nice.
Final Cut Pro supports Blu Ray authoring but it does the bare minimum only. A DVD Studio Pro like program would be nice.
kdarling
Mar 22, 06:30 PM
I would really love for the Playbook or the Touchpad to succeed over the fragmented Android POS ecosystem. The HTC tablet that they announced today won't even come with Honeycomb.
If you meant the HTC View for Sprint (aka the Flyer), then I don't think it needs Honeycomb right away to become popular.
It'll start with Gingerbread, Sense and the Scribe pen technology, which is plenty to play and be useful with.
I'm looking forward to trying its ability to allow typed, drawn, and voice memos during the day, saved into Evernote. Latest demo video here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVK-OTnxnp0). HTC is going out on a limb here, but I think it's a good one.
If you meant the HTC View for Sprint (aka the Flyer), then I don't think it needs Honeycomb right away to become popular.
It'll start with Gingerbread, Sense and the Scribe pen technology, which is plenty to play and be useful with.
I'm looking forward to trying its ability to allow typed, drawn, and voice memos during the day, saved into Evernote. Latest demo video here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVK-OTnxnp0). HTC is going out on a limb here, but I think it's a good one.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 7, 06:21 PM
I was saving up for a Lambo before i remembered i can get a murcielago with the voucher thing i got with the game.
I did kinda just blow a ton of money on a Mine's R34. Its awesome and should get me through the GT World Cup easily enough.
I did kinda just blow a ton of money on a Mine's R34. Its awesome and should get me through the GT World Cup easily enough.
portishead
Apr 12, 02:25 PM
BTW, apparently this site is doing live blogging:
http://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl
That's about all I could find.
http://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl
That's about all I could find.
Doctor Q
Apr 25, 04:26 PM
Nike+iPod must be an even more serious privacy violation. After all, it knows how fast I'm going and my calories burned. And it sends the data to nikeplus.com! :eek:
Yeah, both iPhone/iPod and Nike+iPod store the information only on my device and sync it only to my other devices, sending it elsewhere only if I want. But if I can make money by suing about it then I'll ignore those inconvenient facts!
Yeah, both iPhone/iPod and Nike+iPod store the information only on my device and sync it only to my other devices, sending it elsewhere only if I want. But if I can make money by suing about it then I'll ignore those inconvenient facts!
Bosunsfate
Aug 8, 12:39 AM
:p
As I had said many times before, we were not going to see just upgraded features. Rather the show stoppers are something no one had thought of before.
You guys and Apple are really doing a sweet job....and yea take the rest of the year off.....but then again, I need Leopard shipped, so get that out first. ;)
As I had said many times before, we were not going to see just upgraded features. Rather the show stoppers are something no one had thought of before.
You guys and Apple are really doing a sweet job....and yea take the rest of the year off.....but then again, I need Leopard shipped, so get that out first. ;)
kupua
Nov 29, 12:19 AM
No way Jose...hahahahahahahaha
How much did they invest in the development in the iPod. Yah right just as I though, zip. If MS is that stupid, it just shows what leverage they have on the market for their Zune
How much did they invest in the development in the iPod. Yah right just as I though, zip. If MS is that stupid, it just shows what leverage they have on the market for their Zune
MacsRgr8
Jul 20, 02:28 PM
Have you ever owned a machine that hasn't been CPU bound? I know I haven't.
Probably Single CPU bound....
It will be gr8 being able to get 8 cores in a Mac, but if the software dosn't use it....
Someone already mentioned that it also gives you the possibility to use those cores by using many apps at once. This is true, but I wonder how many often you will actually use all those cores at once.
Let's hope the "opposite of Hyperthreading" will come along (Leopard feature???).. So, instead of a "emulating" a Dual Core / CPU config (like on later Pentium 4's), emulate a Single CPU on multiple cores. :cool:
Then, you get 8 * 3 GHz = 1 * 24 GHz...!!!
Probably Single CPU bound....
It will be gr8 being able to get 8 cores in a Mac, but if the software dosn't use it....
Someone already mentioned that it also gives you the possibility to use those cores by using many apps at once. This is true, but I wonder how many often you will actually use all those cores at once.
Let's hope the "opposite of Hyperthreading" will come along (Leopard feature???).. So, instead of a "emulating" a Dual Core / CPU config (like on later Pentium 4's), emulate a Single CPU on multiple cores. :cool:
Then, you get 8 * 3 GHz = 1 * 24 GHz...!!!
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
err404
Apr 25, 02:31 PM
Obviously this IS an issue; just not a very big one. Considering the low quality of the data and the nature if what is stored, it is not well suited for tracking user whereabouts with any level of confidence.
Apple does need to address this, but I don't see any malicious intent. The data serves a valuable function for the user and is not collected by Apple.
Apple does need to address this, but I don't see any malicious intent. The data serves a valuable function for the user and is not collected by Apple.
GFLPraxis
Aug 11, 10:39 AM
These iPhone rumours continue to persist. I admit to being a sceptic, but maybe I'm wrong! I just hope that if they do do it, they do it well.
The Intel Mac rumors persisted too.
The Intel Mac rumors persisted too.
balamw
Aug 7, 04:42 PM
Still, nothing fundamentally new, and definitely not Vista 2.0... ;)
Remember that Vista and Leopard are desktop OSes, not server OSes...
Anyhow, I'll wait until I see Vista 1.0 (not RC2) before I'm sure about that. ;)
B
Remember that Vista and Leopard are desktop OSes, not server OSes...
Anyhow, I'll wait until I see Vista 1.0 (not RC2) before I'm sure about that. ;)
B
Micjose
Apr 25, 01:45 PM
lol, i think the people are just cashing in ;)
wschutz
Mar 26, 08:19 AM
Um, there's only been one release since leopard. Too soon to know if Lion will wow or not.
I'll save you a headache... it will.. not
Apple has realized it can squeeze people's pocket as much as it wants... for that reason, it is releasing a couple of features (and still not with the latest technology as expected) as new products... from time to time... Apple includes something innovative (such as Thunderbolt though given that no other manufacturer is developing the standard it is kind of useless...).
Therefore, I do not expect anything else from Apple. Lion will be just a mere touch of make-up and a few changes towards making the experience of the newest and most profitable business of Apple... AppStore. So people will be buying a better integration of a application store with the OS...
(And no... integrating Spaces, Expos�, Dashboard and including some of the things from iOS is not worth a new OS... at least Microsoft, and I hate it, does a complete overhaul of everything; sometimes it fails, and sometimes it succeeds)
NB: For those English native speakers... which is the best subject when addressing a company, for instance, Apple/Microsoft...? I used "it" here, but sometimes I also use "they"... and I don't know which one is correct!
I'll save you a headache... it will.. not
Apple has realized it can squeeze people's pocket as much as it wants... for that reason, it is releasing a couple of features (and still not with the latest technology as expected) as new products... from time to time... Apple includes something innovative (such as Thunderbolt though given that no other manufacturer is developing the standard it is kind of useless...).
Therefore, I do not expect anything else from Apple. Lion will be just a mere touch of make-up and a few changes towards making the experience of the newest and most profitable business of Apple... AppStore. So people will be buying a better integration of a application store with the OS...
(And no... integrating Spaces, Expos�, Dashboard and including some of the things from iOS is not worth a new OS... at least Microsoft, and I hate it, does a complete overhaul of everything; sometimes it fails, and sometimes it succeeds)
NB: For those English native speakers... which is the best subject when addressing a company, for instance, Apple/Microsoft...? I used "it" here, but sometimes I also use "they"... and I don't know which one is correct!
No comments:
Post a Comment