.:[Double Click To][Close]:.

Friday, May 13, 2011

real madrid vs barcelona 1-1

real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. real madrid vs barcelona 2011
  • real madrid vs barcelona 2011



  • ezekielrage_99
    Sep 25, 11:32 PM
    And the wait for 8 Core Mac Pros and Merom MacBook Pros/MaBook is on ;)

    Waiting for speed bumps means no one buys a dang thing :cool:





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. Barcelona 1-1 Real Madrid
  • Barcelona 1-1 Real Madrid



  • r.j.s
    May 2, 09:16 AM
    so much for the no malware on macs myth :D
    funny how the apple fanboys are getting all defensive :rolleyes:

    There has been malware for years, and IIRC, it all requires the user to do something to install it.

    Basic user awareness will prevent this from becoming an issue.





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. Real Madrid vs FC Barcelona La
  • Real Madrid vs FC Barcelona La



  • mdntcallr
    Oct 25, 10:58 PM
    This is starting to sound like the war of the razors...

    Anyone remember when the Mach-3 came out, and everyone thought "wow... three blades. that's a lot!" Now we're up to FIVE... and an extra one on the back.

    Just more proof positive that when it comes to Apple you should buy when you need, and enjoy what you've got, cause in two months it'll be replaced anyway.

    ... okay, I'm done. Eight cores is pretty wild. ;)
    S
    Dude, your so funnnnY!!
    but this is a happy time, tech advancements are a great thing.

    this is happily something better than how long it took with G5 to update.

    Hope they do an update with Blu-Ray option.





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. Real Madrid 1-1 Barcelona
  • Real Madrid 1-1 Barcelona



  • Lesser Evets
    Apr 13, 05:49 AM
    $299 is impressive.

    I've been saying that if they put FCX online for $79.99 I'd buy immediately. I'm confused why Apple has an online App store and yet they offer paltry bits of programming.





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. Real Madrid vs Barcelona 1-1
  • Real Madrid vs Barcelona 1-1



  • PhantomPumpkin
    Apr 21, 08:28 AM
    There are already a score of malware and spyware on Android, including software that phish for bank customer information of Fandroids.

    And a nice Skype app that was able to send your private data out.

    http://www.ciol.com/Security/Application-Security/News-Reports/Android-app-Skype-patches-vulnerability/149097/0/





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. Real Madrid vs Barcelona.
  • Real Madrid vs Barcelona.



  • Azadre
    Apr 20, 08:07 PM
    Windows is the castle for Microsoft. Office and everything else for the most part was the moat.

    Google's castle is advertising, and everything else including android is the moat.

    Android is not Windows.





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. Real Madrid vs Barcelona
  • Real Madrid vs Barcelona



  • leomac08
    Mar 11, 01:05 AM
    I have been seeing the breaking news, I saw a tsunami!:(

    It was originally 7.9 then upgraded to 8.8, then 8.9:eek:

    It's so devastating! Cars couldn't escape!:eek:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12709598





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. watch real madrid vs barcelona
  • watch real madrid vs barcelona



  • blackpond
    May 2, 09:29 AM
    People use Safari? ... :confused:





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. real madrid vs barcelona 1-1
  • real madrid vs barcelona 1-1



  • toddybody
    Apr 21, 08:41 AM
    So why are you here? :confused:

    Yeah, I wonder that too sometimes.




    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. Real Madrid Vs Barcelona 1-1
  • Real Madrid Vs Barcelona 1-1



  • somemacuser
    Apr 5, 11:04 PM
    Was a MSFT user since DOS. Switched about 2.5 years ago. I'd concur with the few gripes already listed in here that are a bit of a change for windows users - my favorites (quitting applications isnt alt-f4 anymore, cmd-tab doesnt cycle windows, not being able to launch multiple occurrences of an application, giving up the ability to repair my imac myself, and the lack of a PC-like "delete" key instead of the backspace delete that's on the wireless keyboard - WTF!).

    However, for the few things that were a change for me, I discover new stuff seemingly every week that makes me smile at the thoughtfulness that has been put into the Mac/OSX. Hard to list them all, but the sum of them makes the whole experience SO well done. A few weeks after getting the Mac I was ticked I waited so long to cut over. It was a non issue. I didnt make the leap until I was satisfied parallels would still be a viable option to run XP. It works great, but I never use it other than to show people a mac can run windows. :) OSX is so stable, smooth (scrolling, transitions, etc.), beautiful hardware, and elegant to work in I had no desire to go back. I am well aware that Windows 7 has come a long way, but its *still* not as thoughtfully designed.

    As has been said many times on this site, ultimately, you can accomplish the same stuff on a PC, but its not as pleasant or easy to get there. As I get older and have less free time in my life with family/career, I appreciate just getting what I want out of the computer and not tinkering. I've done a 180 from my earlier days of taking some pleasure in reformatting a pc and reinstalling windows clean. Now my time spent fiddling is learning cool stuff in aperture and imovie. And I am constantly amazed at the quality of the output vs. the time invested.

    Its hard not to be a raving fan of a tool that is that is so enjoyable to use, gives pleasure when you just look at the damn thing, and gives a meaningful return on time spent "learning" it. But my needs may be different than yours. 15 years ago I pounded code for a living and scoffed at apple stuff. Today my way of making a living and my priorities in life are very different. The mac is the right choice for me even if I cant close an application in one click from the corner.





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. Real Madrid vs Barcelona
  • Real Madrid vs Barcelona



  • ender land
    Apr 23, 10:31 PM
    Frankly, it doesn't take much faith to claim that nothing and no-one stands above nature (i.e. being supernatural).

    ...

    Do you realize the sheer magnitude of this statement?

    If even 0.0000001% of an incredibly lowball estimate as to the number of current Christians in the world (not to mention past Christians or other theistic religions) have legitimately experienced a supernatural event - pick one, doesn't matter which or how large or small it is - this is an incorrect statement.

    Even if 99.9999% of a billion people claiming supernatural events such as religion are lying, that is still a thousand experiences which invalidate your premise.

    Everything we can see is derived from nature.

    Spoken like a true empiricist.

    Where would God come from then?

    I have never understood why this is used as an argument against a god(s). Clearly, something exists now (as an aside, if you disagree with this statement there is absolutely no grounds to say religion is not true either, so I'm going to assume you do agree something does in fact exist, namely the universe). No matter how you believe, either atheism, creationism, flying spagetti monsterism, anything, at some point, there will be the problem that something always existed. Or existed "before." Whether it's God or a singularity point or whatever, all rational beliefs agree upon this point.

    Asking how God existed prior to the known universe is meaningless in terms of invalidating any religion.

    If there are spiritual entities which stand above us humans, they do certainly not stand above these laws. It doesn't make sense, and was never even supposed to make sense to the human mind in the first place (ask any priest about the latter, he will confirm it).


    Simple example: I make some robots. I put them into a world (let's say I put them in a room with no visible or perceptible interior doors/windows/etc). They interact and are reasonably self aware. Their entire world is this room. Gravity is "obvious" to them. Suddenly, I rotate the entire room 90 degrees. They would have a situation where the statement "no spiritual entity.. stand[s] above these laws."

    Clearly this does not necessarily prove god(s). But it does mean your belief as stated above is illogical (unless starting from the assumed premise that no god(s) exist, in which case your faith rests upon this belief).





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. Barcelona vs Real Madrid 1-1
  • Barcelona vs Real Madrid 1-1



  • dragonsbane
    Mar 20, 10:04 PM
    It nullifies your power to complain. You said, "I don't think this business model is right" in your head, but clicked "I agree to these terms and conditions" anyway. Then you decide that the terms are inconvenient for you. Now you are breaking those terms, which in addition to being illegal on two fronts (copyright law and a legal TOS contract), is breaking your word. There's no way to construe that as morally sound.
    Sounds to me like your world falls apart when people disagree with you. A small island you must live on when you know all options open to humans who have the same capacity to reason as you. It must feel good to know you are right. Funny how the same arguments you use have be used throughout history and have ALWAYS been seen as wrong over time. You are Midas yelling at the waves.

    Personally, I would prefer to have a bunch of people like you around to check me when I think I know what is right. I am happy to let people see the world from their own vantage without the need to "correct" them. I have no doubt that you will learn that your child will not follow your dictums without question. And here you are, on a forum with adults, and you propose that we simply roll over and agree with you. Pah! Tell us what you think and let us reason for ourselves. The fact that you agree or disagree with an individual is of no importance - except maybe to you.





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. Real Madrid Vs FC Barcelona
  • Real Madrid Vs FC Barcelona



  • Cromulent
    Apr 24, 11:44 AM
    Based on what you've written, you have a very narrow view of what you consider to be "Christianity." You should perhaps spell that out--what I would infer from what you've written is that to "Christian" one must interpret the Bible (by which I assume you mean the Old and New Testaments) fairly literally and that any denomination which does not do so cannot be "Christian." Which would be news to many of the major Christian denominations.

    Perhaps you should substitute "fundamental Christian" for Christian, since that term seems to be more in line with what you've written.

    Not at all. I think anyone who identifies as a Christian is a Christian by definition. I just think that the lengths some goto rationalise their beliefs are ridiculous. Why bother being a Christian at all if you are going to change some of the core tenants of the belief.

    I am mean I heard the other day (second hand so apply salt liberally) that some Christians are even changing the whole holy trinity thing so that it is less "way out there".

    My general thinking on this is that if you can "interpret" so much of the Bible then why do you need a centralised religion at all? Why isn't anyone who believes in a god (any god) a Christian if the definition is so liberal? The only thing that seems constant in Christianity is that every denomination considers the Bible to be their holy book. Everything else, including the meaning whether literal or interpreted is completely up for grabs.

    It just strikes me as odd that God would let the state of his religion fall into such disrepair.

    Just my thoughts.





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. real madrid vs barcelona april
  • real madrid vs barcelona april



  • DeepDish
    Aug 29, 11:06 AM
    Do you have evidence of this just out of interest? I too was surprised to read this, so I'd be interested if you had evidence the other way.


    zero evidence, other than my gut feeling.

    But come on, Dell more green than Apple? Something is not right here.





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. Real Madrid Vs Barcelona Live:
  • Real Madrid Vs Barcelona Live:



  • balamw
    Sep 21, 08:22 AM
    the iTV doesn't do HD either. Quoting Bob iger, Disney CEO:

    http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2066
    IMHO Iger's comments are referring to the content at the store, not the capabilities of the iTV. The iTV is so clearly designed to complement an HDTV with its outputs, if they crippled it to have only 480p output they would have failed. Plus, Steve already demonstrated playing an HD Trailer.

    We shall see...

    B





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. real madrid vs barcelona 2011.
  • real madrid vs barcelona 2011.



  • rasmasyean
    Mar 14, 07:19 PM
    Are there any like Predator survailance drones arround there? You'd figure by now since the US has arrived, they would bring a bunch of these planes that circle Afghanistan and Iraq all 24-7. They can like spot heat signatures and like liscense plates and stuff like that.





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. lt;gt;. Cristiano Ronaldo e
  • lt;gt;. Cristiano Ronaldo e



  • deannnnn
    May 6, 10:07 PM
    For christ's sake -- Arn, why not make a sticky for people who's phones work?

    It's difficult for people who do not live in New York City to understand this issue. You should be happy that your iPhone works for you where you live, not upset at people who have difficulties with it.





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. Real Madrid Vs Barcelona Live:
  • Real Madrid Vs Barcelona Live:



  • babyj
    Sep 21, 03:17 AM
    There is going to be a lot of changes to how we watch and pay for tv shows over the next few years, its still early days at the moment. The main change will be watching everything on demand rather than at the time it is broadcast.

    The bottom line is that the tv companies (producers and broadcasters) have to make money from the shows. That money can come from advertising, cable / satellite subscriptions, paying for downloads or for on demand type services.

    Everyone is treading very carefully at present as they don't want to upset the balance. For example, brands won't pay for advertising if no one is watching the ads as viewers are all buying downloads and until the downloads are paying the bills the tv companies don't want to do anything too drastic.

    Here in the UK the next big thing is likely to be the BBC going all out with downloads and streaming of their content. Which in theory won't cost anyone in the UK much (maybe just paying for the traffic) as we already pay through the tv license.

    If Apple want to get a good market share in the UK they need to forget about tv shows and do a deal for content from the BBC and the Premiership, as the exclusive live rights to the latter is what made Sky so big and popular.





    real madrid vs barcelona 1-1. real madrid vs barcelona 2011
  • real madrid vs barcelona 2011



  • toxic
    Apr 5, 10:44 PM
    forgot to add that the "+" (maximize) button is wildly inconsistent in its function.

    maximizing to full screen in general isn't the way OS X "works", which is why most programs don't do that...but it seems Apple never really decided what the maximize button is supposed to do.

    What if I just want my top 10 favorites? In Windows I just drag the icon (of whatever I want) to the Start button, then drop it into the list of my favorites (I'm not sure of the actual term for this). Can this be done on a Mac?

    Since I open the same 10 or 12 programs or folders or files many times throughout the day, every day, this is pretty important to me. It would absolutely mess up my work flow to lose this feature.

    that's what the dock is for... you put your most common applications in the dock, everything else is in the Applications folder, accessible from the dock.

    I'm was a complete Mac virgin when I switched a couple of months ago but some of the small things that still annoy me.

    1. Pressing delete when you've selected a file in finder doesn't delete the file. You've gotta use the context menu or <gasp> actually drag it to the garbage.

    cmd + delete

    3. There's no ".." button in finder(i.e. go one level up a directory structure)

    cmd + up

    4. Not having an actual uninstall program procedure kind of makes me paranoid.

    all necessary files are contained in the application package, any files that go somewhere else are just saves or preferences. the exception is for certain programs, like Adobe ones, where the developer is too lazy to rewrite their code so that all the necessary components are in one place.





    Cougarcat
    May 2, 09:35 AM
    Bigger, most Windows PC have anti-virus, can you say the same for Macs?

    All macs do have built-in anti-malware:
    http://www.macworld.com/article/142457/2009/08/snowleopard_malware.html
    Don't know how good it is, though.





    citizenzen
    Apr 22, 09:42 PM
    Again, how can you prove something that (in theory) exists outside of time and space?

    It's a never-ending speculation.

    Even if we managed to explore every square inch of time and space you can always ask, "but what if something exists beyond that?"



    The question remains, what makes an atheist?

    The desire to see some form of proof before believing in an extraordinary explanation.

    It's pretty simple really.





    NathanMuir
    Mar 25, 12:32 PM
    You misspeak and mischaracterize.

    This is a thread on the Vatican correct? So far as I know, the Vatican is the leadership hierarchy for the Catholic Church. Please correct me if that's not right.

    A conservative member of this board has already narrowed the discussion from "hate" to "specific acts of violence linked diretly to the catholic church". A distinction that gives a massive amount of "stretch" and eliminates things like a Roman Catholic pastor in Texas comparing homosexuals to rapists or Mexican catholic priests fomenting hate in the wake of a same-sex marriage bill. And yet we are working within his narrowed definition.

    I can't and don't speak for that member. I've already presented my views on why I think that speech is different from physical acts.





    awmazz
    Mar 14, 11:34 AM
    Am I hearing the expert om TV right? He's saying the seawater being pumped in is just *around* the core container to stop it from overheating and melting. It's not actually *into* the core to cool it down.

    So basically these fire engines are just pumping water onto the outside of a red hot oven to keep it from melting while the oven still burns brightly.

    Seawater. I hear that's effective against Triffids too..

    Edit - The NYT article appears to contradict this, saying the water is being pumped in to cover the rods:

    The Kyodo news agency reported that the damaged fuel rods at the third reactor had been temporarily exposed, increasing the risk of overheating. Sea water was being channeled into the reactor to cover the rods, Kyodo reported.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/world/asia/japan-fukushima-nuclear-reactor.html?_r=3&pagewanted=1&hp


    What I would like to say, better than I can say it. Awesome :D

    Regarding the ship-- it is my understanding that the amount of radiation they received was one months worth of background radiation. Often people forget how low this can actually be... we're not talking rem, we're talking mrem-- you get more radiation from living in a house with radon, medical imaging, or flying on planes, just to name a few.

    The key phrase is 'passed through'. So sailing through it. How long did that take, assume 10 minutes? So a month's exposure in just 10 minutes. If they remained stationary for a full day that equates to how many future sailors' babies born with no legs or whatnot? (See there? I'm not talking about deaths.) Quick arithmetic = 6 months backrgound radiation per hour = lookie there a nice divisible number, 12 years worth per day.

    So living in that house of yours in your example. Extrapolate that out. 12 years of background exposure per day for a whole year = 4,380 YEARS worth of normal background exposure per annum. How many deformed babies is that *not* to worry about in future years? Seriously, are you telling us all here that you would have your pregnant wife remain exposed to this sort of 'flying on a plane' level of radiation? That you would be happy to have your pregnant wife (if she was) remain within 100 kilomtres of Fukishima for any length of time based on current circumstances?

    You Puma and Sushi keep trying to play this down because you 'know how a nuclear reactor works', yet every day your "nowt trouble a t'mill" assurances are just hammered by a new event. An analogy in my mind right now would be architects insisting while we're watching smoke billowing from the towers on our screens that the girders were fireproof-coated so there's no risk of them melting and the buildings collapsing...

    Sorry, but the rest of us know how govts and corporations work. They lie. They cover their own arses. They are incompetent. Gulf oil spill. This very same Tokyo electric company saw the CEO and others resign a few years ago for falsifying safety records. So you ignore the most important aspect of the fleet readings. That they contradict the 'official' line we are being told. That they've now officially been caught lying about how bad it actually is.





    Blue Velvet
    Sep 26, 01:41 AM
    As far as that one application is concerned, no difference, but you get to do so much more in the background =)


    Thanks. That's not particularly encouraging... I'm not in the habit of 'doing stuff in the background' when I'm working, unless it's disk-burning. :(