Monday, May 9, 2011

wallpaper red

wallpaper red. wallpaper red.
  • wallpaper red.



  • tigress666
    Apr 9, 12:10 PM
    When Apple Buys Nintendo eventually, it will be a good merge.

    Here is a question. Why (if you want to see good games on the iphone) would you want Nintendo (and Sony's gaming department) to go away?

    As some one pointed out in some other forum, all the really good, non-angry-birds/cut-the-rope, traditional style (racing, jrpgs, simulators, shooters) games seem to be ports from the other handhelds. In general companies like Squaresoft tend to port over games they've made on other handhelds to make more money on the iphone (usually after they've made their money on the handhelds).

    If the other handhelds go away, do you think we'll see more of that style game for handhelds? Or do you think gaming will go more the way of the social (Freemium) gaming (farmville, ick. I admittedly got into these games when I first was on facebook but after a while realized there was absolutely no substance at all and it was just a game of accumulate stuff with no real "game") and puzzle games (cut the rope/Angry birds. fine for a little time wasting but not something you really immerse yourself in, though I will say some are much better than others).

    I have nothing against puzzle games (But I would be pissed if social/freemium gaming became the pretty much norm) but I still love my jrpgs and my racing games and my flight simulators. And I'm really getting into third person rpgs (Prince of Persian, Assassin's Creed... oddly, these I didn't have as much interest until I got an iphone which I admit is not the best format for them but they're still fun on it). I'd hate to see them go away.

    (and somewhere on the net is a really good rant on why freemium games really isn't a great style of gaming, how just paying some money to get that extra incentive takes away from the actual fun of playing the game vs. actually working in the game to get that stuff).





    wallpaper red. a red wallpaper
  • a red wallpaper



  • vniow
    Oct 9, 12:57 AM
    Originally posted by Abercrombieboy
    I don't understand you guys, you say that Windows XP is now stable and maybe you are right, and you say that PC's are faster and the hardware is the same quality for less money.




    wallpaper red. Cool Windows Vista Wallpapers
  • Cool Windows Vista Wallpapers



  • Grimmeh
    Mar 18, 11:11 AM
    AT&T will never have my business anymore. I used AT&T’s service for my older iPhone 3G I had bought off eBay. After a year, they decided to take it upon themselves to have me buy their data plan. I have, and never have had, a need for a data plan. I rarely find myself without Wi-Fi or I do without for those rare occasions (as if their service never has it’s outages). I told them I don’t need it, or ever use it.

    They feel it’s fair to require me to pay for service I don’t need. My phone’s hardware is no different than the dinky little flip phone I’m forced to use until the contract expires (it was the only way for them to keep from charging me for data). Just because of the name of my phone they are telling me I need to buy more from them. That is terrifying if it’s legal.

    Now, they are telling people that because their service is split amongst devices you need to pay more, too? Hah! What if you had to pay extra to have more than one phone on your land line? Or you had to pay extra for having more than one computer on your home Internet? Or more if you use a wireless router?

    Wireless service companies in the U.S. (can’t speak for elsewhere) have people by the balls. I don’t like it.

    P.S. Isn‘t it illegal if they sniff your data? Against privacy laws?





    wallpaper red. red dragons
  • red dragons



  • BornAgainMac
    Sep 26, 04:47 AM
    Running at 8 Core-a-hz





    wallpaper red. Download Free Love Wallpapers
  • Download Free Love Wallpapers



  • Peace
    Sep 20, 05:29 PM
    I whole-heartedly agree.

    I find it higly unlikely that there's a physical Hard Drive in the box that amounts to anything more than the UI and/or chache/buffer.

    There's absolutely no need and would complicate the equation indefinitely, especially concerning digital rights.

    Let's assume Iger is right, though, that there IS a HDD in the TelePort (or as you infidels call it, iTV), and that it can act as a stand-alone media access point. The question remains, how would you be able to get media onto it? Either 1) it comes with some sort of operating system which allowed you to connect it to iTS for content, or 2) it could be detected by a Mac or PC as a computer/HD over the network in order to drag-n-drop media.

    Option 1, I think, is too far-fetched and risky. There would be substantial reliability issues using HDs that small to run an OS. We've all heard many nightmare-ish stories about people trying to bring their home computer to work, booting via iPod. Nonetheless, this seems like the most likely option for the use of a HDD.

    Option 2, if this is the case, you already have a full-sized (i.e. reliable) HDD in your computer, which is connected to the internet, (i.e. iTS) for content. Why would you even need a HD in the box? Basically, Apple would be spending money on MicroDrives which don't have a reliable life-span and take up valuable space inside the box and for what? So that you can have an identical copy of a 1GB movie on both your Mac and your iTV box? As long as streaming works, there's no need. As long as streaming works, there's no need. As long as streaming works, there's no need!

    PLUS, with iTunes DRM, you are limited to the number of copies you can make on devices you own. So an HD in the iTV would eat up one of those copies for any of the media you would choose to load onto it.

    I do think, however, it would be likely to allow it to connect to .Mac, although streaming from the net is slower than from within an internal network... and on top of that, I don't know many people who store full-length, full-quality movies in their .Mac storage. In fact, I don't know any.

    So, that's why I think there will be no HDD in the TelePort.

    -Clive

    That makes no sense at all..

    In order to even view and/or listen to any media from another computer it needs a front row interface.That interface must be on the component itself.So in order for front row to run it must have some kind of O/S built into it.





    wallpaper red. Danger Zone Wallpaper 4
  • Danger Zone Wallpaper 4



  • rasmasyean
    Mar 13, 10:45 PM
    That's a pretty short sighted idea. Even if that were an effective way to stop a tsunami do you really think it's very wise to drop radioactive waste on all of our problems?

    Well they shot a lot of nukes at Bikini Atol and that was near the islands where they can observer it. It didn't "create a tsunami" either. Maybe some small waves and such only and they fired off a lot of nukes there. Of course there will be some degree of radioactivity increase, but think about how much damage a tsunami like this does. It's a tradeoff.





    wallpaper red. Tags: red storm, wallpaper red
  • Tags: red storm, wallpaper red



  • toodeep
    Sep 20, 04:07 AM
    Paraphrasing @emotion: "it's an mpeg-2 world".

    Potential iTV customers will have expectations of being able to watch DVD-content and recorded digital TV programmes, and Apple would be wise to not dissapoint them I think. Similarly for the true video iPod. And if the iTV engine can render MPEG-2 on the fly (and why not: my pocket drive can do this and at the same time up-convert to 1080i) them maybe adding a USB tuner will be an option. (That said I'm very satified with my Mac-friendly Toppy PVR.)





    wallpaper red. red and white wallpaper red
  • red and white wallpaper red



  • �algiris
    May 2, 08:58 AM
    About as huge as most windows ones!

    "Bigger".





    wallpaper red. Wallpaper Red Vintage Design
  • Wallpaper Red Vintage Design



  • yukio
    Aug 25, 10:17 PM
    SJ said it takes 2 years to build a cell tower in the bay area. compared to something like 6 months in texas

    it's not a sf bay area problem nearly as much as it is a san francisco problem.

    i live in the city, and i swear - while the rest of us are working - the "neighbors against things we don't understand" go to each and every city board meeting and derail cell antenna applications.

    even though we have huge chunks of the city with electrified light rail wires overhead emitting their own em radiation, it's the cellphones that must be stopped.

    i'm not making excuses for att - because i think that they have experience deploying in plenty of difficult markets - they just choose to not work the system to get things done.

    and let's face it - service always declines in a single-provider model.





    wallpaper red. Red Wallpaper for Skull
  • Red Wallpaper for Skull



  • munkery
    May 2, 01:38 PM
    That's what I'd like to know. I can't even open HTML pages downloaded from my own website without OS X warning me before opening it, and yet this story makes it sound as if the file contained in the zip is somehow launching on its own without any user notification. Sounds like BS to me. What is the source for this?

    It decompressed the zip file and executes code to launch an installer. This is considered a safe action because the user still has to continue to run the installer.

    Installation of MacDefender via the installer requires password authentication by the user.





    wallpaper red. red leopard wallpaperred
  • red leopard wallpaperred



  • Squonk
    Aug 29, 11:18 AM
    I wonder if they mentioned the fact that Dell has made the computer a disposable purchase with their $299 PCs. I'm serious people buy a new Dell every few years because they are garbage. Do you honestly think people give them back for recycling. They sell them on ebay or craigslist, and the new owner after about a year puts them in the dumpster. With Apple people keep their machines much longer, and are much more likely to recycle them because they are smaller and easier to take to a recycling center (no CRT). This alone makes Apple greener then Dell.

    I was thinking along the same lines. Over the course of 4 PC's in my household, I have only had 2 macs and these have always been my primary machines. I don't want to part with my 5 year old iMac, it still serves me well for basic surfing and audio streaming needs.

    But, the point of the article is that the machines that Apple makes are not as eco friendly as the other manufacturers. Of course, if you looked at the units shipped, wouldn't Dell be less friendly. Aka, they are "making it up" on volume?

    If this article is true, then Apple needs to improve what they are doing. It's that simple. The truth hurts when it hits so close to our hearts...





    wallpaper red. FreeBSD Red Wallpaper
  • FreeBSD Red Wallpaper



  • macmax
    Oct 9, 02:35 AM
    Originally posted by javajedi


    Come on.. lets get real..

    1) Macs don't use shared libraries? You must be using System 6. For the folks who aren't familiar with the concept of the shared library (what Microsoft calls a dynamic link library) simply put shared libs are object orientated pieces of code containing functions/methods and other objects that can be invoked upon from other code. Mac OS X being highly object orientated relies almost exclusively on shared libraries. In the modern world of software engineering we rarely find it necessary to statically build an executable. If you look back at OS 7/8/9, while not as much as 10, developers could take advantage of off the shelf code. (eg, sprockets, mp lib, etc). Also you are not accurate in saying OS X is a 25 year old archiecture.

    1.5) Microsoft OS's that use versions of the Windows 2000 kernel (2000 itself and XP) just like Mach, have a hardware abstraction layer. The "DLL Hell" days (Windows ME and below) are over. This is no longer an issue with the new kernel. The fact of the matter is that my P4 2.8 machine running XP is equally as stable as my PowerBook G4 800 running Mac OS X. I have not *ONCE* had either one core dump or "blue screen". Sure programs screw up, and when they do, they die, not the OS. Both OS's are very mature.

    2.) I have *literally* put my PC up against my PowerBook, and the PowerBook fails miserably. I've wrote a simple stopwatch Java application that iterate through floating point instructions, and if I my PC finished 2.5 times faster than the PowerBook. If you want more details (hell I'll even give you the code) of my app, I'll be glad to share it with the community. Playing/decoding MP3's faster on the Mac? No way in hell. Winamp uses 0-1% CPU, iTunes consumes 8-12%.

    3.) You speak of flaws of the "x86 architecture" but do not provide us specifics as to why you say this. The x86 processor began in the late 70's when Intel first offered the 8086 as a CISC successor to it's 4004 line of processors. Many, many things have changed over the course of 20 years. Had they sit still (like the G4/motorola chip) intel wouldn't be selling products today, now would they? The G4 is not much more than an improved G3 series processor with vector processing instructions. Be honest (especially be honest to yourself!) if you look back and compare the G3/G4, you do see improvements, but not drastic improvements. More clock, the maxbus protocol (debatable), and more cache. One of the reasons why you see Apple adding cache like mad to it's recent products is because they are in between a rock and hard place with this Motorola chip. This is exactly the same approach AMD took with their failing processor, the K5/K6. I want you to contrast this to a P4 with an i850e chipset: Insanely high clock speeds, a 533mhz bus, fast memory with RIMMs @ 4.2GB/s, with a next stop of 9.6GB/s -- to MaxBus. You will soon see why the current generation of PowerPC processors is "inferior", dare I say it.


    For the most part I think its fare to say that the current Macintosh hardware performance is �status-quo�. The current best of breed of Macintoshes are slower than the current best of bread PCs. Mac�s are slower - just accept it. I don�t like it any more than you do.

    my pc with xp pro ed did crash a few times and it does.
    on the other hand , my macs with os x do not





    wallpaper red. Red Velvet Wallpaper Royalty
  • Red Velvet Wallpaper Royalty



  • Arcady
    May 2, 09:32 AM
    Any software for a Mac that says "MAC" in the title or in any documentation would already be suspect to me. Pretty much every person I have run across that thinks it is spelled in all caps as "MAC" has been a moron.





    wallpaper red. Megan Fox Wallpaper red dress
  • Megan Fox Wallpaper red dress



  • Cutwolf
    Mar 18, 11:57 AM
    I agree.

    I completely understand the idea that unlimited data should have to pay for tethering, although I think there should just be a cap prior to additional charges like verizon does.

    What I dont understand is how they think charging tiered data customers for tethering is fair.

    Who cares about fair?

    I'm going to tether til they change my plan, and when they do, cancel with no ETF, and use the money I would have spent paying the ETF on clear spot 4g+.





    wallpaper red. red-wall – Black Wallpaper
  • red-wall – Black Wallpaper



  • torbjoern
    Apr 24, 05:03 PM
    islam is unpleasant and, i guess for want of a better word, evil.

    That was a bit harsh, wasn't it? Not even I would go as far as saying that anybody's religion is evil. But it's definitely proves to be incompatible with modern Western values, which we began to see already in 1994 (Salman Rushdie). My only comfort is that those who have contributed to accelerate the conflicts by providing a lousy integration policy, will likely be the first ones to get stoned to death. I'm a male who doesn't drink alcohol nor commit adultery (and pork meat I can live without), so an islamic state wouldn't really be that bad for me to live in... I think...





    wallpaper red. Vintage wallpaper Red Rose
  • Vintage wallpaper Red Rose



  • KnightWRX
    May 2, 05:51 PM
    Until Vista and Win 7, it was effectively impossible to run a Windows NT system as anything but Administrator. To the point that other than locked-down corporate sites where an IT Professional was required to install the Corporate Approved version of any software you need to do your job, I never knew anyone running XP (or 2k, or for that matter NT 3.x) who in a day-to-day fashion used a Standard user account.

    Of course, I don't know of any Linux distribution that doesn't require root to install system wide software either. Kind of negates your point there...

    In contrast, an "Administrator" account on OS X was in reality a limited user account, just with some system-level privileges like being able to install apps that other people could run. A "Standard" user account was far more usable on OS X than the equivalent on Windows, because "Standard" users could install software into their user sandbox, etc. Still, most people I know run OS X as Administrator.

    You could do the same as far back as Windows NT 3.1 in 1993. The fact that most software vendors wrote their applications for the non-secure DOS based versions of Windows is moot, that is not a problem of the OS's security model, it is a problem of the Application. This is not "Unix security" being better, it's "Software vendors for Windows" being dumber.

    It's no different than if instead of writing my preferences to $HOME/.myapp/ I'd write a software that required writing everything to /usr/share/myapp/username/. That would require root in any decent Unix installation, or it would require me to set permissions on that folder to 775 and make all users of myapp part of the owning group. Or I could just go the lazy route, make the binary 4755 and set mount opts to suid on the filesystem where this binary resides... (ugh...).

    This is no different on Windows NT based architectures. If you were so inclined, with tools like Filemon and Regmon, you could granularly set permissions in a way to install these misbehaving software so that they would work for regular users.

    I know I did many times in a past life (back when I was sort of forced to do Windows systems administration... ugh... Windows NT 4.0 Terminal Server edition... what a wreck...).

    Let's face it, Windows NT and Unix systems have very similar security models (in fact, Windows NT has superior ACL support out of the box, akin to Novell's close to perfect ACLs, Unix is far more limited with it's read/write/execute permission scheme, even with Posix ACLs in place). It's the hoops that software vendors outside the control of Microsoft made you go through that forced lazy users to run as Administrator all the time and gave Microsoft such headaches.

    As far back as I remember (when I did some Windows systems programming), Microsoft was already advising to use the user's home folder/the user's registry hive for preferences and to never write to system locations.

    The real differenc, though, is that an NT Administrator was really equivalent to the Unix root account. An OS X Administrator was a Unix non-root user with 'admin' group access. You could not start up the UI as the 'root' user (and the 'root' account was disabled by default).

    Actually, the Administrator account (much less a standard user in the Administrators group) is not a root level account at all.

    Notice how a root account on Unix can do everything, just by virtue of its 0 uid. It can write/delete/read files from filesystems it does not even have permissions on. It can kill any system process, no matter the owner.

    Administrator on Windows NT is far more limited. Don't ever break your ACLs or don't try to kill processes owned by "System". SysInternals provided tools that let you do it, but Microsoft did not.

    All that having been said, UAC has really evened the bar for Windows Vista and 7 (moreso in 7 after the usability tweaks Microsoft put in to stop people from disabling it). I see no functional security difference between the OS X authorization scheme and the Windows UAC scheme.

    UAC is simply a gui front-end to the runas command. Heck, shift-right-click already had the "Run As" option. It's a glorified sudo. It uses RDP (since Vista, user sessions are really local RDP sessions) to prevent being able to "fake it", by showing up on the "console" session while the user's display resides on a RDP session.

    There, you did it, you made me go on a defensive rant for Microsoft. I hate you now.

    My response, why bother worrying about this when the attacker can do the same thing via shellcode generated in the background by exploiting a running process so the the user is unaware that code is being executed on the system

    Because this required no particular exploit or vulnerability. A simple Javascript auto-download and Safari auto-opening an archive and running code.

    Why bother, you're not "getting it". The only reason the user is aware of MACDefender is because it runs a GUI based installer. If the executable had had 0 GUI code and just run stuff in the background, you would have never known until you couldn't find your files or some chinese guy was buying goods with your CC info, fished right out of your "Bank stuff.xls" file.

    That's the thing, infecting a computer at the system level is fine if you want to build a DoS botnet or something (and even then, you don't really need privilege escalation for that, just set login items for the current user, and run off a non-privilege port, root privileges are not required for ICMP access, only raw sockets).

    These days, malware authors and users are much more interested in your data than your system. That's where the money is. Identity theft, phishing, they mean big bucks.





    wallpaper red. leaked vista red wallpapers
  • leaked vista red wallpapers



  • macmax
    Oct 9, 02:35 AM
    Originally posted by javajedi


    Come on.. lets get real..

    1) Macs don't use shared libraries? You must be using System 6. For the folks who aren't familiar with the concept of the shared library (what Microsoft calls a dynamic link library) simply put shared libs are object orientated pieces of code containing functions/methods and other objects that can be invoked upon from other code. Mac OS X being highly object orientated relies almost exclusively on shared libraries. In the modern world of software engineering we rarely find it necessary to statically build an executable. If you look back at OS 7/8/9, while not as much as 10, developers could take advantage of off the shelf code. (eg, sprockets, mp lib, etc). Also you are not accurate in saying OS X is a 25 year old archiecture.

    1.5) Microsoft OS's that use versions of the Windows 2000 kernel (2000 itself and XP) just like Mach, have a hardware abstraction layer. The "DLL Hell" days (Windows ME and below) are over. This is no longer an issue with the new kernel. The fact of the matter is that my P4 2.8 machine running XP is equally as stable as my PowerBook G4 800 running Mac OS X. I have not *ONCE* had either one core dump or "blue screen". Sure programs screw up, and when they do, they die, not the OS. Both OS's are very mature.

    2.) I have *literally* put my PC up against my PowerBook, and the PowerBook fails miserably. I've wrote a simple stopwatch Java application that iterate through floating point instructions, and if I my PC finished 2.5 times faster than the PowerBook. If you want more details (hell I'll even give you the code) of my app, I'll be glad to share it with the community. Playing/decoding MP3's faster on the Mac? No way in hell. Winamp uses 0-1% CPU, iTunes consumes 8-12%.

    3.) You speak of flaws of the "x86 architecture" but do not provide us specifics as to why you say this. The x86 processor began in the late 70's when Intel first offered the 8086 as a CISC successor to it's 4004 line of processors. Many, many things have changed over the course of 20 years. Had they sit still (like the G4/motorola chip) intel wouldn't be selling products today, now would they? The G4 is not much more than an improved G3 series processor with vector processing instructions. Be honest (especially be honest to yourself!) if you look back and compare the G3/G4, you do see improvements, but not drastic improvements. More clock, the maxbus protocol (debatable), and more cache. One of the reasons why you see Apple adding cache like mad to it's recent products is because they are in between a rock and hard place with this Motorola chip. This is exactly the same approach AMD took with their failing processor, the K5/K6. I want you to contrast this to a P4 with an i850e chipset: Insanely high clock speeds, a 533mhz bus, fast memory with RIMMs @ 4.2GB/s, with a next stop of 9.6GB/s -- to MaxBus. You will soon see why the current generation of PowerPC processors is "inferior", dare I say it.


    For the most part I think its fare to say that the current Macintosh hardware performance is �status-quo�. The current best of breed of Macintoshes are slower than the current best of bread PCs. Mac�s are slower - just accept it. I don�t like it any more than you do.

    my pc with xp pro ed did crash a few times and it does.
    on the other hand , my macs with os x do not





    wallpaper red. Awesome Nokia C6 Wallpapers
  • Awesome Nokia C6 Wallpapers



  • Backtothemac
    Oct 7, 01:54 PM
    Originally posted by ddtlm
    Backtothemac:


    Does it annoy you to know that even in Photoshop (gasp!) those 25-year old ISA x86 machines kick the snot out of the latest and greatest Mac? Sure seems to.

    2.8ghz, by the way.

    Um,
    Don't know what chart you were looking at, but with both processors being used, the 1.25 kicked the "snot" out of the PC's.





    wallpaper red. Download Wallpaper: 800 x 600
  • Download Wallpaper: 800 x 600



  • Chundles
    Mar 11, 01:11 AM
    Yeah that tsunami is massive. There were burning buildings floating on the surge as it rolled inland.

    Not good at all.





    theBB
    Sep 12, 07:32 PM
    $50 gets me all the standard and HD channels on DirecTV. iTunes is still not at that quality/price point yet.
    Off topic, but how do you get your broadband internet? DSL? I guess DSL requires me to pay for a landline phone for another $20 per month, as I currently do not have a landline phone. Then, there is the DSL fee itself. Basic cable, broadband + HDTV is $62 per month right now. If I go with DirecTV, I would end up with DirecTV fees + $40 per month for DSL. Overall more expensive than cable.





    iMikeT
    Sep 12, 04:14 PM
    A sneak peak of a rumored product from Apple?:eek:





    .Andy
    Apr 26, 05:32 PM
    Have we just passed through the looking glass? :confused:
    The Nun Bun looks delicious.





    Povilas
    Oct 7, 12:03 PM
    Android is a mobile OS. iPhone is a device. Android is and will be used in many devices by many manufacturers. iPhone is only one device, but if you add iPod Touch which runs the same OS I don't think Android can surpass it by 2012.





    sinsin07
    Apr 9, 08:50 AM
    Totally agree. The other day I was in the queue at the grocery store and some dude was playing some noob game on his iOS phone... I was like "dude, you should be playing that on a PS3" and he was all "yeah but where would I plug it in and set-up the TV?" and I was like "just use the NGP" and he said "Great, where can I buy that?"