peas
Sep 28, 12:39 PM
what sucks is that academic ve4rsions are not allowed this free update.
what bs. considering i just bought the freakin app not more than 3 weeks ago.
what bs. considering i just bought the freakin app not more than 3 weeks ago.
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
hulugu
Mar 3, 10:45 PM
...
BTW, there is no 'RIGHT' to collective bargaining....
Collective bargaining is a legislative privilege granted by friendly law makers in some localities which can be quickly and abruptly eliminated (as you've all just observed.)[/QUOTE]
It's interesting, AFAICT, the courts have mainly avoided creating a 'right' to collective bargaining and have remaindered this structure to legislative acts like the NLRB.
Public unions are idiotic. Imagine a private sector union where the union members themselves were able to contribute to the election and vote for the individual whom they'd be bargaining against. BRILLIANT! It's a conflict of interest - straight up.
A conflict of interest? I disagree, this is akin to being on the hiring committee for your boss�a common corporate and university structure. Extend the logic of this and you're effectively arguing that no public employee, from police officer to NHS doctor should be able to vote.
What's important about the conflict in a conflict of interest is whether or not the union's interest runs counter to the government's, which is at the very least arguable.
Lee, my wife is a teacher. I'm quite aware of how much they make. For the record, they aren't required to have masters degrees (where do you get this stuff?). Most importantly, without thuggish unions, good teachers like my wife would make far more money than they do today, while the bad ones would make less or be fired.
How? Without the union, bad teachers would presumably be fired, but how would this raise wages directly or indirectly?
Have you seen the movie 'Waiting for Superman' by chance, Lee?
Many have argued that this is a piece of agitprop and is not a fair documentary.
Bill Gates accurately pointed out the failure of allowing the unionization of public employees and the incredible damage it's causing our state budgets. Thankfully, people like him are willing to look at the facts and report honestly on the situation instead of pretending like the government can produce miracles out of thin air or that money grows on trees.
I'm not so sure you should declare the genius of Gates on a Mac forum. ;)
Are you aware of the number of school districts that have unions and those that do not and what the test scores for ACT/SAT are? I'm wondering if there's at least a correlative connection between the two. Adding in the variable of education spending might also be useful.
Might have to go to mass media complete.
BTW, there is no 'RIGHT' to collective bargaining....
Collective bargaining is a legislative privilege granted by friendly law makers in some localities which can be quickly and abruptly eliminated (as you've all just observed.)[/QUOTE]
It's interesting, AFAICT, the courts have mainly avoided creating a 'right' to collective bargaining and have remaindered this structure to legislative acts like the NLRB.
Public unions are idiotic. Imagine a private sector union where the union members themselves were able to contribute to the election and vote for the individual whom they'd be bargaining against. BRILLIANT! It's a conflict of interest - straight up.
A conflict of interest? I disagree, this is akin to being on the hiring committee for your boss�a common corporate and university structure. Extend the logic of this and you're effectively arguing that no public employee, from police officer to NHS doctor should be able to vote.
What's important about the conflict in a conflict of interest is whether or not the union's interest runs counter to the government's, which is at the very least arguable.
Lee, my wife is a teacher. I'm quite aware of how much they make. For the record, they aren't required to have masters degrees (where do you get this stuff?). Most importantly, without thuggish unions, good teachers like my wife would make far more money than they do today, while the bad ones would make less or be fired.
How? Without the union, bad teachers would presumably be fired, but how would this raise wages directly or indirectly?
Have you seen the movie 'Waiting for Superman' by chance, Lee?
Many have argued that this is a piece of agitprop and is not a fair documentary.
Bill Gates accurately pointed out the failure of allowing the unionization of public employees and the incredible damage it's causing our state budgets. Thankfully, people like him are willing to look at the facts and report honestly on the situation instead of pretending like the government can produce miracles out of thin air or that money grows on trees.
I'm not so sure you should declare the genius of Gates on a Mac forum. ;)
Are you aware of the number of school districts that have unions and those that do not and what the test scores for ACT/SAT are? I'm wondering if there's at least a correlative connection between the two. Adding in the variable of education spending might also be useful.
Might have to go to mass media complete.
Abstract
Apr 12, 08:25 PM
I don't think this is wrong if the TSA has a valid reason for suspecting that a passenger is carrying something suspicious. Also, it should be policy that if you fail the screening test, a passenger should be allowed to go through a 2nd time, but perhaps with their arms in a different position (or something). They shouldn't be allowed to pat-down someone unless there's a reason, and all other measures have been taken.
Starship77
Apr 15, 03:34 PM
Actually, shooting up close with a wide-angle lens will give you exactly that distortion. Here is a photo I just took of a REAL iPhone with a 17mm lens. Sorry about the fuzziness - handheld and did not use a flash:
http://www.marulla.com/files/perspective.jpg
So I don't think text in the 3rd photo is skewed. That being said, I agree it's a fake.
What gives the bad impression is that, since is a 3D rendering, it doesn't have lens distortion (because the guy "forgot" about it). Real lenses always gives you some barrel distortion because they are curved, and the standard camera in a 3D software is always just straight 3 point perspective. When you put it in an angle that gives too much perspective it looks strange.
Specially the first image, is a good 3D, but is not realistic enough to be perceived as a photo because of:
1- Lack of lens distortion
2- Very linear noise, obviously applied.
3- Un-natural light
4- Not so realistic dynamic range and exposure
5- Shadows are too smooth for that kind of flash-light
6- Light is too uniform
7- The model is good, but you can see that there are some hard edges that are not natural.
8- Doesn't have any camera meta-data. (he "forgot" to fake that also)
and a few other minor things... but yeah, it's a very good 3D work!:)
if you want to do a little test with your abilities to tell if it's cg or not:
http://area.autodesk.com/fakeorfoto/challenge
a little too easy though... ;)
http://www.marulla.com/files/perspective.jpg
So I don't think text in the 3rd photo is skewed. That being said, I agree it's a fake.
What gives the bad impression is that, since is a 3D rendering, it doesn't have lens distortion (because the guy "forgot" about it). Real lenses always gives you some barrel distortion because they are curved, and the standard camera in a 3D software is always just straight 3 point perspective. When you put it in an angle that gives too much perspective it looks strange.
Specially the first image, is a good 3D, but is not realistic enough to be perceived as a photo because of:
1- Lack of lens distortion
2- Very linear noise, obviously applied.
3- Un-natural light
4- Not so realistic dynamic range and exposure
5- Shadows are too smooth for that kind of flash-light
6- Light is too uniform
7- The model is good, but you can see that there are some hard edges that are not natural.
8- Doesn't have any camera meta-data. (he "forgot" to fake that also)
and a few other minor things... but yeah, it's a very good 3D work!:)
if you want to do a little test with your abilities to tell if it's cg or not:
http://area.autodesk.com/fakeorfoto/challenge
a little too easy though... ;)
holmesf
Apr 30, 06:53 PM
Who said anything about driving away future developers? You do realize that the closed app store is bringing in more developers right?
There's no proof that a closed app store brought in developers because prior to the app store existing there was no 3rd party development on the device (well, besides jailbreakers). So you can't claim that. Case in point, the Mac App store hasn't exploded in popularity the way the iPhone app store did.
But it's pretty clear that if Apple closed the platform they would lose the marketshare in:
1. education (need unix shell, ability to write programs in Eclipse, etc)
2. server (need extensibility)
3. games (steam for example could not operate)
4. professional (Adobe wouldn't stand for not being able to manage their own business model, for example)
5. open source (major open source projects would avoid the Mac because App store doesn't jive with their licenses, Firefox, OpenOffice, etc)
They'd probably also face a major antitrust lawsuit.
It's an unrealistic doomsday proposition that Apple isn't stupid enough to pursue.
There's no proof that a closed app store brought in developers because prior to the app store existing there was no 3rd party development on the device (well, besides jailbreakers). So you can't claim that. Case in point, the Mac App store hasn't exploded in popularity the way the iPhone app store did.
But it's pretty clear that if Apple closed the platform they would lose the marketshare in:
1. education (need unix shell, ability to write programs in Eclipse, etc)
2. server (need extensibility)
3. games (steam for example could not operate)
4. professional (Adobe wouldn't stand for not being able to manage their own business model, for example)
5. open source (major open source projects would avoid the Mac because App store doesn't jive with their licenses, Firefox, OpenOffice, etc)
They'd probably also face a major antitrust lawsuit.
It's an unrealistic doomsday proposition that Apple isn't stupid enough to pursue.
twoodcc
Dec 10, 09:35 PM
For an H50, that's still too high temps for an OC. My 930, under -smp 8 settings with an H50 runs at 65C and 38C idle.
what case do you have?
i'm actually have problems with my northbridge temps on the asus. i think it's the motherboard. right now i have the case open and a box fan blowing air on it
what case do you have?
i'm actually have problems with my northbridge temps on the asus. i think it's the motherboard. right now i have the case open and a box fan blowing air on it
micahR
Nov 8, 07:33 AM
I got my copy on my desk right now. I will check it out tonight and see what's up. I'll post more tomorrow.
Mac-Mariachi
Apr 15, 11:17 PM
Why didn�t they post photos of the front side of the shell?
thejadedmonkey
Jan 10, 06:59 PM
who would have complained if it was microsofts demo pcs that got hacked because of some security vounerability?
The same people who are complaining now, if it was by a known hacker who supposedly worked for the good of everything.
The same people who are complaining now, if it was by a known hacker who supposedly worked for the good of everything.
bousozoku
Jan 12, 08:32 PM
What about all the former Apple CEO's. They had a company behind him too, but he simply could not lead like Jobs can.
Notice the Newton? That was John Sculley's idea and it was brilliant.
Had System 7 been what Copland was supposed to be, there would likely not have been any downfall but by that time, no one cared a lot. Both founders were out the door and morale was low. They were working on the Pink OS and decided to work with IBM but IBM is notorious for going nowhere with most of what they do.
Michael Spindler didn't care about the business.
It was the financial department that kept the company going despite marketing trying to squeeze $79 for each minor o.s. release.
It takes more than one person to make a company work. It's good to have someone in charge who knows and cares about what's going on but without sharp developers and accountants, companies fail all the time. Look at Sun and Palm.
Notice the Newton? That was John Sculley's idea and it was brilliant.
Had System 7 been what Copland was supposed to be, there would likely not have been any downfall but by that time, no one cared a lot. Both founders were out the door and morale was low. They were working on the Pink OS and decided to work with IBM but IBM is notorious for going nowhere with most of what they do.
Michael Spindler didn't care about the business.
It was the financial department that kept the company going despite marketing trying to squeeze $79 for each minor o.s. release.
It takes more than one person to make a company work. It's good to have someone in charge who knows and cares about what's going on but without sharp developers and accountants, companies fail all the time. Look at Sun and Palm.
vixapphire
Jan 15, 05:08 PM
for a single phone to sell 4million, i think thats amazing!
rim only has 20% more smartphone holding and think of all the versions that it has and how many years has the blackberry been around? atleast 5, problaby way more then that.
yes, 5 million were expected, so without saying it outright, steve admits the iphone has not performed as expected.
note also his omission of the two biggest iphone news items: the price drop shortly after release, and the big "F.U." and subsequent backtrack concerning unlocking the phones.
of course, he's within his right to try and accentuate the positive...:apple:
rim only has 20% more smartphone holding and think of all the versions that it has and how many years has the blackberry been around? atleast 5, problaby way more then that.
yes, 5 million were expected, so without saying it outright, steve admits the iphone has not performed as expected.
note also his omission of the two biggest iphone news items: the price drop shortly after release, and the big "F.U." and subsequent backtrack concerning unlocking the phones.
of course, he's within his right to try and accentuate the positive...:apple:
DHUK
Jan 9, 05:10 AM
Cheaper tracks on iTunes, at least in the UK.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7178651.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7178651.stm
Mal
Jul 25, 12:03 AM
I'd be worried about that exept one incontrovertible fact. Steve Jobs has more creative spark in his left pinky than M$ does in it whole genetic tree.
I think that's the idea. The implication I got was that they were going to give Microsoft a generous stretch of rope and let them hang themselves.
jW
I think that's the idea. The implication I got was that they were going to give Microsoft a generous stretch of rope and let them hang themselves.
jW
kuwisdelu
Apr 9, 05:21 PM
So what are the ton of features that apple introduced in 10.6?
I guess it depends what you call a "feature." They're not user-facing, and Apple didn't advertise them as features, but frankly I don't see how they're not features, even if they're under-the-hood. Anyway, here (http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/08/mac-os-x-10-6.ars/)'s 22 pages worth of new and improved stuff.
I guess it depends what you call a "feature." They're not user-facing, and Apple didn't advertise them as features, but frankly I don't see how they're not features, even if they're under-the-hood. Anyway, here (http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/08/mac-os-x-10-6.ars/)'s 22 pages worth of new and improved stuff.
Mitthrawnuruodo
Aug 2, 05:44 AM
You New York is New York, part of the USA.That's why I said local government... you have that in the US, too, you know... :rolleyes:
Saying that you are small, rich and well educated... And then you even say, you are technologically advanced?
Have you been to Singapore, Kuwait, Japan? I can name a few more places, but let's keep the list short. No I haven't been to any of those places. But what has that to do with anything...? :confused:
Again, this is not a contest, and I didn't even say we were the most technological advanced population in the world, nor the richest.
Just that we as population in general are rich and technologically advanced. Or don't you agree with that?
Saying that you are small, rich and well educated... And then you even say, you are technologically advanced?
Have you been to Singapore, Kuwait, Japan? I can name a few more places, but let's keep the list short. No I haven't been to any of those places. But what has that to do with anything...? :confused:
Again, this is not a contest, and I didn't even say we were the most technological advanced population in the world, nor the richest.
Just that we as population in general are rich and technologically advanced. Or don't you agree with that?
iGary
Sep 26, 04:56 PM
After all of the comments about how great Aperture ran, and considering how crappy it was running on mine, I decided to take into the Apple Store.
The video card is defective and they are replacing it. No wonder my experience with the program stunk.
:)
The video card is defective and they are replacing it. No wonder my experience with the program stunk.
:)
Squonk
Oct 3, 01:55 PM
I still believe that there will be some type of announcement, on something, before Thanksgiving.
Yup - I hear you. Apple going three months, in the wind-up to holiday shopping without any more "press", I don't think so. I wish it were the iPhone, but I concurr with the rest that this is unlikely. MBPs then?
Yup - I hear you. Apple going three months, in the wind-up to holiday shopping without any more "press", I don't think so. I wish it were the iPhone, but I concurr with the rest that this is unlikely. MBPs then?
yg17
Apr 13, 08:50 AM
I don't see anything wrong with it at all. People use children to carry goods all the time and the TSA agent was totally professional about it talking through each step. The rules are there to provide a layer of safety and if you think that it doesn't and don't like the rules, ride the bus!
Better yet, let's remove the TSA agents and let someone fly a plane into another building. :rolleyes:
The 9/11 hijackers did not bring anything on the plane that was banned. No amount of groping or searching by airport security would've prevented 9/11.
9/11 was a failure of intelligence, not a failure of airport security.
Better yet, let's remove the TSA agents and let someone fly a plane into another building. :rolleyes:
The 9/11 hijackers did not bring anything on the plane that was banned. No amount of groping or searching by airport security would've prevented 9/11.
9/11 was a failure of intelligence, not a failure of airport security.
xraytech
May 4, 10:54 AM
A great commercial. As a teacher who is getting 30 ipads for next years students I am super pumped. These truly are the future of education and I can't wait to have my students start using them.
Wow!!!
I've heard stories but DAYUM!!!
Do you teach at a public, charter or private school. And what grade?
Wow!!!
I've heard stories but DAYUM!!!
Do you teach at a public, charter or private school. And what grade?
173080
Oct 7, 08:09 PM
Wonder what the stairway leads to?
Heaven. Oh wait... :D
Heaven. Oh wait... :D
twoodcc
May 12, 09:04 PM
if the machines resboot then there is no problem with remote login. setup some sort of VNC server that opens once the machine starts up and away you go! i can do that to any of my machines from external sites - works a treat :D
true, but if it crashes then there's nothing i can do. and usually if it crashes or restarts, to fix the problem i have to get into the BIOS. but remote login would be good if the power flickers (like today)
thats a hell of alot of power!!!!! atm i only have my i7 iMac - 4 cores, and crappy E4600 @2.4ghz lol. the PC has a 8500GT - can that be used in any way? it worked with BOINC when i used to do SETI. it was about 2x faster then my CPU haha.
thanks. all of those have 4 real cores, 8 logical. same as your iMac. the difference is mine are all overclocked.
hey it wouldn't hurt to download the gpu client and see if it works with that card. it might
true, but if it crashes then there's nothing i can do. and usually if it crashes or restarts, to fix the problem i have to get into the BIOS. but remote login would be good if the power flickers (like today)
thats a hell of alot of power!!!!! atm i only have my i7 iMac - 4 cores, and crappy E4600 @2.4ghz lol. the PC has a 8500GT - can that be used in any way? it worked with BOINC when i used to do SETI. it was about 2x faster then my CPU haha.
thanks. all of those have 4 real cores, 8 logical. same as your iMac. the difference is mine are all overclocked.
hey it wouldn't hurt to download the gpu client and see if it works with that card. it might
maflynn
Apr 12, 06:58 AM
You get trials. Not actual copies, unless you pay for the license.
There is a big difference there.
For the anti-virus, yes, for office no you get the complete version, as well as MS live.
Depending on where you buy, you actually can get more "full" versions of applications then you do with a mac. I'm not knocking apple or iLife, they're great apps, but you cannot say that a new PC is unusable until you download a lot of apps and such. Dell, HP, etc all come with office and/or other apps. Yeah there's crapware installed and I won't dispute that, but you also get full version apps
There is a big difference there.
For the anti-virus, yes, for office no you get the complete version, as well as MS live.
Depending on where you buy, you actually can get more "full" versions of applications then you do with a mac. I'm not knocking apple or iLife, they're great apps, but you cannot say that a new PC is unusable until you download a lot of apps and such. Dell, HP, etc all come with office and/or other apps. Yeah there's crapware installed and I won't dispute that, but you also get full version apps
YoNeX
Sep 12, 12:24 AM
Welcoming of Media Members
No comments:
Post a Comment