mozmac
Nov 29, 09:21 AM
Dirty mother farters. How dare you try to claim a share of the music players. You see, they do more than just music. Would if someone bought one without putting any music on it!
Machead III
Sep 19, 09:27 AM
I hope that the MacBook with Core 2 Duo is better than the Core Duo version :)
I hope it's worse?
I hope it's worse?
mdelvecchio
Mar 31, 03:22 PM
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
not really. he hails them when they do good, he faults them when they dont. google it.
and this -- is the definition of hypocrisy. will Rubin tweet that his first-ever-tweet is now broken and untrue?
not really. he hails them when they do good, he faults them when they dont. google it.
and this -- is the definition of hypocrisy. will Rubin tweet that his first-ever-tweet is now broken and untrue?
jeznav
Apr 10, 02:38 AM
I'm not so sure about the down res option, it sounds like an awful lot of time spent compressing, though I sure hope it is some type of interface, perhaps as an input device or palette.
I love to see an iPad become the proxy editor for FCP. Or the ability to access and edit raw media from a server with steaming so it's not neccessarily taxing iPad's processor.
I love to see an iPad become the proxy editor for FCP. Or the ability to access and edit raw media from a server with steaming so it's not neccessarily taxing iPad's processor.
Sydde
Mar 19, 06:22 PM
OMG. I guess I should not have deleted those White House E-mails as spam. :eek:
I imagine you got them because they thought the .ca stood for California
I imagine you got them because they thought the .ca stood for California
yoak
Apr 12, 04:18 AM
The insufficient content shouldn't pop up at random, or there is a bug. It pops up when there is insufficient content for a transition. Some transitions like crossfade are centered at the end/starting point of a clip. So it expands past/before this point, hence the need of additional content in the file.
I didn't know about that multicore issue with Compressor when launched directly from the timeline. I suspect an issue with your setup. Compressor does make good use of my 4 cores on mpeg2 and I never set up Qmaster.
What Mac are you using?
When I installed FSC3 I had to set up Qmaster to make Compressor use all my cores. It was not easy to make it work, but that was due to the bug that don�t allow you to send directly from FC. This is what took me a while to find out.
We still had some problems making a new Mac Pro making use of all it�s core just this winter.
Have you checked your BAtch Monitor to make sure Compressor really splits up the file and spread it out over all your cores?
For the content bug, I�m not sure it�s a bug. I do know that it comes up when a file is too short for dissolve etc, but sometimes I can�t figure out why it comes up. Could still be my own fault, maybe I presumed it was a bug too easily
I didn't know about that multicore issue with Compressor when launched directly from the timeline. I suspect an issue with your setup. Compressor does make good use of my 4 cores on mpeg2 and I never set up Qmaster.
What Mac are you using?
When I installed FSC3 I had to set up Qmaster to make Compressor use all my cores. It was not easy to make it work, but that was due to the bug that don�t allow you to send directly from FC. This is what took me a while to find out.
We still had some problems making a new Mac Pro making use of all it�s core just this winter.
Have you checked your BAtch Monitor to make sure Compressor really splits up the file and spread it out over all your cores?
For the content bug, I�m not sure it�s a bug. I do know that it comes up when a file is too short for dissolve etc, but sometimes I can�t figure out why it comes up. Could still be my own fault, maybe I presumed it was a bug too easily
ArchaicRevival
Apr 25, 03:44 PM
Ha. They got nothing on Apple's lawyers lol
nilk
Apr 6, 04:14 PM
I run a Windows VM with 1 GB of dedicated memory and a Linux VM with 1.5 GB of dedicated memory. All while Xcode is open and doing something in every OS.
Seriously, software development is about the less ressource hungry task you can do on modern computers. Browsers use more system ressources nowadays than code editors/compilers/debuggers.
Totally depends on what tools you are using. Sure, when I'm at home working on a light webapp running nothing but Emacs, Chrome, Postgres, and using, for example, Python as my server-side language, 4GB of RAM is more than enough, hell I could get by with 2GB no problem.
But at work I have open: Eclipse, one or more instance of Tomcat or Jetty, Oracle SQL Developer (Java app), Windows VM with Visual Studio and other tools, and maybe a Linux VM running Oracle. I always have the Windows VM running. When I had 4GB, things would drag, and I couldn't run the Linux VM without my system becoming unusable. Now that I have 8GB things run great; I can afford to give my Windows VM over 2GB, and I don't notice the difference between running and not running my Linux VM. Sometimes I have as many as 3 VMs running using over 3GB RAM in total and things are still smooth unless there's a lot of hard drive access going on.
But it's encourage to know that you're successfully using a MBA w/ 4GB even with VMs eating up half your RAM. Maybe the SSD makes a huge difference.
Seriously, software development is about the less ressource hungry task you can do on modern computers. Browsers use more system ressources nowadays than code editors/compilers/debuggers.
Totally depends on what tools you are using. Sure, when I'm at home working on a light webapp running nothing but Emacs, Chrome, Postgres, and using, for example, Python as my server-side language, 4GB of RAM is more than enough, hell I could get by with 2GB no problem.
But at work I have open: Eclipse, one or more instance of Tomcat or Jetty, Oracle SQL Developer (Java app), Windows VM with Visual Studio and other tools, and maybe a Linux VM running Oracle. I always have the Windows VM running. When I had 4GB, things would drag, and I couldn't run the Linux VM without my system becoming unusable. Now that I have 8GB things run great; I can afford to give my Windows VM over 2GB, and I don't notice the difference between running and not running my Linux VM. Sometimes I have as many as 3 VMs running using over 3GB RAM in total and things are still smooth unless there's a lot of hard drive access going on.
But it's encourage to know that you're successfully using a MBA w/ 4GB even with VMs eating up half your RAM. Maybe the SSD makes a huge difference.
hagjohn
Sep 19, 06:02 AM
Many users have pointed to extended ship dates and delays for MacBooks as evidence of an impending update. While possible, the shipping delays may simply be due to a demand backlog which was noted (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1896) in Apple's Q3 2006 conference call in July. At the time Apple stated they expected to reach a supply/demand balance by the end of September (the end of Apple's current fiscal quarter).
I hope they are wrong... I doubt that the same chip will be used in both Macbook and Macbook pro's. If they have been building up supply since the release, I would think they would have enough by now.
I hope they are wrong... I doubt that the same chip will be used in both Macbook and Macbook pro's. If they have been building up supply since the release, I would think they would have enough by now.
Peace
Aug 5, 05:15 PM
No MacRumors IRC channel?
http://www.macrumorslive.com/irc/login/
http://www.macrumorslive.com/irc/login/
AngryCorgi
Apr 6, 04:16 PM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
ergle2
Sep 13, 01:58 PM
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
There's a bunch of HP Superdome 64-way Itanium systems around running Windows Server mostly for MS SQL work.
Windows XP 64bit is based on the same core. Given the license is per-socket, not per-processor (currently, anyway) and the Pro editions support two sockets, it should in theory support the 8-way setup as described by Anandtech.
Whether it recognises quad-core CPUs as such may of course be a different matter.
There's a bunch of HP Superdome 64-way Itanium systems around running Windows Server mostly for MS SQL work.
Windows XP 64bit is based on the same core. Given the license is per-socket, not per-processor (currently, anyway) and the Pro editions support two sockets, it should in theory support the 8-way setup as described by Anandtech.
Whether it recognises quad-core CPUs as such may of course be a different matter.
other
Aug 7, 04:29 PM
*shrug* I don't think TM is a copy of System Restore. But I think how much that feature has caught on with Win users is also not unrelated to the presence of TM in Leopard. All's fair in love, war, and operating systems. :)
Well, do you think it's a copy of "Previous versions", which someone posted a link to in this thread?
(Here's the link again: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060730-7383.html)
Well, do you think it's a copy of "Previous versions", which someone posted a link to in this thread?
(Here's the link again: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060730-7383.html)
Multimedia
Jul 15, 05:15 AM
I prefer the Simpsons' parody of that cartoon:
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.Yes MacBook broke the speed record for shift to the refurb page in record time. Right now everything is up there except the 17" MacBook Pros. My Quad made it there in only 3 months last Winter.
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.Yes MacBook broke the speed record for shift to the refurb page in record time. Right now everything is up there except the 17" MacBook Pros. My Quad made it there in only 3 months last Winter.
ergle2
Sep 13, 02:40 PM
So what do you think they meant with M/C/W being a derived arch and Penryn,etc being unified archs?
From what I understood, they'll stop having different characteristics (FSB,RAM,Cache) and instead just differentiate them with MHz and core count. Hence all the stories that future Intel chips (starting with Penryn I presume) won't use FSB.
I believe you've got it backwards. Penryn is a derived arch (check the diagram) -- it's derived from Conroe/Merom, etc., ie it's based on them with "more" -- faster FSB, more cache, a die shrink (which is technically less... :) ) etc.
Unified just means the micro-arch itself the same rather than the entire CPU. This is already true of Core2, and is significantly cheaper in terms production costs. Merom/Conroe are literally the same core in a different package, specified for different voltage/clockspeeds. I'm not sure if Woodcrest is but it seems highly likely.
The one oddity I am aware of is Allendale isn't a Conroe with half the cache disabled, it's actually a specific die. The rest of the microarch itself is the same, however.
Nehalem, etc. aren't derived because they're a new microarch. (Interestingly, Nehalem was originally intended for launch early 2007).
CSI replacing FSB was originally planned for 2006 in older roadmaps. It now looks like a 2008 debut with Tukwila (Itanium, not x86), and will no doubt work its way down from there.
From what I understood, they'll stop having different characteristics (FSB,RAM,Cache) and instead just differentiate them with MHz and core count. Hence all the stories that future Intel chips (starting with Penryn I presume) won't use FSB.
I believe you've got it backwards. Penryn is a derived arch (check the diagram) -- it's derived from Conroe/Merom, etc., ie it's based on them with "more" -- faster FSB, more cache, a die shrink (which is technically less... :) ) etc.
Unified just means the micro-arch itself the same rather than the entire CPU. This is already true of Core2, and is significantly cheaper in terms production costs. Merom/Conroe are literally the same core in a different package, specified for different voltage/clockspeeds. I'm not sure if Woodcrest is but it seems highly likely.
The one oddity I am aware of is Allendale isn't a Conroe with half the cache disabled, it's actually a specific die. The rest of the microarch itself is the same, however.
Nehalem, etc. aren't derived because they're a new microarch. (Interestingly, Nehalem was originally intended for launch early 2007).
CSI replacing FSB was originally planned for 2006 in older roadmaps. It now looks like a 2008 debut with Tukwila (Itanium, not x86), and will no doubt work its way down from there.
doctor-don
Apr 27, 10:41 AM
Your phone's memory / storage will be freed up when the update is issued.
081440
Aug 18, 08:31 PM
My Pro now starts 10.4.7 in less than 5 seconds!
NO WAY!! that would be awesome
NO WAY!! that would be awesome
Kwill
Mar 22, 12:49 PM
Meanwhile, Apple is drowning in orders and battling light leaks (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/22/buyers.complain.of.multiple.faulty.replacements/) in displays. If the quality cannot be improved expeditiously, would-be customers may investigate the competition. :(
MacinDoc
Aug 26, 08:39 PM
I agree. But I refuse to buy any "So-Called" MacBook Pro until they have implemented the easy access HD professional feature they put in the MacBook. I would rather buy a C2D MacBook with that feature than ever buy a MBP without it. :mad:
Apple has, on occasion, introduced new or upgraded features on its consumer computers when those computers were refreshed between refresh cycles of their professional computers. For example, at one time, the iMac had a faster SuperDrive than the Power Mac. Of course, with the next refresh of the pro computers, the new/upgraded features seen previously in the consumer products have always been added.
Apple has, on occasion, introduced new or upgraded features on its consumer computers when those computers were refreshed between refresh cycles of their professional computers. For example, at one time, the iMac had a faster SuperDrive than the Power Mac. Of course, with the next refresh of the pro computers, the new/upgraded features seen previously in the consumer products have always been added.
leekohler
Apr 27, 01:18 PM
obamacare in its smallest form is extreme
No it's not. It's basically what Mitt Romney put in place in Massachusetts. And he's a (gasp!) Republican!
stimulus bill is extreme (and extrememly $$)
No, it's not. This is not the first time it's happened either.
The extreme people he hires, etc.
Such as?
No it's not. It's basically what Mitt Romney put in place in Massachusetts. And he's a (gasp!) Republican!
stimulus bill is extreme (and extrememly $$)
No, it's not. This is not the first time it's happened either.
The extreme people he hires, etc.
Such as?
spicyapple
Jul 30, 11:15 AM
All of the reviews of the Core 2 Duo say that it crushes AMD in the desktop arena. This is good news, now we just need new iMacs, MacBook Pros, and Mac Pros.
Can't wait to hear Steve Jobs' spin on the Core 2 Duos at WWDC. He makes everything sound so good, and with the C2Ds really good, it should be fantastic! :)
Can't wait to hear Steve Jobs' spin on the Core 2 Duos at WWDC. He makes everything sound so good, and with the C2Ds really good, it should be fantastic! :)
tekmoe
Sep 19, 07:38 AM
apple store isn't down yet. I don't expect it today like a lot of people do
i agree. i think the store would have went down already. next monday has got to be it.
i agree. i think the store would have went down already. next monday has got to be it.
twoodcc
Aug 13, 10:36 PM
You originally said...
...which as I've said, a few times now, is incorrect. If you only count 4 games, as you originally said in that quote, that only totals 46M. And besides, if you check that link I originally provided, which is FROM POLYPHONY THEMSELVES, you would see that the total worldwide is only 56M. At least if you're going to quote the number in the wrong context, use the right number.
well i did have demos just before that quote. but yes, what i meant to say, and what i actually typed, was two different things. but i think you can see what i was trying to say, and is clear: NFS has sold more, but has more games out there.
Yay, let's play the "Twist The Numbers To Fit Our Needs" game....
100M / 15 years = 6.66M per year (Need for Speed)
56M / 13 years = 4.31M per year (Gran Turismo)
So yea, Need for Speed sells 50% more per year. YAY, math is fun!!!
math is fun, and yes, per year, NFS has sold more. but they released more games to do it. and on more consoles, to break it down even further
It is. I don't like the direction Polyphony has taken the game. A game that used to be my favorite game. It disappoints me. Thus my frustration. I bought my PS3 with the hopes
did you buy GT5: prologue?
for someone who at one point really liked the games/series, i don't see why you wouldn't give this game a shot, at least after reading reviews first. i find it very frustrating to see people make judgements before the game is even out
Can I buy one and drive it to work? No? Then it isn't real, intentions or not.
no matter what anyone says, it is a fact that they intended to build a car specifically for Gran Turismo. that in itself is very impressive to me.
Then according to you, Wii Play is the "greatest" video game of all time. Just reading that sentence should show you exactly why sales have very little to do with the quality of a game.
i never said that the most sold game is the greatest. but i do think sales is one aspect to consider.
I keep saying this, but it seems people don't really understand it. Sales, which deal with numbers, are an objective measure of something. Greatness, which deals with personal preferences, is a subjective measure. You can think GT, or the iPhone, or Star Wars, or whatever, is great. That is fine, and a personal opinion. But, the sales of those things can't be "great". They can be large, and they are, but they can't be great.
i understand this, but i don't think you understand what i am trying to point out. you are correct in that what makes something great is personal preference, and when many people have that same personal preference, it turns into many sales.
let's try this analogy. take tennis for example. who is a "greater" player - Roger Federer or Andy Roddick? Roddick has played some great games, and has a great serve, but Federer has many more championships. almost everyone would say Federer is greater (if there is such a term).
think of championships as sales in this case. i know it's not the best analogy, but the first thing i could think of.
And really, if someone uses the sales of something to qualify the greatness of it to themselves, that is kind of sad. Quite a few of my favorite things, which I consider great, didn't sell very well. That doesn't make them any less great to me.
you do make a very good point here, but again, i think you are taking my point out of context.
my whole point in all of this, is not that i think GT is the greatest series of all time or whatever, or that they have sold the most, blah blah. all i'm trying to say is that they have a very respectable racing series, one of the best, and i think this next game will continue their success. and i pointed out that past sales show that they have had much success. that's all i'm really saying here
But anyway, I don't even know why I'm arguing about this. I'm not even going to be buying this game. I'm done with this thread now. I'll just tip my hat, and bid you adieu.
it seems we are arguing just to argue. i hope you at least read some reviews once the game is out before making a choice like that. and i also hope that this thread hasn't led you to that decision
It's refreshing that I don't have to go to gamespot forums to see a pointless immature fanboy pissing match :rolleyes:
sorry for the inconvenience. you don't have to read this you know.
...which as I've said, a few times now, is incorrect. If you only count 4 games, as you originally said in that quote, that only totals 46M. And besides, if you check that link I originally provided, which is FROM POLYPHONY THEMSELVES, you would see that the total worldwide is only 56M. At least if you're going to quote the number in the wrong context, use the right number.
well i did have demos just before that quote. but yes, what i meant to say, and what i actually typed, was two different things. but i think you can see what i was trying to say, and is clear: NFS has sold more, but has more games out there.
Yay, let's play the "Twist The Numbers To Fit Our Needs" game....
100M / 15 years = 6.66M per year (Need for Speed)
56M / 13 years = 4.31M per year (Gran Turismo)
So yea, Need for Speed sells 50% more per year. YAY, math is fun!!!
math is fun, and yes, per year, NFS has sold more. but they released more games to do it. and on more consoles, to break it down even further
It is. I don't like the direction Polyphony has taken the game. A game that used to be my favorite game. It disappoints me. Thus my frustration. I bought my PS3 with the hopes
did you buy GT5: prologue?
for someone who at one point really liked the games/series, i don't see why you wouldn't give this game a shot, at least after reading reviews first. i find it very frustrating to see people make judgements before the game is even out
Can I buy one and drive it to work? No? Then it isn't real, intentions or not.
no matter what anyone says, it is a fact that they intended to build a car specifically for Gran Turismo. that in itself is very impressive to me.
Then according to you, Wii Play is the "greatest" video game of all time. Just reading that sentence should show you exactly why sales have very little to do with the quality of a game.
i never said that the most sold game is the greatest. but i do think sales is one aspect to consider.
I keep saying this, but it seems people don't really understand it. Sales, which deal with numbers, are an objective measure of something. Greatness, which deals with personal preferences, is a subjective measure. You can think GT, or the iPhone, or Star Wars, or whatever, is great. That is fine, and a personal opinion. But, the sales of those things can't be "great". They can be large, and they are, but they can't be great.
i understand this, but i don't think you understand what i am trying to point out. you are correct in that what makes something great is personal preference, and when many people have that same personal preference, it turns into many sales.
let's try this analogy. take tennis for example. who is a "greater" player - Roger Federer or Andy Roddick? Roddick has played some great games, and has a great serve, but Federer has many more championships. almost everyone would say Federer is greater (if there is such a term).
think of championships as sales in this case. i know it's not the best analogy, but the first thing i could think of.
And really, if someone uses the sales of something to qualify the greatness of it to themselves, that is kind of sad. Quite a few of my favorite things, which I consider great, didn't sell very well. That doesn't make them any less great to me.
you do make a very good point here, but again, i think you are taking my point out of context.
my whole point in all of this, is not that i think GT is the greatest series of all time or whatever, or that they have sold the most, blah blah. all i'm trying to say is that they have a very respectable racing series, one of the best, and i think this next game will continue their success. and i pointed out that past sales show that they have had much success. that's all i'm really saying here
But anyway, I don't even know why I'm arguing about this. I'm not even going to be buying this game. I'm done with this thread now. I'll just tip my hat, and bid you adieu.
it seems we are arguing just to argue. i hope you at least read some reviews once the game is out before making a choice like that. and i also hope that this thread hasn't led you to that decision
It's refreshing that I don't have to go to gamespot forums to see a pointless immature fanboy pissing match :rolleyes:
sorry for the inconvenience. you don't have to read this you know.
Rodimus Prime
Feb 28, 09:12 PM
Very sorry.
I have dyslexia, so I read sentences in my head, not words. When the words fit, my brain just makes that model of what it thinks the text said.
Sorry for getting mad. :o
I have dyslexia as well. Word of advise. When ever something gets you all mad like that always and I repeat ALWAYS re read it a few times before posting. I have caught myself a few times. Not that it always works.
I was about to say something but saw another posted did.
what it does show is that the brain is wired a certain way. I personally believe homosexallity is both a choice and genetic.
We all fall on a scale that goes from complete homosexaul to straight. Now majority of people are much closer to the straight side and all clustered over there. Then people who are spread out across the all the way to the other end. I do not know how many fall in the bi range compared to complete homosexual cluster.
What this means is some people are much more predisposed to be homosexual than others.
I will repeat there is nothing wrong with it and I have said before they should have the right be married. We have little control over who we are attracted to. We can over ride it somewhat but only to a point. Mostly it feel we take the predisposition and induld it and we go that way.
I have dyslexia, so I read sentences in my head, not words. When the words fit, my brain just makes that model of what it thinks the text said.
Sorry for getting mad. :o
I have dyslexia as well. Word of advise. When ever something gets you all mad like that always and I repeat ALWAYS re read it a few times before posting. I have caught myself a few times. Not that it always works.
I was about to say something but saw another posted did.
what it does show is that the brain is wired a certain way. I personally believe homosexallity is both a choice and genetic.
We all fall on a scale that goes from complete homosexaul to straight. Now majority of people are much closer to the straight side and all clustered over there. Then people who are spread out across the all the way to the other end. I do not know how many fall in the bi range compared to complete homosexual cluster.
What this means is some people are much more predisposed to be homosexual than others.
I will repeat there is nothing wrong with it and I have said before they should have the right be married. We have little control over who we are attracted to. We can over ride it somewhat but only to a point. Mostly it feel we take the predisposition and induld it and we go that way.
0 comments:
Post a Comment