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

Friday, May 13, 2011

selena gomez wallpapers latest

selena gomez wallpapers latest. selena gomez wallpapers latest
  • selena gomez wallpapers latest



  • reel2reel
    Apr 15, 09:50 AM
    That's awesome.

    Humans can be some nasty creatures.

    Yep, this hate is dying off. Demographics are destiny. Younger people, writ large, are not homophobic or anti-gay.

    But they're still pretty good at hating and excluding for other reasons. Some things never change, unfortunately.





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. Selena Gomez Wallpaper In HD
  • Selena Gomez Wallpaper In HD



  • AppliedVisual
    Oct 25, 11:28 PM
    But the octo-core for sure will be faster than the quad G5 for non universal Adobe CS2 apps.

    Unfortunately it won't be... Adobe's software in its current CS2 form isn't multithreaded and the only way you're going to get the use of multiple cores is running multiple programs at the same time. So when it comes to running Photoshop, a 3GHz quad-core will run it faster than a 2.66GHz 8-core. Hopefully we'll see some multithreaded enhancements with the CS3 update. Otherwise, buying a Mac Pro for Adobe's software is somewhat overkill unless you have specialized PS filters that are multithreaded to use the multiple CPU cores. For now the hardware has dramatically out-paced the software side of the industry and so we wait... Outside of video encoding apps, 3D rendering, visualization and scientific computing apps, most everything else out there is not multithreaded (which means multi-core ignorant). Know your software before you plunk down your money.

    For me, I'm a 3D rendering kinda guy so the 8-core Mac Pro can't get here fast enough. Although, I just bought an MBP about 3 weeks ago since I needed one and my wife needed a Macbook, but I handed that down to her and ordered me a C2D MBP yesterday... And I bought another Maya license, so the budget is a little thin right now.





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. selena gomez wallpaper 2009.
  • selena gomez wallpaper 2009.



  • Peace
    Sep 12, 04:48 PM
    who thinks it will be 802.11g or will it be 802.11n?

    will that mean that all new macs Q1 07 also come with 802.11n as well?

    or will the streaming from a 802.11g mac to the iTV just be crap?

    if that's the case what will everyone with a current mac do, dongle it?

    Steve should have been more explicit about the 802.11 or at least assured us that 802.11g macs will stream to it just fine.

    Does anyone know if 802.11g can handle streaming video at that resolution?

    I'd be willing to bet the new iMacs and Mac Pros will only need a firmware update.





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. Selena Gomez Wallpapers
  • Selena Gomez Wallpapers



  • Evangelion
    Jul 13, 02:57 AM
    The point was that pretty much everything he said was bogus and flame bait. Sadly, I took the bait.

    I don't see much baiting in his post.





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. Selena gomez latest wallpapers
  • Selena gomez latest wallpapers



  • Multimedia
    Nov 3, 11:32 AM
    Anyone hear of Apple going the opposite direction with the Xeon.
    i.e. how about a single dual-core?To be more clear...
    Mac Pro with 1 dualcore Xeon?

    A whole line of Mac Pro's then
    2 cores
    4 cores
    8 coresSingle Dual Core is out of the question. We're way past wanting-needing less than 4-cores. Xeon are made to be used in pairs. What you probably mean is discussed above - a single 4-core Kentsfield processor (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=3014347&postcount=239) in a Conroe motherboard. Some of us hope that will be a sub $2k offering next year.

    More like:
    4 cores 2006
    8 cores 2007
    16 cores 2008
    32 cores 2009
    64 cores 2010





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. latest wallpapers of selena
  • latest wallpapers of selena



  • AidenShaw
    Jul 13, 07:07 AM
    it depends whether you are looking at it from software-perspective or hardware-perspective.
    Actually, it looks the same from both perspectives.

    Yonah, Conroe and Merom have full hardware SMP support on the package (or on the chip itself).

    The cache coherency and inter-processor (in this case meaning inter-core) communications features are present, and must be present in order to avoid corrupting memory data and to support an SMP operating system.

    The difference with Woodcrest is that Yonah/Conroe/Merom do not support SMP features *between* sockets - the cache coherency and IPC mechanisms are not brought out to the pins on the package.

    Woodcrest brings those signals out to the pins, and the Woodcrest's 5000x chipset connects those signals between sockets.





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. selena gomez wallpapers latest
  • selena gomez wallpapers latest



  • joepunk
    Mar 11, 01:16 AM
    Just heard about it on CBC late night news. Terrible.





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. selena gomez wallpapers latest
  • selena gomez wallpapers latest



  • nacnud
    Sep 12, 06:24 PM
    This iTV seems like a very interesting device, first off it appears to be a HD wireless media streaming box like the Hauppauge Media MVP but hopefuly with a nicer UI.

    However another thing also jumps out, if can you add an ipod via the USB or even an external hard drive then this could give consumers access to the iTunes Store without a computer. That has got to be worth a lot in terms of possible revenue and growing the market rather than just the market share.





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. selena gomez wallpapers
  • selena gomez wallpapers



  • �algiris
    Apr 28, 12:11 PM
    They didn't delete the word "computer" from the Apple name for nothing.

    I could use a good laugh. Please "deduce" this one.





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. selena gomez wallpapers latest
  • selena gomez wallpapers latest



  • Bill McEnaney
    Mar 28, 12:17 PM
    He wouldn't have to: he wears his dogma on his sleeve.
    Even if I'm dogmatic, I'm still distinct from my dogmatism. Being-dogmatic may be a property I have, but I'm not identical with that property.





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. Selena Gomez Hot Wallpapers,
  • Selena Gomez Hot Wallpapers,



  • Multimedia
    Oct 28, 12:50 PM
    I am in the process of selling my Dual 2.0 GHz PPC. I was planning on replacing it with the Mac Pro 2.66 GHz. Should I consider holding off in the purchase of the new system. What potential impact would there be the system that I am considering buying?

    On a forward thinking basis, what potential(speculation) revisions are possible to this system in the next 6 - 12 months?Know your workload. Do you use applications that are multi-core aware? Do you want to run them simultaneously? Do you want to run several applications simultaneously - each doing work at the same time? Leopard is bound to be very multi-core friendly since 4 cores will be the norm when it ships.

    Since you have hung on to the Dual 2GHz model for far past its hayday, I'm thinking you don't need 8 cores. I had a Dual 2GHz G5 back in '04 and got the 2.5 soon as it went refurb early '05. By early '06 I was in a panic with not enough power to do my Multi-Threaded Workload. I was in a cold sweat when I ordered the Quad G5 in early February.

    I found its limit within a few months and have been enthusiastically awaiting these 8-core Dual Clovertown Mac Pros since before the 4-core Mac Pro shipped.

    Since that does not describe you, you may be happy with the 4 core Mac Pro. But if you can afford it and you do Video, 3D work, lots of heavy Photoshop processes and/or want to run a bunch of single core processes simultaneously in the course of a day and/or nights, you would be much better off in the long run with the upcoming 8-core. Figure with RAM it will run you around or above $4k. Does that work for you?

    Oh, and I'm not selling my Quad G5 either. :)





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. Selena Gomez Wallpaper In HD
  • Selena Gomez Wallpaper In HD



  • Peace
    Sep 20, 06:09 PM
    Well said. This product will NOT sell (after the initial "craze") if there is no DVR functionality. People (general mass of people not macrumors folk) are not ready to pay for individual TV shows. People love DVRs because they can record, watch later and skip commercials.

    In the future when Apple has such a stronghold on the cable industry that companies are forced to move to a pay-per-channel (a-la-carte) system, then sure, but not right now.

    DVR is where it is at for the moment. Apple is going to miss the boat. Apple having an iTV does not make me want to buy TV shows. It simply makes me not want to buy an iTV.

    And I guess this is why Disney sold 125,000 movies the first week and Apple has sold millions of TV shows right?*





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. selena gomez wallpapers latest
  • selena gomez wallpapers latest



  • uzombie
    Sep 26, 12:49 PM
    Since the 3.0ghz Woodcrest is now about $875 (street), I am betting it will drop another $100 when the Clovertown 4 cores are released (Those prices are for 1000 lot each, so resellers will undoubtedly charge more). Until the Woodcrest 3.0Ghz duals hit below the $450 mark, it makes more $ense to get the CPUs you need, now. (that is in the MacPro, not as self-upgrades)

    It looks like you are better off buying the mac you want, than wait for CPU prices to drop enough to build on-the-cheap (getting low-end 2.0ghz, then upgrading to X1900 and dual Clovertown 2.66 4-cores). By the time the price on those CPUs is reasonable, Apple may have a new Pro and bus. And intel wil have more cores than we need. Or atleast, the hardware is far ahead of the software written to fully utilize the cores.

    We welcome the bloatware overloards! ;)





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. Selena Gomez Wallpapers
  • Selena Gomez Wallpapers



  • Rt&Dzine
    Mar 14, 02:44 PM
    What do you mean *if* we have a meltdown. Are you denying there has been a meltdown at all? I'll wager with you that there is not only just a meltdown, but actually *three* active meltdowns currently in progress right now. Even so, I'm not even sure where your confidence over the 'if' comes from, everything so far that we're seeing indicates that they are struggling to even keep the situation under control let alone stabilize it, so I believe it's more of a certainty than an if. I believe they are failing, if not already failed, and the situation is already out of their control so it's only a matter of time.

    Edit - my beilief is based on reading stuff like this (from the BBC) about the hitherto quiet reactor #2. While all the focus has been on the exploding #1 and #3, they've also been pumping seawater into #2 as well. So not only is that yet another wtf? moment, we also have a wtf? squared that the fire engine truck ran out of petrol to keep the pump going so the rods were exposed. So I hope you can understand what I mean about not having confidence that they are even abe to stay on top of the situation let alone control it.


    Japanese officials are saying it's highly likely there is a partial meltdown occurring in three reactors.





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. Disney Star Selena Gomez Hot
  • Disney Star Selena Gomez Hot



  • GGJstudios
    May 2, 11:36 AM
    4. Run a Spotlight search for "MACDefender" to check for any associated files that might still be lingering

    That's a sure way *not* to find any related files.
    The only effective method for complete app removal is manual deletion:
    Best way to FULLY DELETE a program (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11171082&postcount=16)
    One thing Macs need anti-virus is to scan mails for Windows viruses, so that those doesn't to you PC. That is all.
    That doesn't protect Windows PCs from malware from other sources, which is a far greater threat than receiving files from a Mac. Each Windows user should be running their own anti-virus, to protect them from malware from all sources.
    Yes so much. Because Malware can copy itself and infect a computer.
    No, only a virus can do that. A trojan requires user involvement to spread.
    So few virus for MAC than when one appears it is news... :)
    This isn't a virus.
    Mac OS X fanboys really need to stop clinging to the mentality that "viruses" don't exist for OS X and that "malware" is a Windows-only problem.
    I agree. While no Mac OS X viruses exist at this time, that doesn't mean they won't in the future. And malware has always been a threat. What's important is to understand the kinds of threats and the most effective methods for protection.

    The fact is, the days of viruses are long gone.
    I wouldn't go so far as to say that. Just when you do, someone will release a new virus into the wild. While they may not be as prevalent as they once were, they're by no means extinct.

    The fact is, understanding the proper terminology and different payloads and impacts of the different types of malware prevents unnecessary panic and promotes a proper security strategy.

    I'd say it's people that try to just lump all malware together in the same category, making a trojan that relies on social engineering sound as bad as a self-replicating worm that spreads using a remote execution/privilege escalation bug that are quite ignorant of general computer security.
    The best defense a Mac user has against current malware threats is education and common sense. Understanding the basic differences between a virus, trojan, worm, and other types of malware will help a user defend against them. Doing simple things like unchecking the "Open "safe" files after downloading" option is quite effective.

    I despise the "X is a file downloaded from the Internet" dialog introduced in SL. Really wish you could disable it.
    That's one of the simple lines of defense for a user, as it lets them know they're about to open a newly-downloaded app. It only does that the first time you launch the app, so why bother disabling such a helpful reminder?
    To the end user it makes no difference. It's fine if you know, but to a novice quickly correcting them on the difference between a virus, a trojan, or whatever else contributes approximately zero percent towards solving the problem.
    Actually, it helps a user to have some understanding about malware. Part of the problem is a novice user is likely to engage in dangerous activities, such as installing pirated software, unless they know what a trojan is and how it infects a system. Also, understanding what a virus is, how it spreads, and the fact that none exist for Mac OS X will prevent them from instantly assuming that everything unexpected that happens on their Mac is the result of a virus. Also, understanding that antivirus apps can't detect a virus that doesn't yet exist will prevent them from installing AV and having a false sense of security, thinking they're immune to threats. Educating a user goes a very long way in protecting them, by teaching them to practice safe computing habits.

    Mac Virus/Malware Info (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9400648&postcount=4)





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. selena gomez 2011 wallpaper
  • selena gomez 2011 wallpaper



  • ET007
    Mar 18, 02:48 PM
    Just because a company makes you sign their TOS, it does not make the TOS a Holy Grail law. TOS are only written in the best interest of a company and they are very often faulty.

    Unfortunately in some countries, people forget to use common sense and reasoning and take everything the way it is BECAUSE it was written in the TOS, as so many people keep quoting in this forum.There is no such thing as a perfect TOS and even if you sign it, it does not mean you cannot challenge it.

    Just because the TOS says so and you sign it, it does not make it right or the law. If it did, a lot of legal professionals would be unemployed and a lot of average Joes/Janes would be in jail.

    AT&T is in the business to make money. They will take whatever they can get and however they can get it. AT&T is just as unethical as ......(you get to fill in the blanks ;)). It is up to the consumer to challenge AT&T's faulty TOS instead of just being passive, quoting and accepting it. It is amazing and worrisome how accepting some people are in this forum. I guess they do not teach critical thinking anymore in schools and/or colleges.

    The sad part is that big companies are in bed with the politicians (republicans and democrats in the US) so the government will never step in to protect the interest of consumers.:mad:





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. Selena gomez pictures amp;
  • Selena gomez pictures amp;



  • MacMyDay
    Sep 20, 01:06 AM
    I know of at least one company (http://www.itv.com/) in the UK who won't be too happy if they keep that name.





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. selena gomez wallpapers latest
  • selena gomez wallpapers latest



  • ~loserman~
    Mar 20, 06:28 PM
    It is wrong? How so? If I burn a track for my wedding video, yes, I'm technically breakeing the law, but there is nothing immoral about doing that. No one is losing out on any money. No one is being hurt. He isn't stealing anything. He's breaking a copyright law that makes no sense in that case.

    If you add it to your wedding video for your own use then you are not. If you make copies of the video and give them to the wedding guests then you are.





    selena gomez wallpapers latest. selena gomez wallpapers latest
  • selena gomez wallpapers latest



  • greenstork
    Jul 12, 03:27 PM
    How is it an insult to conroe to say that a desktop chip should go in a moderately priced desktop? And perhaps more to the point, why exactly are you so worked up about someone insulting conroe... is it your personal creation or something? You do realize that both PCs and Macs will be using both conroes and woodcrests in various configurations, right? It's not like woodcrest is an apple product. So what exactly are you so worked up about?

    Do you really think anyone here will care if you overclock your conroe-based PC? Let alone "break our hearts?" Have fun.

    Even if you had a point worth making, your attitude is so repulsive that I don't know why anyone would want to listen to you.

    I think his point was that most tech geeks are freaking out about the revolutionary core 2 architecture, be it in the conroe, woodcrest or merom. For people to view conroe as a lesser chip in some way smacks of mac snobbery and I tend to agree with him.





    Mac'nCheese
    Apr 24, 12:36 PM
    If you strike a bias and confrontational tone, you get one in return. ;)

    And people wonder why PRSI conversations revolve in endless circles, rehashing the same tired subject matter...

    I don't think I did and that certainly is not what I got in return.





    jettredmont
    May 3, 03:44 PM
    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...


    I wasn't specific enough there. I was talking about how "Unix security" has been applied to the overall OS X permissions system, not just "Unix security" in the abstract. I'll cede the point that this does mean that "Unix security" in the abstract is no better than NT security, as I can not refute the claim that Linux distributions share the same problem (the need to run as "root" to do day-to-day computer administration). I would point out, though, that unless things have changed significantly, most window managers for Linux et al refuse to run as root, so you can't end up with a full-fledged graphical environment running as root.


    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.


    Yes and no. You are looking at "Unix security" as a set of controls. I'm looking at it as a pragmatic system. As a system, Apple's OS X model allowed users to run as standard users and non-root Administrators while XP's model made non-Administrator access incredibly cumbersome.

    You can blame that on Windows developers just being dumber, or you can blame it on Microsoft not sufficiently cracking the whip, or you can blame it on Microsoft not making the "right way" easy enough. Wherever the blame goes, the practical effect is that Windows users tended to run as Administrator and locking them down to Standard user accounts was a slap in the face and serious drain on productivity.


    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.


    Interesting. I do remember being able to do some pretty damaging things with Administrator access in Windows XP such as replacing shared DLLs, formatting the hard drive, replacing any executable in c:\windows, etc, which OS X would not let me do without typing in a password (GUI) or sudo'ing to root (command line).

    But, I stand corrected. NT "Administrator" is not equivalent to "root" on Unix. But it's a whole lot more "trusted" (and hence all apps it runs are a lot more trusted) than the equivalent OS X "Administrator" account.


    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.


    Again, the components are all there, but while the pragmatic effect was that a user needed to right-click, select "Run as Administrator", then type in their password to run something ... well, that wasn't going to happen. Hence, users tended to have Administrator access accounts.


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


    Sorry! I know; it burns!

    ...


    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.


    Well, unless you have more information on this than I do, I'm assuming that the .zip file was unarchived (into a sub-folder of ~/Downloads), a .dmg file with an "Internet Enabled" flag was found inside, then the user was prompted by the OS if they wanted to run this installer they downloaded, then the installer came up (keeping in mind that "installer" is a package structure potentially with some scripts, not a free-form executable, and that the only reason it came up was that the 'installer' app the OS has opened it up and recognized it). I believe the Installer also asks the user permission before running any of the preflight scripts.

    Unless there is a bug here exposing a security hole, this could not be done without multiple user interactions. The "installer" only ran because it was a set of instructions for the built-in installer. The disk image was only opened because it was in the form Safari recognizes as an auto-open disk image. The first time "arbitrary code" could be run would be in the preflight script of the installer.





    Peace
    Sep 12, 06:26 PM
    Not completely accurate... EyeHome has component out - with a pretty decent 1080i Software Upconvert over Component to an HDTV set...

    I may be wrong but it has "composite out" not "component"





    Sydde
    Mar 14, 01:13 PM
    in japan though it's a little bit different. thats why there also isn't much open panic: simply for the fact that the majority of japanese don't want to be seen 'losing it'
    I suspect you are somewhat mistaken on that point. Mostly, what happened happened, not much they can do about that now. Some eyewitnesses I hear on the radio were saying they felt eerily calm during the shaking, now they are mostly fatalistic, I would think. Panic just amounts to a waste of energy.


    off topic side note: for other nuclear plant designs this events could have been massivle more dramatic

    That remains to be seen. Right now, they are still struggling to keep this disaster from happening. The situation is hardly what I would call stable.





    DakotaGuy
    Oct 8, 08:47 PM
    Who really gives a damn?

    I would rather be sitting at my "old" iMac DV with a sllllloooow 400Mhz G3 then my buddies new 2. whatever GHz Wintel computer. Why you might ask? Because mine works and works right everytime. He has already had his back to the store 3 times for service and faulty components, not to mention problems with XP. In fact, I can get more done in less time, because I have never experienced any downtime with my Mac. For the last 3 years it has never failed me once, never re-loaded the OS only upgraded it, and never had any hardware problems. Everyone says Apple's hardware is junk because it is not as fast. Okay so maybe you can buy a cheap PC with 2 million GHz, but I can tell you in the end the Apple will outlast it and be more productive.

    Downtime and OS problems cause a lot more downtime, then a couple of seconds here and there. You complain about Mac speed, but what if, like most PC's Apple only cared about speed and not overall hardware and software quality...all we would have is a fast POS IMHO.

    So as I might get flamed for this post, get off Apple's back. Their products are not the pieces of crap everyone on here tries to make them out to be. You pay more for Apple because they don't sacrifice quality. If you want only speed and don't care about software, OS, or hardware quality, then why are you here??? Get a cheapo PC. The new Macs are not slow computers, sure there are some PC's that are a little faster and win the old GHz race, but when you make a purchase you have to look at the entire picture. Look at everything the machine offers, value, quality, style, longevity, productivity, etc... Apple is better.



    No comments:

    Post a Comment