Oct 8th 2007 10:46PM MUCH more important is allowing the LFG tool to work for "lower level" quests and dungeons. Nothing is more annoying than needing to grind rep or complete an old quest for a chain and not being able to find a group. It's the most asinine thing I've seen.
After that, I fully agree with this so we can catch up on things we missed. Although it would break with our experience thus far, I think unavailable quests should have a red exclamation point (fits with skills we can't use), and a gray one when they won't yield XP (again, fitting with skills). Keep the rest yellow for simplicity.
Sep 17th 2007 3:50PM Oh crap, I didn't know someone was videoing me...
Aug 26th 2007 8:26PM Watanabe is a parasite and should not be supported.
Amen, OCM. Inquisitor is great and free (for now), but just look at his long history with XTorrent, Acquisition, and others to get an idea of how he treats his users, uses open source software without proper attribution, and basically abuses anyone and anything to make money.
Aug 26th 2007 5:11PM They most certainly are a security problem - how on earth can you claim that having bundles that can manipulate running programs with impunity is NOT?
Leaving that aside, they also cause nearly as many stability problems as Unsanity's APE does. I can't count how many problems on WebKit.org have turned out to be incompatible InputManager hacks.
What we SHOULD be clamoring for is a stable extension/plugin mechanism for Safari and other applications in Leopard, not the continued presence of InputManager hacks.
Aug 25th 2007 5:17PM Let me buck the trend by saying this is an incredibly STUPID decision. There's a simple way to prevent people from bypassing content - make the other zones harder - duh. If I had a flying mount in Outlands from day 1, I would have been able to look at all the pretty zones, but I wouldn't have been able to land (other than gathering flightpaths).
Arbitrarily cutting abilities like this - especially something that took so much work/time to get and is so enjoyable - stinks of piss-poor-planning.
As for the rest of Azeroth, I most certainly do want them to finish all the various "broken" bits of landscape that they left half done. My flying mount is faster than my land mount and allows me to go straight from point A to point B. At level 70, I'm not bypassing any content, I'm shaving a few minutes off a trip to Scarlet Monastery or similarly remote areas of the Plaguelands.
Aug 16th 2007 10:55PM Um, no Zach. Those data plans are specifically for USB or mobile broadband cards. In other words, your laptop.
This is about phones, which just need the unlimited Power Vision package, which is $15/month. If you want to tether your laptop to it, the kick you in the nuts again to the tune of $40/month.
Aug 13th 2007 8:43PM Get a Drobo (http://www.drobo.com) and be happy. The current version is only USB 2.0, but future versions will have additional interfaces (likely Firewire 800 and eSATA).
Aug 9th 2007 6:26PM For all of the talking of "masking tools", the image used already had its transparency set, and the shadow erasure was just a plain eraser - nothing was actually masked specially. If he'd had a less steady hand, the edge of the apple would be gone as well. In short, nothing very impressive here.
I'm not so sure about this - its main competition is Photoshop Elements, which has far more features, an interface that isn't that different from this, and costs only a very little more. Once it's made universal, I don't see a call for this at all.
Aug 7th 2007 10:01PM I was totally underwhelmed by the upgrade as well - no wonder it didn't get any mention.
However, check out the refurb prices on the old Mini's. They're gone now, but the old $799 model with Superdrive and such was just $479 this afternoon. Snapped one up as soon as I saw it.
Aug 6th 2007 12:04PM If you want a comparison, feel free to read the reviews of both products on MacUpdate.
In a nutshell, Parallels 2.5 was decent, but 3.0 has had MAJOR stability problems and the company has been unable to provide adequate support (looks like they grew way too fast). VMWare, meanwhile, has been excellent since beta 3, and improved constantly. Its underlying architecture is generally accepted to be more advanced (supporting multiple processors, full USB 2.0, and ACPI), and its user interface was designed ground up for the Mac - no porting there. At the same time, since it shares the underlying VMWare virtualization engine, you can download virtual machines freely from its web site (usually Linux, since distributing Windows would be illegal).
Performance isn't really an issue for virtualization - it's not emulating things, so it's really down to how good its OS tools are (how it integrates with the host system) and these days, 3D support. Parallels only supports Windows; VMWare supports Windows and Linux with full integration tools. I can't personally comment on 3D support, as I don't use it for that.