- pontiac gto 2005 black
- Pontiac 389 Engine. the intake
- 1964 Pontiac GTO - TKO GTO
- 1966 Pontiac GTO Hardtop 389
- The 389 engine got revised
- The engine compartment on the
- The engine compartment on the; Pontiac 389 Engine. 1966 PONTIAC 389 ENGINE CRANK. This item has been shown times; 1966 PONTIAC 389 ENGINE CRANK.
- V8+engine+cartoon
- 1969 pontiac gto judge engine
- Pontiac GTO History
- 1965 Pontiac GTO Lemans 389
- AMS Dyno Testing - 389 Pontiac
- Pontiac Tri-Power 389 Engine
- 1962 Pontiac Catalina - The
- 1966 Pontiac GTO Tri Power
- Pontiac 389 Engine Eagle Crank. Eagle Crank
- The 389 engine got revised; Pontiac 389 Engine. 1966 Pontiac GTO Tiger - Beat; 1966 Pontiac GTO Tiger - Beat
- The 1960 Pontiac Ventura
- Pontiac 389 Engine Parts
Moyank24
Mar 30, 01:52 PM
This just makes me more interested to hear what Apple has come up with. I like the idea of "the cloud" but I'd definitely like to compare Amazon's with Apple's when it is announced in June.
heisetax
Aug 2, 04:47 PM
Why is everyone so convinced that there will be significant updates to the Cinema Displays? Remember how long the non-Alu plastic displays were out? It must have been five years, while the Alu displays have been out for less then two years.
I can't see Apple making a bigger screen then 30" for desktop use. And if they were to, it would be for a multimedia center type thing, which not only is unlikely, but would never be released at WWDC. As a 30" display owner, theres no way a screen larger then 30" would be a feasible desktop display. Besides, anything larger then 30" is just too niche of a market.
Regarding a built-in iSight, I think the Pro market is just the wrong market for that. Apple has to be aware of its market, and b/c of security reasons, cameras just aren't feasible at this point.
Hell, who knows, I'm probably 100% wrong :p.
Edit: Perhaps Apple will just bump the display to be HDCP compliant. HDMI is pretty much the same as DVI, for everyone who doesn't know ;).
I agree with you that the 30" display is big. I disagree with you about any larger display as being too big. It may be for you but not for others. When I first starting using my 30" display besides my 23" display I thought it was big. Using it with my 17" PowerBook even makes it seem bigger. But the only thing that could hold me back from purchasing a larger display would be the need of purchasing a new computer to be able to use 2 larger screens at the same time. My 17" PowerBook can only use one. My MDD PowerMac can only use one. But that is really a different question.
Many people seem to have tunnel vision when they use their computers & are or at least think they are happy with one 15" display. Others can see the need & usefulness of a larger display. At least you use a 30". But if Apple would have come out with a 32", 35" or larger display instead would you have purchased it the same as you did your 30" model? Then it would take a 40" or 45" display to be too larger.
With DualLink only able to support 3840 X 2400 & Single Link only able to support up to 1920 X 1200, there will be a natural size limitation until one of the new systems come around. The need probably isn't there yet, but a couple more size and/or reolution increases would change all of that.
How long do you think it will be before someone else says that his 45" display is all the larger anyone would ever need, so why make one larger? Whan I sold computers many thought that the 17" CRT was too larger, why go larger than 15"?
Bill the TaxMan
I can't see Apple making a bigger screen then 30" for desktop use. And if they were to, it would be for a multimedia center type thing, which not only is unlikely, but would never be released at WWDC. As a 30" display owner, theres no way a screen larger then 30" would be a feasible desktop display. Besides, anything larger then 30" is just too niche of a market.
Regarding a built-in iSight, I think the Pro market is just the wrong market for that. Apple has to be aware of its market, and b/c of security reasons, cameras just aren't feasible at this point.
Hell, who knows, I'm probably 100% wrong :p.
Edit: Perhaps Apple will just bump the display to be HDCP compliant. HDMI is pretty much the same as DVI, for everyone who doesn't know ;).
I agree with you that the 30" display is big. I disagree with you about any larger display as being too big. It may be for you but not for others. When I first starting using my 30" display besides my 23" display I thought it was big. Using it with my 17" PowerBook even makes it seem bigger. But the only thing that could hold me back from purchasing a larger display would be the need of purchasing a new computer to be able to use 2 larger screens at the same time. My 17" PowerBook can only use one. My MDD PowerMac can only use one. But that is really a different question.
Many people seem to have tunnel vision when they use their computers & are or at least think they are happy with one 15" display. Others can see the need & usefulness of a larger display. At least you use a 30". But if Apple would have come out with a 32", 35" or larger display instead would you have purchased it the same as you did your 30" model? Then it would take a 40" or 45" display to be too larger.
With DualLink only able to support 3840 X 2400 & Single Link only able to support up to 1920 X 1200, there will be a natural size limitation until one of the new systems come around. The need probably isn't there yet, but a couple more size and/or reolution increases would change all of that.
How long do you think it will be before someone else says that his 45" display is all the larger anyone would ever need, so why make one larger? Whan I sold computers many thought that the 17" CRT was too larger, why go larger than 15"?
Bill the TaxMan
B.Boston
Apr 26, 03:43 PM
That's awesome... Android OS is run on exponentially more devices than iOS is. Of course Android is going to be ahead in Market Share. They reach a wider customer base, from low end Android devices closer to feature phones up to flagship devices that better compete with the iPhone and iOS.
If you really want to know how the two are doing, you should be looking at Profit Share as well. My guess... Apple and iOS are the leader in that.
If you really want to know how the two are doing, you should be looking at Profit Share as well. My guess... Apple and iOS are the leader in that.
rdlink
Apr 21, 09:12 PM
And how do you operate it? A server can be accessed from a workstation but a Mac Pro IS a workstation, it's not a server. It's not a logical step. I have a professional photographer in the family, with a Mac Pro. He needs to load his RAWs onto his Mac for post processing. How to do this if that Mac is in another room, in a rack :confused: Very inconvenient if you ask me.
Not sure you quite get it. The idea here would be that the one machine could be used either as a workstation, or as a server. You could use it in a SOHO situation as a workstation/under the desk server. An enterprise could configure it as a rack mounted server. One assembly line. Two products.
Not sure you quite get it. The idea here would be that the one machine could be used either as a workstation, or as a server. You could use it in a SOHO situation as a workstation/under the desk server. An enterprise could configure it as a rack mounted server. One assembly line. Two products.
rtharper
Sep 11, 12:00 AM
this event is going to be simulcast in LONDON. Does this mean that movies will be able to be purchased by folks in the UK??? as far as I know you still cant purchased TV shows sold through iTunes in the UK:confused:
Strange Apple would work out US and UK movie distribution deals at the same time.
Depends on who they're marketing. If its just US movie makers, or a small subset thereof, I see no reason why they shouldn't be working out contracts to distrubte them overseas. Of course, I haven't given this too much thought (the merom MBP overshadows this in my mind) so someone else might see a problem with it
Strange Apple would work out US and UK movie distribution deals at the same time.
Depends on who they're marketing. If its just US movie makers, or a small subset thereof, I see no reason why they shouldn't be working out contracts to distrubte them overseas. Of course, I haven't given this too much thought (the merom MBP overshadows this in my mind) so someone else might see a problem with it
macridah
Jul 30, 06:41 AM
I hope it will be a GSM phone. If the AppleBerry rumors are true, then that would be sweet, too.
bcharna
Jul 30, 10:28 PM
" While I'm sure if it is true..."
it is true, i saw a add for it in a magazine. it gave the website: www.iphone.org,
but when i typed that in, all it gave me was the apple website with the .org URL. and its not a flip phone. its made by Sony Ericson. I believe this is why an Apple logo showed up on that one thing Sony was showing.
i saw the real one on the back pages of a "MacBook" magazine. would have bought it, but it was $30.http://www.ipodnoticias.com/uploaded_images/iphone-701958.jpg
it was this add
iphone.org isn't owned by Apple, therefore, Someone who wanted to fool people and couldn't afford to pay for a .com name could have easily bought this name and just directed it to apple.com.
Just a simple redirection people...
it is true, i saw a add for it in a magazine. it gave the website: www.iphone.org,
but when i typed that in, all it gave me was the apple website with the .org URL. and its not a flip phone. its made by Sony Ericson. I believe this is why an Apple logo showed up on that one thing Sony was showing.
i saw the real one on the back pages of a "MacBook" magazine. would have bought it, but it was $30.http://www.ipodnoticias.com/uploaded_images/iphone-701958.jpg
it was this add
iphone.org isn't owned by Apple, therefore, Someone who wanted to fool people and couldn't afford to pay for a .com name could have easily bought this name and just directed it to apple.com.
Just a simple redirection people...
CFreymarc
May 6, 12:59 AM
Moving away from Intel in their notebooks and desktops would be a HUGE mistake in my opinion. Intel is the big dog and they have the resources to keep innovating.
Intel has been a Microsoft bitch for the past twenty years and it shows. They did everything they did to keep the 8086 instruction set running for every piece of screwed up DOS code written by guy with more karma than formal CS educations. From that, they have not been able to shuck the old binaries and move on. Win7/64 did a good job shucking the Win 3.1 binary instruction base but it is too little too soon. Short Intel stock long term, you will do well IMO.
I guess if they plan on making everything iOS then it makes a little more sense, but for true blue OSX machines Intel has the muscle.
You been drinking the Santa Clara kool-aide too much. ARM has been good at forcing app developers to recompile for the latest instruction set and dumping on old binaries. Apple sees this trend as healty. We will see a version of XCode with a target for iOS 7 running on laptops / set top media and consuming one tenth of the power as they are now with a daylight readable 24-bit color display running full video.
Apple is good kicking the third party developer base in the ass and telling them to rev their code. Wintel machines have been way too servicing toward old binaries that too many customers are too cheap to upgrade. But then, that is the mediocre / anal customers which Wintel sells to.
Better money is out there.
Intel has been a Microsoft bitch for the past twenty years and it shows. They did everything they did to keep the 8086 instruction set running for every piece of screwed up DOS code written by guy with more karma than formal CS educations. From that, they have not been able to shuck the old binaries and move on. Win7/64 did a good job shucking the Win 3.1 binary instruction base but it is too little too soon. Short Intel stock long term, you will do well IMO.
I guess if they plan on making everything iOS then it makes a little more sense, but for true blue OSX machines Intel has the muscle.
You been drinking the Santa Clara kool-aide too much. ARM has been good at forcing app developers to recompile for the latest instruction set and dumping on old binaries. Apple sees this trend as healty. We will see a version of XCode with a target for iOS 7 running on laptops / set top media and consuming one tenth of the power as they are now with a daylight readable 24-bit color display running full video.
Apple is good kicking the third party developer base in the ass and telling them to rev their code. Wintel machines have been way too servicing toward old binaries that too many customers are too cheap to upgrade. But then, that is the mediocre / anal customers which Wintel sells to.
Better money is out there.
ptysell
May 6, 12:29 AM
Can always have a system with ARM AND x86 CPUs.
cvaldes
May 7, 10:53 AM
Why not just make it a $20 product instead of giving it away for no profit?
It might be easier for Apple to run MobileMe as a free service; there's a certain amount of overhead for account administration, customer service, etc., plus a certain level of expectation (higher?) when it's a paid service.
Apple uses software, content and services to drive sales of its high-margin hardware. By publicizing the fact that they are giving away basic cloud services for free, that might drive more people to buy Macs and mobile devices.
Also, this would make them even more of a competitor to Google.
It might be easier for Apple to run MobileMe as a free service; there's a certain amount of overhead for account administration, customer service, etc., plus a certain level of expectation (higher?) when it's a paid service.
Apple uses software, content and services to drive sales of its high-margin hardware. By publicizing the fact that they are giving away basic cloud services for free, that might drive more people to buy Macs and mobile devices.
Also, this would make them even more of a competitor to Google.
Pro31
Apr 18, 03:51 PM
Ridiculous. Nothing is at all similar, aside from the bezel. But then if that's an "infringement" then all those digital picture frame makers can sue Apple for copying their "user interface". Honeycomb itself, the actual aspect ratio, none of that is similar. Get a grip Apple.
When I was considering an Android, I actually looked at the Samsung BECAUSE it was so much like Apples interface. I don't know what stuff you are looking at?
When I was considering an Android, I actually looked at the Samsung BECAUSE it was so much like Apples interface. I don't know what stuff you are looking at?
toughboy
Nov 26, 04:46 PM
Well whatever Apple puts inside that 'tablet' thing, I want it to be named as 'Newton'.. That is the name the product deserves, something with respect to Apple's own history..
We should be done with the cheap code-names like iTV and etc.. Newton is 'Apple-ish' enough...
For the spec side, all I want is a machine running a croped version of Mac OSX that can be used as a GSM cellphone and can surf internet via WiFi.. We already got iPod for music, so we dont need tens of gigabytes of storage.. 4-8gb is fair enough for a device like this..
We should be done with the cheap code-names like iTV and etc.. Newton is 'Apple-ish' enough...
For the spec side, all I want is a machine running a croped version of Mac OSX that can be used as a GSM cellphone and can surf internet via WiFi.. We already got iPod for music, so we dont need tens of gigabytes of storage.. 4-8gb is fair enough for a device like this..
djkny
Sep 15, 06:56 PM
"Announced" on Tuesday, 9/19; ready for shipping in 10-15 days, maybe longer, once all of us C2D geeks spring for this.
Shipping date then will read: on or before 10/21. :eek:
Shipping date then will read: on or before 10/21. :eek:
Hildron101010
Mar 30, 06:13 PM
So I guess that Gold Master rumor was wrong.
Nope, it's not wrong. It will still be released.
Nope, it's not wrong. It will still be released.
bedifferent
Mar 31, 03:58 AM
Sure, I know. It's just plain stupid default-settings if you ask me.
I can't imagine this is a better default setting for new users.
One aspect that always bothered me since Leopard: having a silver dock with light indicators. It makes determining running apps in the dock very difficult. One of the first things I do is change my dock to black glass and add stack overlays:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/ember/4xfOeej6P9j8aNcXnJUt9sTOnXbNNk8l_l.png
I can't imagine this is a better default setting for new users.
One aspect that always bothered me since Leopard: having a silver dock with light indicators. It makes determining running apps in the dock very difficult. One of the first things I do is change my dock to black glass and add stack overlays:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/ember/4xfOeej6P9j8aNcXnJUt9sTOnXbNNk8l_l.png
sineplex
Apr 20, 01:54 AM
How many people think this is some elaborate scheme to get people to think it will come out in the fall, when they might be setting people up for a surprise with the release of iphone 4 -white as the new ip5?
Nobody, as the White Iphone 4 gets released @ end of this month.
Nobody, as the White Iphone 4 gets released @ end of this month.
JAT
Mar 29, 04:13 PM
Secondly, the term "3rd world" and "1st world" is offensive. The proper term is developing and developed world.
Yawn. In 5 years, those terms will be "offensive". Then we'll have to call them "mature" and "growing". Then, 20 years later that will be offensive, and we'll have to call them "service oriented" and "industry oriented". Then, 20 years later that will be offensive, and we'll have to call them "1st world" and "3rd world" again. Get off your PC high horse and deal with life straight on instead of hiding behind semantics.
*note: PC does not always refer to computers.
Yawn. In 5 years, those terms will be "offensive". Then we'll have to call them "mature" and "growing". Then, 20 years later that will be offensive, and we'll have to call them "service oriented" and "industry oriented". Then, 20 years later that will be offensive, and we'll have to call them "1st world" and "3rd world" again. Get off your PC high horse and deal with life straight on instead of hiding behind semantics.
*note: PC does not always refer to computers.
phpmaven
Apr 25, 11:28 AM
+1. My IP is being logged right now most likely. No matter where you go, using any communication device, you can be tracked. If you're that paranoid, get off the grid. Every phone company tracks your location. This for iPhone users is just a log of it on your phone.
I do agree, however, that the consolidated.db file should at least be encrypted if it is to remain on the device. Now any good crook knows all they need is your iphone to find out when best to rob you.
Exactly. I don't know why everybody is all fired up about this. If you aren't a criminal, you have nothing to worry about. If you are, then you are probably bright enough to use a burn phone. :p
I do agree, however, that the consolidated.db file should at least be encrypted if it is to remain on the device. Now any good crook knows all they need is your iphone to find out when best to rob you.
Exactly. I don't know why everybody is all fired up about this. If you aren't a criminal, you have nothing to worry about. If you are, then you are probably bright enough to use a burn phone. :p
chrmjenkins
May 3, 04:10 PM
I get the rules, but I'm so confused about how to actually play the game? How does my team spilt up? How do we communicate on moving together?
You can decide to split up if you wish, and that's a decision between you and whoever you want to split up with. You do all of your communication in the thread.
You can decide to split up if you wish, and that's a decision between you and whoever you want to split up with. You do all of your communication in the thread.
navguy
Dec 12, 05:23 PM
The Bluetooth only works when the iPhone is in the cradle and the ignition is turned on. When you turn off the ignition, the Bluetooth turns off. If you have the iPhone in your pocket the Car Kit Bluetooth will not connect.
I guess I see the connection to the ignition, but only activating when there is a phone in cradle seems like a strange use of bluetooth ... why not use hardwire connection to eliminate any potential for interference ... or open up and allow use as speaker phone in car regardless of phone in cradle
I don't believe Magellan uses bluetooth in this way
I guess I see the connection to the ignition, but only activating when there is a phone in cradle seems like a strange use of bluetooth ... why not use hardwire connection to eliminate any potential for interference ... or open up and allow use as speaker phone in car regardless of phone in cradle
I don't believe Magellan uses bluetooth in this way
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 4, 05:22 AM
Why not? They did it with the iBooks for quite some time...
It is a new game after PPC->x86.
Apple is now competing directly with all other PC manufacturers. You can easily compare the hardware between different computers.
Hence, I am sure Apple will upgrade all MBs to Merom as soon as they have made sure they will get enough Meroms to satisfy the need of MBP.
Besides since both the iBook and 12'' PB seems to have merged into the 13'' MB, it is vital to keep this line updated for demanding users with a need for a smaller form factor.
It is a new game after PPC->x86.
Apple is now competing directly with all other PC manufacturers. You can easily compare the hardware between different computers.
Hence, I am sure Apple will upgrade all MBs to Merom as soon as they have made sure they will get enough Meroms to satisfy the need of MBP.
Besides since both the iBook and 12'' PB seems to have merged into the 13'' MB, it is vital to keep this line updated for demanding users with a need for a smaller form factor.
Chris.L
Nov 6, 12:01 PM
Blah blah blah. Lack of AV software makes Macs very unattractive to business settings.
One of the barriers to integrating Macs into corporate and business environments is the lack of anti-virus tools. Yeah, you can dismiss this as FUD (and maybe there's some truth to that) but the fact remains--someday, one way or another, there will be a Mac OS X virus. I defy you to find one IT dept. in the country that wants to be caught off-guard by that. If you're going to have Macs in a business environment, the IT staff needs to know that they're protected in the event of an OS X virus outbreak. Whether any OS X viruses exist now or not and whether AV companies are trying to sell products with FUD is irrelevant in that context.
Those of you who want to see wider adoption of Macs in business environments ought to be happy to see this kind of thing showing up, regardless of whether you personally need it or not.
Agree completely.
And not just any old AV solution either something with a respected name and centrally managed. Something that will be a requirement for any half decent IT Dept/Corporate. How if I could just get a VMware client for OS X I could ditch my work HP. Oh, and a docking station...
I have had this installed since release day, and I can honestly say it hasn't slowed my MBP at all. I would actually forget it was there at all except for the little icon at the top.
One of the barriers to integrating Macs into corporate and business environments is the lack of anti-virus tools. Yeah, you can dismiss this as FUD (and maybe there's some truth to that) but the fact remains--someday, one way or another, there will be a Mac OS X virus. I defy you to find one IT dept. in the country that wants to be caught off-guard by that. If you're going to have Macs in a business environment, the IT staff needs to know that they're protected in the event of an OS X virus outbreak. Whether any OS X viruses exist now or not and whether AV companies are trying to sell products with FUD is irrelevant in that context.
Those of you who want to see wider adoption of Macs in business environments ought to be happy to see this kind of thing showing up, regardless of whether you personally need it or not.
Agree completely.
And not just any old AV solution either something with a respected name and centrally managed. Something that will be a requirement for any half decent IT Dept/Corporate. How if I could just get a VMware client for OS X I could ditch my work HP. Oh, and a docking station...
I have had this installed since release day, and I can honestly say it hasn't slowed my MBP at all. I would actually forget it was there at all except for the little icon at the top.
swingerofbirch
Jul 30, 01:10 AM
I've been eligible to upgrade my Verizon phone for a while now (new every 2), but have held off because the phones all seem so gimmicky. I like Verizon call quality, but I feel like their phones (all cell phones) are dictated by what the service providers want to be able to sell (Vcast, etc).
So they add cameras and EVDO etc to make more money from the associated services they offer.
The only two feature requests I ever have from a cell phone are: better reception and better battery life.
I have never cared about the other features, because I prefered carrying devices that specialized in those areas, ie a separate digital camera and an iPod.
However, it seems that Apple's major competition going forward will be from cell phone carriers who sell songs (albeit at 3.99/each) directly to cell phones.
The cell phone carriers have the advantage in that a lot of people will be buying these devices whether they want MP3 players or not. You have a cell phone, you've got an MP3 player. And not only that, you don't need a PC to buy music, you do it right from the phone.
Going forward the quality of phones as Mp3 players and cameras and the phones' music store experiences will improve, and Apple obviously realizes this will be their competition (more so I believe than a Wifi enabled Zune).
Perhaps Apple's wild-bet will be a device that is a master of all trades. They could combine iPod with Newton PDA a cell phone and a decent camera (iSight?).
I would imagine that to offer a device like this and not have it hobbled by terrible software and keep it fairly open, Apple will need to create their own wireless network. They do have 9.5 billion.
:)
I think it's where the future is headed. But it's a big bet. But in business it's also a bet not to take a big bet sometimes.
So they add cameras and EVDO etc to make more money from the associated services they offer.
The only two feature requests I ever have from a cell phone are: better reception and better battery life.
I have never cared about the other features, because I prefered carrying devices that specialized in those areas, ie a separate digital camera and an iPod.
However, it seems that Apple's major competition going forward will be from cell phone carriers who sell songs (albeit at 3.99/each) directly to cell phones.
The cell phone carriers have the advantage in that a lot of people will be buying these devices whether they want MP3 players or not. You have a cell phone, you've got an MP3 player. And not only that, you don't need a PC to buy music, you do it right from the phone.
Going forward the quality of phones as Mp3 players and cameras and the phones' music store experiences will improve, and Apple obviously realizes this will be their competition (more so I believe than a Wifi enabled Zune).
Perhaps Apple's wild-bet will be a device that is a master of all trades. They could combine iPod with Newton PDA a cell phone and a decent camera (iSight?).
I would imagine that to offer a device like this and not have it hobbled by terrible software and keep it fairly open, Apple will need to create their own wireless network. They do have 9.5 billion.
:)
I think it's where the future is headed. But it's a big bet. But in business it's also a bet not to take a big bet sometimes.
Piggie
Apr 23, 06:25 PM
Because those screens WILL look better to those normal customers. Text and graphics will look sharper, and clearer.
The iPhone screen, before the retina screen, had a higher resolution than macs. People could not see individual pixels. Despite that, ask any Tom Dick or Harry on the street, and they will be unequivocal that the Retina screen is far better looking than the 3GS screens.
The iPhone, before the current model had a screen res of 320 x 480
The first iMac, made 13 years ago in 1998 (the G3) had a screen res of 1024x768 the same as an iPad2 they are making today.
The first Apple Mac in 1984, 27 years ago had a screen res of 512�342 on a black and white screen.
I don't know where you get your statement than the "iPhone had a higher resolution than macs"
The iPhone screen, before the retina screen, had a higher resolution than macs. People could not see individual pixels. Despite that, ask any Tom Dick or Harry on the street, and they will be unequivocal that the Retina screen is far better looking than the 3GS screens.
The iPhone, before the current model had a screen res of 320 x 480
The first iMac, made 13 years ago in 1998 (the G3) had a screen res of 1024x768 the same as an iPad2 they are making today.
The first Apple Mac in 1984, 27 years ago had a screen res of 512�342 on a black and white screen.
I don't know where you get your statement than the "iPhone had a higher resolution than macs"
Post Title
→Pontiac 389 Engine
Post URL
→http://teropongkota.blogspot.com/2011/05/pontiac-389-engine.html
Visit Pople Tali Kutang for Daily Updated Wedding Dresses Collection
