political crap

[whfsdude]

Sounds like Fox news :D

[serpicolugnut]

Sounds like Fox news

Actually, sounds like CNN. Remember, when Apple launched the G5, CNN ran a story with one of the rumor sites renderings of the machine which turned out to be wrong...and this was DAYS after the release, so the G5 photos were right on Apples site for downloading...

If you're going to slam FoxNews, at least have some examples ready....

Jeeesh...

[DamnDJ]

Originally posted by serpicolugnut


If you're going to slam FoxNews, at least have some examples ready....

Jeeesh...

Geraldo Rivera?

[Powerbook G5]

I'm sure the Fox News comment was just a joke... But on topic, I doubt this as much as I doubt updated PowerBooks being released this week...

[MrMacMan]

Wow this guy know nothing about panther...

Is it more 'compatible' with windows... yes, it is x86 compatible... no.

There are features that help it interact with the windows world, but it doesn't allow you to run windows programs...

Maybe that will come in 10.4 (ha)...


Originally posted by serpicolugnut

If you're going to slam FoxNews, at least have some examples ready....

Jeeesh...
Thats more of a political Disc... But really even after Bush stated 'that the 16 words' were false Fox News went and said they were true and they Believed what he originally said... yeah, false.


That story... I can't believe they even have people who don't research their comments properly.

[fixyourthinking]

Sounds like Fox News

then posted by mdavis
rofl totally

Fox is the ONLY fair reporting channel. Where do they get facts wrong? What a troll.... I sure wish they had moderation on these forums.

To be on point ... the article is misinterpretting the network interoperability Panther will have. Supposedly Panther will integrate seamlessly into NT and Windows networks using a different abstraction of TCP/IP/Rendezvous Hybrid and will finally drop ALL Appletalk code. Developers at WWDC were praising this - in particular Thursby and even Microsoft.

[chmorley]

Originally posted by Sol
...it is a stated fact that the new Office packages will come with Virtual PC...Just to clarify, this is not going to be the standard Office package. It has been talked about as a "Pro" package that might cost $100 more than the base package of Office.

As for Fox "News"...

Whether you support them or not, read this article (http://www.fair.org/extra/0205/oh_really.html) on O'Reilly. By simply reporting statements that O'Reilly has made and then comparing them with actual facts, it makes for amusing reading.

Fox is entertaining right up to the point where people start believing they are a good source for facts--then they start to get a bit scary.

Chris

[j33pd0g]

Originally posted by serpicolugnut
Actually, sounds like CNN. Remember, when Apple launched the G5, CNN ran a story with one of the rumor sites renderings of the machine which turned out to be wrong...and this was DAYS after the release, so the G5 photos were right on Apples site for downloading...

If you're going to slam FoxNews, at least have some examples ready....

Jeeesh...

Or perhaps it reads like a New York Times article.

[haaz]

...their rabid support Bush's of false grounds for invading Iraq comes to mind, but that's not *tech* news...

[Foocha]

As a point of interest, Fox News has been banned in the UK for "biased" reporting.

Unlike you guys in the US, we have not concept of free speach here, it seems.

[chicagdan]

Originally posted by adzoox
Fox is the ONLY fair reporting channel. Where do they get facts wrong? What a troll.... I sure wish they had moderation on these forums.


Okay, I'll bite ... here's six weeks of Fox War lies during the Iraq War. I could go on for about 10 more pages, but I don't want to hog the site with Fox lies ... Arn, feel free to move this post to a more appropriate place on the board.

March 14:_ On The Fox Report anchor Shepard Smith reports that Saddam is planning to use flood water as a weapon by blowing up dams and causing severe flood damage.

March 19:_ Fox anchor Shepard Smith reports that Iraqis are planning to detonate large stores of napalm buried deep below the earth to scorch coalition forces. _ Fox Military Analyst Major Bob Bevelacqua states that coalition forces will drop a MOAB on Saddam's bunker and give him the "Mother of All Sunburns."_

March 23: The network begins 2 days of unequivocal assertions that a 100-acre facility discovered by coalition forces at An Najaf is a chemical weapons plant. _ Much is made about the fact that it was booby trapped._ A former UN weapons inspector interviewed on camera over the phone downplays the WMD allegations and says that booby-trapping is common._ His points are ignored as unequivocal charges of a chemical weapons facility are made on Fox for yet another day (March 24)._ Only weeks later is it briefly conceded that the chemicals definitively detected at the facility were pesticides.

March 28:_ Repeated assertions by Fox News anchors of a red ring around Baghdad in which Republican Guard forces were planning to use chemical weapons on coalition forces._ A Fox "Breaking News" flash reports that Iraqi soldiers were seen by coalition forces moving 55-gallon drums almost certainly containing chemical agents.

April 7:_ Fox, echoing NPR, reports that U.S. forces near Baghdad have discovered a weapons cache of 20 medium-range missiles containing sarin and mustard gas. _ Initial tests show that the deadly chemicals are not "trace elements."

April 10:_ Fox "Breaking News" report of weapons-grade plutonium found at Al Tuwaitha.

April 10 (3 p.m. EDT: Reporter Rick Leventhal)_ Fox "Breaking News" report:_ A mobile bioweapons lab is found._Video of a tiny tan truck—about the size of the smallest truck that U-Haul rents – which had its cargo bed and fuel tank shot up with bullets after a looter tried to drive it away. Repeated assertions that this is most definitely a "bioweapons" lab._A graphic sequence is shown of a large Winnebago-type vehicle that is massive compared to the tiny truck found._ The irony of this escapes the Fox newscasters and defense "experts."_

April 7:_ Repeated ominous footage of barrels buried in a below-ground shed near Karbala. _The implication is that the Iraqi landscape is replete with these types of shelters, all of them brimming with evidence of chemical weapons._ [These were revealed to be agricultural chemicals as well.]

April 15:_ Fox analyst Mansoor Ijaz claims that the top 55 Iraqi leaders (along with the whole stash of chemical and biological WMDs they have taken with them) are now living it up in Latakia, Syria._ [This is the same 55 that appeared on the deck of cards and is still being captured – far from all living it up in Syria.] _

April 16:_ Fred Barnes on Special Report with Brit Hume blames the looting of the Iraqi National Museum on the museum staff._

[bobindashadows]

Originally posted by adzoox
Fox is the ONLY fair reporting channel. Where do they get facts wrong? What a troll.... I sure wish they had moderation on these forums.

Just because somebody is a liberal, doesn't make them a troll. You can't censor someone just because they don't agree with you.

I think the same, but truth be told, I'd say at least 90% of the Mac users I've ever met (on this board, and outside of it) are all liberals. Liberals don't like to hear the conservative point of view. Conservatives don't like to hear the Liberal point of view. However, what most on both sides never seem to realize is that you have to at least hear the other side to justify your own position. On a completely unrelated side note, has anyone read the book Treason?

Oh - and the British government still stands behind their intelligence, whether we think its wrong or not. Bush screwed up by not making a press conference much earlier, but he still stands behind his intelligence. And Bill Clinton, the God of all men (as long as womanizing is a commandment), even says that everyone is making a far bigger deal out of this than they should.

As for this: It's a mistake. I don't know how much it would undercut new software for the Mac... well actually it would, IMO. I was going to make an analogy to VPC, but i remembered that VPC costs a bit of money. Having VPC functionality built into the system with no extra cost could prove disastrous. Doesn't this rumor show up like once a month, just like the desktop threads?

Originally posted by Foocha
As a point of interest, Fox News has been banned in the UK for "biased" reporting.

Unlike you guys in the US, we have not concept of free speach here, it seems.

Wow... that's pretty surprising. I wasn't sure if you were being sarcastic about how you don't have the concept of free speech, so I won't comment on that. I do know that France has banned the word "e-mail", because they don't want the evil American culture invading. And yes, that was a slight exaggeration - I know some of you can't take a joke. (or recognize sarcasm)

[wilco]

Originally posted by bobindashadows
Liberals don't like to hear the conservative point of view. Conservatives don't like to hear the Liberal point of view.
Great insight. Watching Fox "News" doesn't necessarily mean someone's "conservative" -- but it's a pretty good indication that the person is stupid. Referencing Ann Coulter? Why not throw in Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson too?

[bobindashadows]

Originally posted by wilco
Great insight. Watching Fox "News" doesn't necessarily mean someone's "conservative" -- but it's a pretty good indication that the person is stupid.

And you better be careful - that's a way to get yourself in trouble w/ the Mod-squad. Calling people stupid isn't very nice, and it almost got me banned once.

Referencing Ann Coulter? Why not throw in Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson too?

I threw that in as an unrelated side note ;-) Nah, but it's worth the read anyway, even if you don't want to listen to what she says. I had trouble researching a few of her points however - there's a reference to "Vladimir Lenin's glass of water theory", which she references to a book published in 1990. However, when I looked it up, I only found socialist web sites saying he hated the theory (such as www.greenleft.org.au), and so I wasn't able to tell if she was wrong there or not. A friend of mine has a textbook saying the same - however, it also says that Joe McCarthy claimed to have 207 names of communists. *lifts his grain of salt with the assistance of professional body builders, then puts it on the table. The table breaks.*

[serpicolugnut]

Great insight. Watching Fox "News" doesn't necessarily mean someone's "conservative" -- but it's a pretty good indication that the person is stupid.

Of course, we all should watch CNN, the network who brought us "Operation Tailwind". I'll take Geraldos mistakes over Peter Arnetts any day of the week.

Who cares if Ann Coulter or Limbaugh is referenced... If they do actual RESEARCH for a story, then their report is just as valid David Corn or Maureen Dowd (actually Dowd does no research... She just makes half truth statements and never has to back them up with retractions when proven wrong)....

As for all of your supposed "points" about Fox News... Those were stories that were reported during the war by ALL major news outlets. AP and Reuters were the source for most of those, and CNN, MSNBC et al reported them with the caveat "Saddam might try to do x, y, z". Maybe you don't understand the meaning of the word "might" (since libs also have trouble with the meaning of the word "is"), so I guess we should cut you a little slack.

[bobindashadows]

Originally posted by serpicolugnut


As for all of your supposed "points" about Fox News... Those were stories that were reported during the war by ALL major news outlets. AP and Reuters were the source for most of those, and CNN, MSNBC et al reported them with the caveat "Saddam might try to do x, y, z". Maybe you don't understand the meaning of the word "might" (since libs also have trouble with the meaning of the word "is"), so I guess we should cut you a little slack.

Yeah... mostly true. And in fact, assuming I followed the same Iraqi War on Fox News you did, nearly all of those were a) reported (thereby adding a lack of incredibility - "reports" are just that, "reports")
and
b) reported as possibly being something. Nearly all of those were reported on other stations - though with different commentary. CNN: "Nope, I don't believe it. I hate republicans." "Me too. THey're so stupid!" "hehe" "hehehe".

Nah, that's a stretch. But Fox (and the other stations) were just trying to show everything going on. You may notice, that Fox also reports when soldiers die every other day in Iraq, even though it would be in their best interest not to. THey could say "nope, a soldier hasn't died in two months! Isn't GWB great?", but they don't.

[Foocha]

Off topic but...

In the UK we don't have the equivalent of the US constitution, and there is no legal concept of the right to free speach.

News International, owners of Fox News, own a satellite service in the UK called Sky Digital. UK broadcasting legislation currently requires that TV news is free from policial bias - it's part of a concept of "public service" broadcasting that is very popular here. News International has had its application for a broadcasting license for Fox News rejected.

Ironically, most Brits have some idea that their country is the mother of all democracies.

I've not had a chance to see Fox News - I doubt I would want to watch it, but that should be my choice, not the UK governments!

[bobindashadows]

Originally posted by Foocha
Off topic but...

In the UK we don't have the equivalent of the US constitution, and there is no legal concept of the right to free speach.

News International, owners of Fox News, own a satellite service in the UK called Sky Digital. UK broadcasting legislation currently requires that TV news is free from policial bias - it's part of a concept of "public service" broadcasting that is very popular here. News International has had its application for a broadcasting license for Fox News rejected.

Ironically, most Brits have some idea that their country is the mother of all democracies.

I've not had a chance to see Fox News - I doubt I would want to watch it, but that should be my choice, not the UK governments!

That's really interesting, I never knew that about Great Britain. I'm not going to say it's "worse" or "fascist" or anything, because you have to examine a culture from within the culture... one thing I've wondered about is this: I've never watched the BBC, mainly due to the lack of availability here (unless I got satellite or digital cable, because i have these piles of money i don't know what to do with), but I always got the impression that it was slanted towards the left. Is that true?

I'm interested in that presentation that was mentioned a few posts back by SpamJunkie. Did he say what apps they were?

Originally posted by Nebrie
Uh, Wine Is Not an Emulator. That's what it stands for. It is impossible for Macs to ever use Wine.

The impression I got from Wine and WineX (the subscription service?), is that it translates Win API calls to the appropriate UNIX/Linux ones, so that the code does what it would were it on a Windows box. But someone said that there's a Wine for OS X? I doubt it would run as well, since it would also have to translate x86 to PPC, like VPC does. An emulator makes it possible to run an instruction set that the computer is not based on (there are 68K emulators for Windows, but they require you have the physical ROM and stuff), such as VPC which runs the x86 instruction set on Macs.

[mmmbop]

Originally posted by Foocha
Off topic but...

I've not had a chance to see Fox News - I doubt I would want to watch it, but that should be my choice, not the UK governments!

It's not that UK broadcasters can't report bias, they are, however, obliged to be fair in their reporting by showing the 'other' viewpoint as well, so all arguments and opinions about the subject are aired and viewers are not shown a one-sided picture.

Fox News seems to blur the distinction (if there is any) between what is reporting and what is comment/opinion. In this country, Sky News does an excellent job at balanced reporting, but shifts the emphasis to comment in it's early evening talkshows: one show is presented by Richard Littlejohn, a right-wing commentator, followed later in the week by 3-D, hosted by three female presenters. Completely different views on everthing (right/left, male/female, etc.), but that way they can challenge each others' views and extend the arguments. And, so the theory goes, no viewpoint is lost and news reporting/opinion can be balanced.

Incidentally, Fox News can broadcast in this country (UK) if it so wishes. Fox was banned because it's registered office for broadcasting in Europe is in London, and so fell foul of UK regulations on editorial bias. If it were to move to France where the laws are not so stringent on ensuring balance, they could rebroadcast by satellite back into Britain, and be protected by EU law which overrides the regulatroy powers of the UK. EU law says it's cool to be biased (who would've thought?!). But that would mean moving to France... not sure how Fox News would feel about that!

Sincere apologies for being completely off-topic. Er, I rated this new item negative, if anyone's interested...

MARK

[bobindashadows]

Originally posted by mmmbop
It's not that UK broadcasters can't report bias, they are, however, obliged to be fair in their reporting by showing the 'other' viewpoint as well, so all arguments and opinions about the subject are aired and viewers are not shown a one-sided picture.

Fox News seems to blur the distinction (if there is any) between what is reporting and what is comment/opinion. In this country, Sky News does an excellent job at balanced reporting, but shifts the emphasis to comment in it's early evening talkshows: one show is presented by Richard Littlejohn, a right-wing commentator, followed later in the week by 3-D, hosted by three female presenters. Completely different views on everthing (right/left, male/female, etc.), but that way they can challenge each others' views and extend the arguments. And, so the theory goes, no viewpoint is lost and news reporting/opinion can be balanced.

Incidentally, Fox News can broadcast in this country (UK) if it so wishes. Fox was banned because it's registered office for broadcasting in Europe is in London, and so fell foul of UK regulations on editorial bias. If it were to move to France where the laws are not so stringent on ensuring balance, they could rebroadcast by satellite back into Britain, and be protected by EU law which overrides the regulatroy powers of the UK. EU law says it's cool to be biased (who would've thought?!). But that would mean moving to France... not sure how Fox News would feel about that!

Sincere apologies for being completely off-topic. Er, I rated this new item negative, if anyone's interested...

MARK

That's pretty interesting. Yeah, I don't think they'd be cool with moving to France. Bill O'Reilly would want to kill himself every time he had to dub over (forgive the terrible spelling - I take Spanish, not French) "courier electronique" at the end of his show.