Sunday, May 8, 2011

lionel messi girlfriend 2008

lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Lionel Messi#39;s girlfriend
  • Lionel Messi#39;s girlfriend



  • CalBoy
    Apr 22, 08:35 PM
    There are arguments and counter-arguments to both camps, which is why I choose to be agnostos. In the face of a dearth of evidence it's more rational to withhold judgment than leap to an extreme position.

    In science when there is a dearth of evidence for something, you fail to reject the null hypothesis (which is that hypothesis x is incorrect).

    If I wanted to make a claim about something, say that two bricks tied together will fall at the same rate as a single brick, I first have to make this my working hypothesis. The null hypothesis is that what I'm asserting is not true (in this case the null is that the bricks will fall at different rates). It's up to me to provide the evidence. If there isn't enough (or any) evidence, we fail to reject the null hypothesis.

    When it comes to religion, it is the theologian who is making the claim. Thus, his working hypothesis is, "God exists." In searching for evidence, however, we come up with nothing. Thus we must fail to reject the null hypothesis, which is, "God does not exist."

    Agnosticism is really the position that the an affirmative statement on the matter of deities is impossible to know. It doesn't have a rational basis in logic or science, thought it might make some people more comfortable with their skepticism.

    Atheism is the position that, based on currently available evidence, there is no basis to consider any deity to be real. This could change as new evidence comes to light, of course. That is a quality you will not find in theism or agnosticism.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Lionel Messi With Girlfriend
  • Lionel Messi With Girlfriend



  • AppleScruff1
    Apr 20, 10:08 PM
    Is that a prerequisite? I have Apple battery charger.

    LMAO! I have an Apple sticker a friend gave me, does that count? :D

    What's wrong with that? I may not own a particular product but like being in X products forums to learn about it.

    I find that it's a great way to learn about products that I'm interested in.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Lionel+messi+2008
  • Lionel+messi+2008



  • rtdunham
    Sep 20, 12:34 PM
    Maybe in the future, Apple teams up with Marantz...and other AV surround reciever manufacturers to build ITV inside their receivers? (like some of them already have ipod dock connectors)...The ITV is built inside the AV receiver. And you can use the remote from your receiver the control the new front row.

    Nice idea. and car makers could have the iTV built in, so kids or passengers in the back seat could stream video to the car's built-in video system (the link could just as easily be wired, but none of today's iPod-ready cars provide for this video-to-dvd player useability, do they?





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. top goalslionelmessi
  • top goalslionelmessi



  • Edge100
    Apr 15, 10:53 AM
    Oh man. Utterly ridiculous. I'm trivializing the issue? No, I'm putting it in a more accurate and less political context. And you call that hate!

    Second, don't drag me into the ridiculous "born gay / chose to be gay" false dichotomy. I swear that gays invented that one just to trick dimwitted social conservatives into parroting it. It's a really poor rendering of Nature vs. Nurture, which is a spectrum and not a binary condition. And it doesn't matter. It's the behavior which is either morally wrong or isn't, so pick your side and argue it. Just don't argue that a behavior is moral because you were "born that way". That opens up a seriously dangerous can of worms.

    You also end up implying that because fat people weren't "born that way", it's ok to mistreat them.

    And then you finish it off with "I don't even care if you don't like homosexual people"... well that's great. I never said I don't like homosexual people. But I guess you didn't quite accuse me of that with that sentence either. I don't care if you hate your mom and puppies either. You don't hate your mom, do you? And if you do, why? Why don't you love your mom?

    Sigh.

    Gay is not a "hip counterculture"; that implies it's a choice, pure and simple. It's a state of being. It's like being 6 feet tall, or having blue eyes, or brown hair. It's simply a characteristic of a person.

    You know what IS a choice? Religion. And look at the lengths we go to to protect the right of every last believer to say and do the most ridiculous, hateful things.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Lionel+messi+girlfriend
  • Lionel+messi+girlfriend



  • ender land
    Apr 23, 10:31 PM
    Frankly, it doesn't take much faith to claim that nothing and no-one stands above nature (i.e. being supernatural).

    ...

    Do you realize the sheer magnitude of this statement?

    If even 0.0000001% of an incredibly lowball estimate as to the number of current Christians in the world (not to mention past Christians or other theistic religions) have legitimately experienced a supernatural event - pick one, doesn't matter which or how large or small it is - this is an incorrect statement.

    Even if 99.9999% of a billion people claiming supernatural events such as religion are lying, that is still a thousand experiences which invalidate your premise.

    Everything we can see is derived from nature.

    Spoken like a true empiricist.

    Where would God come from then?

    I have never understood why this is used as an argument against a god(s). Clearly, something exists now (as an aside, if you disagree with this statement there is absolutely no grounds to say religion is not true either, so I'm going to assume you do agree something does in fact exist, namely the universe). No matter how you believe, either atheism, creationism, flying spagetti monsterism, anything, at some point, there will be the problem that something always existed. Or existed "before." Whether it's God or a singularity point or whatever, all rational beliefs agree upon this point.

    Asking how God existed prior to the known universe is meaningless in terms of invalidating any religion.

    If there are spiritual entities which stand above us humans, they do certainly not stand above these laws. It doesn't make sense, and was never even supposed to make sense to the human mind in the first place (ask any priest about the latter, he will confirm it).


    Simple example: I make some robots. I put them into a world (let's say I put them in a room with no visible or perceptible interior doors/windows/etc). They interact and are reasonably self aware. Their entire world is this room. Gravity is "obvious" to them. Suddenly, I rotate the entire room 90 degrees. They would have a situation where the statement "no spiritual entity.. stand[s] above these laws."

    Clearly this does not necessarily prove god(s). But it does mean your belief as stated above is illogical (unless starting from the assumed premise that no god(s) exist, in which case your faith rests upon this belief).





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Messi did not talked much
  • Messi did not talked much



  • Salacion
    Apr 20, 07:14 PM
    Good for you.

    I'm a former iPhone user.
    The cost difference in an Android was great, and I don't regret it one bit because the experience is far superior FOR ME.

    Live and let live, your iPhone is not a Ferrari.

    After hearing some parts of your mind, you definitely correlate well with your Android device.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Lionel Messi picture (Credit:
  • Lionel Messi picture (Credit:



  • ksz
    Oct 25, 10:46 PM
    I am so there with the cash ready a willing to fly out the window to Apple's account sooner than Apple can say:

    "8-Core Mac Pro Available At the Apple Online Store For Ordering." :)
    If it has hardware RAID and eSATA I'll be ordering mine within seconds of the announcement...well, after checking the price of course.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. lionel messi girlfriend
  • lionel messi girlfriend



  • Dr.Gargoyle
    Sep 20, 01:10 PM
    That's why I'm ripping my DVDs in H.264/AAC instead of the ever-popular DivX/Xvid or any other AVI/Quicktime nightmare. Too many CODECs.
    Hmmm, that makes me wonder if iTunes in a later version will be able to rip DVD's as well as Cd's.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Posted on December 29, 2008 by
  • Posted on December 29, 2008 by



  • jeffgarden
    Mar 18, 05:04 PM
    Sorry, i didn't read every post so this may be repeatative but...


    If you're going to PAY for music to break drm, just buy it at a store or use Kazaa

    OR get napster to go trial, get virtuosa 5.0 to make them mp3's and you're done

    why would you pay for something you don't want





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Leo Messi and Long Time
  • Leo Messi and Long Time



  • edifyingGerbil
    Apr 24, 05:09 PM
    That was a bit harsh, wasn't it? Not even I would go as far as saying that anybody's religion is evil. But it's definitely proves to be incompatible with modern Western values, which we began to see already in 1994 (Salman Rushdie). My only comfort is that those who have contributed to accelerate the conflicts by providing a lousy integration policy, will likely be the first ones to get stoned to death. I'm a male who doesn't drink alcohol nor commit adultery (and pork meat I can live without), so an islamic state wouldn't really be that bad for me to live in... I think...

    Islam is more ideology/politcal movement than a simple religion.

    You're right, if more had been done to integrate immigrants rather than endorse multi-kulti then perhaps we'd see the new generation being less radical than their parents, however (in belgium at least) the children of immigrants, who were born in europe, are MORE radical and devout than their parents. madness...

    Anything that goes against Western Values is evil to me... or at least anathema. I don't like the term evil, it's too christian... as is anathema for that matter.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Lionel Messi Girlfriend
  • Lionel Messi Girlfriend



  • damnyooneek
    Oct 7, 06:14 PM
    its going to happen since its so open and so many brands are putting it into their phones.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Girlfriendwho lionel messi
  • Girlfriendwho lionel messi



  • DavidLeblond
    Mar 18, 03:14 PM
    Although it's an eye opener to know that itunes itself is what wraps the music with DRM. I'd have thought the music was already DRM'd on the server. But I can see why apple chose that route, so that to get DRM'd songs onto an ipod, you would have to use itunes. I bet they never thought someone would bypass the itunes interface (kind of shortsighted if you ask me, this should have been anticipated).

    Actually the reason why it isn't encoded with DRM on the server is that if they did that they would need a copy of every song for every customer they have on the server.

    They don't care how you put songs on the iPod anyway... just that you buy an iPod to put the songs on. iTMS is there to sell iPods after all. Therefore if someone breaks the DRM and allows you to put the downloaded songs on ANY MP3 player it most DEFINATELY will not please Apple. The DRM isn't just there to appease the RIAA, it is there to make sure we keep buying iPods.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. From Messi#39;s doomed vow to
  • From Messi#39;s doomed vow to



  • TuckBodi
    Aug 23, 10:04 AM
    I had maybe one dropped call this whole year. But I don't talk on my phone as much as someone else may.

    I had one an hour ago........and another an hour before that.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Lionel+messi+girlfriend
  • Lionel+messi+girlfriend



  • Cabbit
    Apr 15, 12:47 PM
    Not if you believe HBO! All Roman women were raging lesbians (or at least bi-sexual).
    The hunky men, not so much� *sigh*
    :p

    A married woman of high standing was not allowed, but lower classes were. A man or woman could have a man, woman, child or animal if they wished.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. lionel messi girlfriend break
  • lionel messi girlfriend break



  • darkplanets
    Mar 13, 07:20 PM
    First off, I want to thank you guys for actual intelligent input.

    the second link actually is the "power-delivered-to-the-grid" 300 mw powerplant ... not an testing reactor
    in reality creating the pebbles and preventing the pebbles from cracking was also highly difficult (and costly)... the production facility for them was afaik also involved in some radioactive leakages
    Yeah, I saw that, sorry for not specifying completely-- my argument was mainly referring to the AVR, not the THTR-300 specifically. You're right though, it was connected to the grid... and still a pebble reactor. If you saw my edit I explain what I said earlier a (little) more; as you have noted pebble reactors with TRISO fuel clearly fail to work under the current implementation.


    i have nothing against further testing out reactor types or different fuels if it means finding safer and more efficient ways for nuclear power plants but the combination peddle reactor + thorium has been neither been safe nor economical (especially the pebble part)
    Good! I noted that above in the edit. On a side note, I wonder why they're having such fabrication issues? Properly made TRISO fuel should be able to withstand at least 1600�C, meaning that this is obviously a challenge that will have to be overcome. Overheating/uneven heating of the reactor--per the AVR-- is clearly a reactor design issue. Perhaps better fabrication and core design will result in even safe heating, perhaps not. As of now you're correct, thorium in pebble form is not a good answer.


    also two general problems about the thorium fuel cycle:
    - it actually needs to the requirement of having a full scale fuel recyling facility which so far few countries posess, of which all were in involved in major radioactive leakages and exactly none are operating economically
    - Nulcear non profileration contract issues: the 'cycle' involves stuff like plutonium and uranium usable for nuclear weapons being produced or used: not exactly something the world needs more
    I relate operating economically with good design, but you are entirely correct about the first point-- it is a current sticking point. Perhaps further development will yield better results. As per the non proliferation bit... sadly not everyone can be trusted with nuclear weapons, although in this day and age I think producing one is far simpler than in years prior-- again another contention point. With the global scene the way it is now only those countries with access to these materials would be able to support a thorium fuel cycle.


    perhaps a safer thorium reactor can be constructed but using it in actually power production is still problematic
    perhaps MSR can solve the problems but that technology has yet to prove it's full scale usability especially if the high temperatures can be handled or if they have a massive impact on reliability on large scale reactors
    it might take decades to develop such a large scale reactor at which point cost has to come into play wether it is useful to invest dozens of (taxpayer) billions into such a project
    Yes, economically there are a lot of 'ifs' and upfront cost for development, so it really does become a question of cost versus gain... the problem here is that this isn't something easily determined. Furthermore, though a potential cash sink, the technology and development put into the project could be helpful towards future advances, even if the project were to fail. Sadly it's a game of maybe's and ifs, since you're in essence trying to predict the unknown.


    i'm just saying that sometimes governmental money might perhaps better be spent elsewhere
    Very possible, but as I said, it's hard to say. I do respect your opinion, however.

    And yet, government is ultimately the main source of information about nuclear power. Most atomic scientists work for the government. Almost all nuclear power plants are government funded and operated. Whatever data we employ in debates can usually be traced back to government scientists and engineers.
    Yes, quite true. We could get ourselves into a catch-22 with this; the validity of scientific data versus public interest and political motivation is always in tension, especially when the government has interests in both. Perhaps a fair amount of skepticism with personal knowledge and interpretation serves best.


    Who's to say how much energy we need? And what do we really 'need' as opposed to 'want'? What people 'need' and what they 'want' are often two different things. I think it's time for a paradigm shift in the way we live. While you're right about want vs need, you yourself say it all-- how can we have a paradigm shift when we don't really know what we want OR need? It's hard to determine exactly what we "need" in this ever electronic world-- are you advocating the use of less technology? What do you define as our "need"? How does anyone define what someone "needs"? Additionally, there's the undoubted truth that you're always going to need more in the future; as populations increase the "need" will increase, technological advancements notwithstanding. With that I mind I would rather levy the idea that we should always be producing more than our "need" or want for that matter, since we need to be future looking. Additionally, cheaper energy undoubtedly has benefits for all. I'm curious as to how you can advocate a paradigm shift when so many things are reliant upon electricity as is, especially when you're trying to base usage on a nearly unquantifiable value.


    Whenever I hear/read the phrase "there are no alternatives" I reach for my revolver.
    Violence solves nothing. If you had read one of my following posts (as you should now do), you'd have saw that I mentioned geothermal and hydroelectric. However, since you seem to be so high and mighty with your aggressive ways-- what alternatives do you propose exactly? What makes you correct over someone else?


    Wow, I don't even know where to start with this. There are literally hundreds of nuclear incidents all over the world each year, everything from radiation therapy overexposure and accidents, to Naval reactor accidents, military testing accidents, and power plant leaks, accidents and incidents, transportation accidents, etc. It's difficult to get reliable numbers or accurate data since corruption of the source data is well known, widespread and notorious (see the above discussion regarding government information). It's true that in terms of sheer numbers of deaths, some other energy technologies are higher risk (coal comes to mind), but that fact alone in no way makes nuclear energy "actually quite safe."
    I never denied that these events regularly happen, however as you say yourself, some other energy technologies are higher risk. Therefore that makes nuclear energy "actually quite safe" relative to some other options. There is no such thing as absolute safety, just like there is no such thing as absolute certainty-- only relatives to other quantifiable data. That would therefore support my assertion, no?


    Next, how do you presume to know where most people get their education about nuclear power from? Greenpeace is merely citing research from scientific journals, they do not employ said scientists. Perhaps your beef is actually with the scientists they quote.
    My "beef" is both with poor publishing standards as well as Greenpeace itself... citing research that supports your cause, especially if you know it's flawed data, and then waving it upon a banner on a pedestal is worse than the initial publishing of falsified or modified data. If you do any scientific work you should know not to trust most "groundbreaking" publications-- many of them are riddled with flaws, loopholes, or broad interpretation and assumptions not equally backed by actual data. I don't presume to know where most people get their education about nuclear power from, I presume that most don't know anything about nuclear power. If I walked down the street and asked an average layman about doping and neutron absoprtion, I don't think many would have a clue about what I was talking about. Conversely, if I asked them about the cons of nuclear power, I bet they would be all too willing to provide many points of contention, despite not knowing what they are talking about.


    Finally, Germany is concerned for good reasons, since their plants share many design features with Russian reactors. The best, safest option is obvious: abandon nuclear energy. Safest, yes. Best; how can you even make this assumption given all of the factors at play? As far as I'm aware, the German graphite moderated reactors still in use all have a containment vessel, unlike the Russians. Furthermore, Russian incidents were caused by human error-- in the case of Chernobyl, being impatient. It's clear that you're anti-nuclear, which is fine, but are you going to reach for a gun on this one too? How are you going to cover the stop-gap in power production from these plants? What's your desired and feasible pipeline for power production in Germany? I'm rather curious to know.



    In terms of property destruction, and immediate lives lost, yes. Mortality and morbidity? Too early to tell....so far at least 15 people have already been hospitalized with acute radiation poisoning:
    http://story.torontotelegraph.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/2411cd3571b4f088/id/755016/cs/1/
    All of them being within immediate contact of the plant. It's similar to those who died at Chernobyl. The projected causalities and impairments is hard to predict as is... given the host of other factors present in human health you can really only correlate, not causate. It's rather relative. Unless you're going to sequence their genome and epigenome, then pull out all cancer related elements, and then provide a detailed breakdown of all elements proving that none were in play towards some person getting cancer, linking incidental radiation exposure with negative health effects is hard to do. This is the reason why we have at least three different models: linear no threshold, linear adjustment factor, and logarithmic.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Lionel Messi has finished
  • Lionel Messi has finished



  • DeepDish
    Aug 29, 11:16 AM
    Hmm. Gut feeling's all very well, but Apple obviously do a great job of marketing themselves as a friendly green company and we may go round believing that without evidence, and it looks as if the figures don't back them up.


    danielwsmithee is right.

    Dell boxes have a shorter life span and need to be replaced more often. Dell sells a lot more CRTs than Apple does.

    At work, we never throw out a mac. But the pc boxes get replaced often.

    This report is about getting "big press"





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. LIONEL MESSI GIRLFRIEND KISS
  • LIONEL MESSI GIRLFRIEND KISS



  • truz
    Jul 7, 06:14 PM
    And I will never set foot in an Apple store again. They are the definition of needless, bulls**t arrogance. If my Macbook Pro, either Macbook, iMac, iPad or any of the 5 iPhones I own ever need serviced, I'll call and ask them to send a box rather than deal with that mall trash again.


    I agree. I rather have a box sent out then step into a store. I'm 45 minutes away from an Apple Store and a boat load of traffic in the Orlando area.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Lionel Messi#39;s girlfriend
  • Lionel Messi#39;s girlfriend



  • strabes
    Apr 20, 07:09 PM
    Please explain to me how I am experiencing a "degraded" experience on my current Android phone? I can do everything your iPhone can, plus tether at no additional cost and download any song I want for free.

    The experience is degraded because Android lacks the Apple-integrated experience that we care about. Saying Android can do anything iPhone can do is like saying that both an Hyundai Accent and a Ferrari will get you from A to B. Yes, both can do this, but it's the experience that matters. The point isn't the fact that both have apps and both can browse the internet. Most people don't care about overclocking their phones or installing custom ROMs or "software freedom," whatever that means.

    I'm a former two-year Android user. The transition to iPhone 4 was great.





    lionel messi girlfriend 2008. Lionel+messi+girlfriend+
  • Lionel+messi+girlfriend+



  • matticus008
    Mar 20, 03:27 PM
    What a silly thought. Of course it's not free. I'm saying that it is just as unethical for Apple to ignore Linux as it is for DVD Jon to try and play music on Linux. We are not talking about what is technically wrong here. After all, every country has a different set of laws. We are talking about what is the right thing to do. It would hardly be a burden for Apple to port iTunes and open up Airport drivers.

    The main concern of mine is Apple's stubborn refusal to adapt to simple standards. They haven't kept up with GNU standards in GCC, they won't port Quicktime or iTunes to Linux, they won't make open drivers available for Airport cards. Apple is losing quite a few fans. I was a huge Apple fan for a long time (3/4 of my life). Now, I am losing respect for Apple's ridiculous money-making stubborness.

    And don't try and argue that Mac OS X is just the same as linux. It isn't.

    It is NOT unethical to keep drivers for your own hardware and distribute them how you choose. Apple has an obligation to keep up with their own hardware and software. They have no moral or legal obligation to make drivers for any OS they don't want to. Is it frustrating? Yes, if you want to run Linux on your PowerBook. But in that situation, you have to know that Linux doesn't have mainstream support for tons of hardware, and nothing is stopping you from writing your own driver, except a lack of knowledge or time on how to do so. If you need assistance or technical information, join Apple's Developer program. That's exactly why it exists, and why I participate. If they don't want to port their software to another platform, they don't have to.

    You might say that iTunes should be on Linux, and that it will make more money for Apple, so it's a good idea. It doesn't mean that someone violating the TOS is an ethical action. DVD Jon might want his iTunes on Linux, but he has no right to it. Like I've said previously, he can just as easily import the audio from CDs into Linux and stream purchased music over his network from a Windows or Mac machine with iTunes legally installed. Or, as it turns out, you can buy CrossoverOffice (or modify Wine yourself to avoid having to pay for it) and install iTunes that way. Those are legal alternatives to accomplishing what you want, and that's that.

    Doing something you are specifically not supposed to do is NOT the same as not doing something you could do, but don't have to do.





    blue22
    Apr 12, 11:00 PM
    Steve Jobs said the new version would be "awesome," well I disagree. He was completely wrong... IT IS FREAKIN' ASTOUNDING! Bravo Apple!

    +1

    Yes, this is a great update for FCP. And the $299 price tag makes it that much more "astounding" so I don't know why some people here are bemoaning this release.





    NathanMuir
    Mar 24, 07:26 PM
    When your moral beliefs or beliefs about human nature are bigoted and wrong, yes, we will attack you. Get used to it because that is the direction the world is moving, like it or not.

    So they can't do it to you, but you can do it to them?

    Remind me how that makes one different from them?

    That's hypocritical at best. :rolleyes:





    chirpie
    Apr 13, 11:01 AM
    I don't get the "imovie pro" comments. From the announcement, does it look like functionality is removed? What specifically would make this new version less pro than the previous.



    And why are you assuming that FC doesn't include all that functionality, or that Color is no longer included? They didn't talk about the rest of the suite, but for a software package two months from release, it seems just as likely that the rest of the suite is still there but they just didn't want to talk about them yet. Or did they actually say that it's just one app now instead of a suite?

    As a Logic user, I'm very interested to see if Soundtrack Pro is updated. It has a ton of potential but it has always been in horrible shape. Apple could kill it (and just beef up the audio in FC, but that seems like a bad strategy) or they could finally give it the attention it needs and finally make it an audio post app that can compete with Pro Tools. Hopefully Apple will have more info soon, will STP get an update, and if so will that update be available to Logic users (or will we have to wait until Logic X ships)?

    In Cory's defense, he's presenting this as large concern that hasn't been addressed yet, not that he's ready to jump ship on the idea of FCP X.

    And I share the concern. There's a LOT of unanswered questions around the suite. If Apple said "we're killing the rest of the suite" then I'd be p*ssed, but that doesn't sound likely at all.

    So now we're left to wait and see what other details emerge.

    A recap of a few things that made me happy... (from Larry's blog)

    ---------
    * Rendering is now in the background and much faster because it harnesses the power of the GPU.
    * The 4 GB memory limit is gone – FCP will use as much RAM as you have installed on your system.
    * FCP X now uses all the processors on your system, not just one and a half.

    In addition, a flock of new features were added:
    * It supports editing video image sizes from standard definition up to 4K.
    * It uses fewer tools from the Tool palette (which is no longer there, by the way) by making the cursor smarter. WHERE you click something determines WHAT you can do with it.
    * A lot of existing features are jazzed up (linking and grouping are replaced by the much more elegant Clip Connection and Compound Clips)
    * While new features like the magnetic timeline, permanent audio sync and auto-metadata generation are flat-out stunning.

    -------------

    And I for one LIKE the new UI. I was doing a favor for an aunt and was editing her son's graduation video and elected to do it in iMovie even though I have FCS3 and obviously while I didn't have all the functionality I was used too, I had plenty of moments where I was thinking "This part would have taken forever in FCP" or "I wish FCP was this slick looking."

    This PREVIEW is a large step in the right direction. Let's see where things go from here.





    TwinCities Dan
    Apr 8, 10:38 PM
    Apple will buy Nintendo eventually.

    It's over for Nintendo.

    Get ready for the iwii

    That is an interesting idea, but Nintendo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo) has survived 122 years of business... ;)





    Keebler
    Apr 12, 11:11 PM
    i'm liking the looks so far. being able to make my simple edits while importing more tapes is a huge time saver, let alone having the ability to render in the background as well.

    unless i missed it, they never mentioned anything about the exporting capabilities which is understandable given it's an editing tool.

    BUT, seeing the re-org and new features, it gives me hope that a similar reboot of compressor for exporting is on the horizon (ie. fully utilizing all cores and 64 bit mode :)

    I don't do much in the way of full bore editing. i transfer people's home movies on reel and tape so the edits are usually basic in nature by removing footage or adding a title. The changes will help me without a doubt.

    I do agree with the notion that no software makes an editor better. I would say it's the creativity of choosing the right angles, the timing of shots, a feel for what the director is after, capturing the right moments etc....

    FCPX looks like it will help those editors achieve what they want faster and more efficiently. kudos to that! :)



    Total Pageviews