KingYaba
Mar 3, 09:38 PM
I heard somewhere that federal employees are not able to collectively bargain for their benefits package. If this is true, why are recent states' attempts to restrict unionized bargaining seen as being so draconian, and why isn't there an outcry to give federal employees the same "rights"?
The outcry, in this case, is the jail sentencing for striking.
The outcry, in this case, is the jail sentencing for striking.
mcmadhatter
Oct 17, 09:46 AM
I'm not sure about what you're saying here, because content producers will still be having to supply the same film in two different formats.
No they won't they can produce their film in whatever format they like because all players would be dual format so it wouldn't matter, they wouldn't even need those fancy hybrid discs
They'll likely drop the less popular format, and thus, we'll have a winner. This could happen though it is unlikely with dual format drives
DVD +/- is a writing thing. It's not the same, because people don't care where they get their blank discs from as much.
When it was going on it was a big thing, because a lot of dvd Players would only Play one type of disc so if you recorded to + and your friend had - they would not be able to play it
More simply, I'm curious of who out there needs to burn 30 to 50 GB chunks of data, too large for a dual layer DVD to hold, and why.
I do , I have 140Gb of Photos from my DSLR (and previous digital cameras) putting this on 3 discs rather than 40 discs would be great
I also have 28Gb of music, backing up form itunes to 1 disc rather than 8 would also be useful
External drives are very easy to break beyond repair with osx (3 different NEW external drives, 3 different disk manufacturers disks, and the longest they lasted without dying so badly they needed an RMA was 72 hours) and dvd blueray etc discs take up less space, and you have the possibility of having 3-4 copies.
No they won't they can produce their film in whatever format they like because all players would be dual format so it wouldn't matter, they wouldn't even need those fancy hybrid discs
They'll likely drop the less popular format, and thus, we'll have a winner. This could happen though it is unlikely with dual format drives
DVD +/- is a writing thing. It's not the same, because people don't care where they get their blank discs from as much.
When it was going on it was a big thing, because a lot of dvd Players would only Play one type of disc so if you recorded to + and your friend had - they would not be able to play it
More simply, I'm curious of who out there needs to burn 30 to 50 GB chunks of data, too large for a dual layer DVD to hold, and why.
I do , I have 140Gb of Photos from my DSLR (and previous digital cameras) putting this on 3 discs rather than 40 discs would be great
I also have 28Gb of music, backing up form itunes to 1 disc rather than 8 would also be useful
External drives are very easy to break beyond repair with osx (3 different NEW external drives, 3 different disk manufacturers disks, and the longest they lasted without dying so badly they needed an RMA was 72 hours) and dvd blueray etc discs take up less space, and you have the possibility of having 3-4 copies.
Evmanw
Apr 22, 01:11 PM
Just to make a point of how stupid this whole thing is I voted every one of Arn's posts negative.:)
And you are why this system won't work.
I do like the system though. Just hours before the buttons were added, I was wishing there was a like button because a post was really helpful. ;)
And you are why this system won't work.
I do like the system though. Just hours before the buttons were added, I was wishing there was a like button because a post was really helpful. ;)
leekohler
May 6, 10:09 AM
I believe this might LITERALLY be the first time I've ever read something from Lee, been impressed with it's depth, and not been saddened by the complete opacity of his partisan blinders.
Very well said, sir. I agree, 100%
Funny, you could really use this advice more than anyone else here.
I would take that as a compliment, but it was just another backhanded insult.
Here's a little knowledge. Try to empower yourself with it.
I've shot guns.
And yet ... somehow ... I'm not bewitched by the thrill of firearms.
I know. How is that even possible? :eek:
Well, good for you. Maybe other people do enjoy them. Different strokes, dude. I tried marijuana, and wasn't "bewitched" by that thrill either. That doesn't mean I don't think other people should not be able to use it.
Very well said, sir. I agree, 100%
Funny, you could really use this advice more than anyone else here.
I would take that as a compliment, but it was just another backhanded insult.
Here's a little knowledge. Try to empower yourself with it.
I've shot guns.
And yet ... somehow ... I'm not bewitched by the thrill of firearms.
I know. How is that even possible? :eek:
Well, good for you. Maybe other people do enjoy them. Different strokes, dude. I tried marijuana, and wasn't "bewitched" by that thrill either. That doesn't mean I don't think other people should not be able to use it.
more...
eawmp1
Apr 12, 06:37 PM
Clip has absolutely no context, so hard to tell if reasonable. Did she trip the metal detectors? Did something show on body scan? Did mom refuse body scan? Were they acting suspicious?
I agree the current screening policies are ridiculous. I'll play devil's advocate. Drugs have been smuggled on children. Why couldn't bombs be stashed on them?
I agree the current screening policies are ridiculous. I'll play devil's advocate. Drugs have been smuggled on children. Why couldn't bombs be stashed on them?
idunn
Mar 25, 03:06 PM
'Consequently, Apple has chosen to position the next step in the evolution of Mac OS X as "Back to the Mac", an effort to bring some of the most popular features of iOS to the Mac platform for the first time while retaining the familiarity, flexibility, and horsepower of Mac OS X.'
- per 'Macrumors'
;) A lot of fantastic change in but 10 years. In looking back, I'm somewhat amazed at the evolution of Apple. Happy Birthday.
If still basically loyal to Apple, I would note, in hopefully helping the brand, certain lapses such as apparently quality control in some aspects of the new iPad2. Other areas as well. Just something to be mindful of, and with luck smoothed out soon.
As for OS X, I've wondered of late if the natural progression would not be a merging of iOS and OS X into one. Although it certainly should not be a merger in one direction only. Some of the discussions on the iPad forum concern those frustrated with the limitations of iOS for real work, such as lack of a real file system. Some have postulated, and surely rightly so, that the iPad is still a device best used in conjunction with something running OS X. The same would hold true for users of the iPhone, as likely very few who consider it their only computer. So, ideally, I could see the best traits of either OS merged into one better, and that expanded in capability.
In any event, if imperfect, Apple still the best, and much to love.
- per 'Macrumors'
;) A lot of fantastic change in but 10 years. In looking back, I'm somewhat amazed at the evolution of Apple. Happy Birthday.
If still basically loyal to Apple, I would note, in hopefully helping the brand, certain lapses such as apparently quality control in some aspects of the new iPad2. Other areas as well. Just something to be mindful of, and with luck smoothed out soon.
As for OS X, I've wondered of late if the natural progression would not be a merging of iOS and OS X into one. Although it certainly should not be a merger in one direction only. Some of the discussions on the iPad forum concern those frustrated with the limitations of iOS for real work, such as lack of a real file system. Some have postulated, and surely rightly so, that the iPad is still a device best used in conjunction with something running OS X. The same would hold true for users of the iPhone, as likely very few who consider it their only computer. So, ideally, I could see the best traits of either OS merged into one better, and that expanded in capability.
In any event, if imperfect, Apple still the best, and much to love.
more...
LightSpeed1
Apr 11, 01:23 AM
Street Kings
I think my favorite thing about this movie is it's soundtrack... prob in top 10
http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/2485/streetkingsbluray.jpgthat movie was pretty good.
I think my favorite thing about this movie is it's soundtrack... prob in top 10
http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/2485/streetkingsbluray.jpgthat movie was pretty good.
twoodcc
May 15, 11:47 PM
oh you have a login screen. only logmein.com will work with that. the others will being on logon.
maybe implement a two-tier system? :D
ok. i might try and set it up next weekend. we'll see. only 2 more weeks here though! thank goodness!
maybe implement a two-tier system? :D
ok. i might try and set it up next weekend. we'll see. only 2 more weeks here though! thank goodness!
more...
chrisgeleven
Jan 5, 03:23 PM
Why did Apple do away with live feeds of the event? That seems like a good idea. What are they trying to avoid?
That little thing called bandwidth. You know how many people will be hitting that streaming video stream if it were live? With it being tape delayed, Apple can somewhat spread out the number of people who will be watching it.
Heck I have a hard enough time viewing the keynote hours after it was released, never mind trying to do it live.
That little thing called bandwidth. You know how many people will be hitting that streaming video stream if it were live? With it being tape delayed, Apple can somewhat spread out the number of people who will be watching it.
Heck I have a hard enough time viewing the keynote hours after it was released, never mind trying to do it live.
miketcool
Oct 19, 10:05 AM
1.5% woo hoo!! Thats quite a climb!
more...
Lord Blackadder
Aug 10, 01:10 PM
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
snberk103
Apr 17, 04:43 PM
What security problem?
You know what kills more Americans than terrorism every year? Peanut allergies. Swimming pools. Deer running in front of cars.
Pat downs, body scanners, and TSA in generally are about "security theater." The government puts on a big show so the poor little sheep who are afraid of the big bad muslim wolves feel better.
So how about we all stop letting politicians play on our fears, stop feeding money to the contractors who design useless crap like body scanners and stop giving up constitutional rights all in the name of preventing a "danger" that's significantly less likely to kill you than a lightning strike.
I believe that's faulty logic. Using seat belts has cut the number of fatalities for car passengers by 50% to 75% (depending on the rate of seat belt usage in a jurisdiction - USA/Canada). Because very few people are now killed in car crashes, you are saying we should stop enforcing the seat belt laws?
Or because so many fewer people are now dying due to drunk driving we should stop enforcing those laws?
I'm not sure your logic supports your conclusion.
You know what kills more Americans than terrorism every year? Peanut allergies. Swimming pools. Deer running in front of cars.
Pat downs, body scanners, and TSA in generally are about "security theater." The government puts on a big show so the poor little sheep who are afraid of the big bad muslim wolves feel better.
So how about we all stop letting politicians play on our fears, stop feeding money to the contractors who design useless crap like body scanners and stop giving up constitutional rights all in the name of preventing a "danger" that's significantly less likely to kill you than a lightning strike.
I believe that's faulty logic. Using seat belts has cut the number of fatalities for car passengers by 50% to 75% (depending on the rate of seat belt usage in a jurisdiction - USA/Canada). Because very few people are now killed in car crashes, you are saying we should stop enforcing the seat belt laws?
Or because so many fewer people are now dying due to drunk driving we should stop enforcing those laws?
I'm not sure your logic supports your conclusion.
more...
hob
Jan 9, 01:10 PM
damn. wish I'd read that earlier!
psycoswimmer
Jan 9, 02:08 PM
Still, that's pretty annoying... I'd only uncovered one of those two out of my own stupidity...
Yeah. Well, at least now I don't feel scared to refresh the page looking for the updated link. Is there anyone that can be contacted to take that off?
Yeah. Well, at least now I don't feel scared to refresh the page looking for the updated link. Is there anyone that can be contacted to take that off?
more...
mixel
Jan 10, 06:30 AM
I'd like them to start putting BD in the MacPros and iMacs as standard. (BTO for mini) .. If Sony can do it (admittedly at a loss) I wish :apple: would too.
Even less likely. Tablet Mac with multitouch *and* stylus support, when I say stylus I really mean Wacom-style touch-sensitive pen, as Apple could cater to artists really nicely that way. :)
Even less likely. Tablet Mac with multitouch *and* stylus support, when I say stylus I really mean Wacom-style touch-sensitive pen, as Apple could cater to artists really nicely that way. :)
RobertD63
Apr 27, 06:03 PM
Arn,
May I ask if you feel this feature has been useful so far. I really like the concept of a post rating. But I feel like this doesn't bring any real value to the MR community.
Thanks,
:)
It would be useful if they you reached a certain amount of upvotes you can get into the marketplace too. That'll help with actual contributing users that don't post much. The current system provokes people to just post quick short responses to raise their post count.
May I ask if you feel this feature has been useful so far. I really like the concept of a post rating. But I feel like this doesn't bring any real value to the MR community.
Thanks,
:)
It would be useful if they you reached a certain amount of upvotes you can get into the marketplace too. That'll help with actual contributing users that don't post much. The current system provokes people to just post quick short responses to raise their post count.
more...
Mac Fly (film)
Oct 19, 11:30 AM
Two can play at that game. I still have the 400 shares I bought in 1997.
Do the math. :)
I bought 4600 shares in 1997, do that math ;)
My last comment was a complete fabrication!! :D
Do the math. :)
I bought 4600 shares in 1997, do that math ;)
My last comment was a complete fabrication!! :D
AWallen90
May 3, 10:14 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
Anyone know what's the app being used in the "to a CEO" part?
Looks like Roambi??
Second guess is MicroStrategy
Apple definitely knows how to show off the coolest part of an app.
Anyone know what's the app being used in the "to a CEO" part?
Looks like Roambi??
Second guess is MicroStrategy
Apple definitely knows how to show off the coolest part of an app.
The General
Apr 15, 04:06 PM
doesn't look photoshopped to me. looks like three photos of a real object. i dont think it's actually the body of the next iphone. if aluminum didnt work out so well for reception on the OG iphone, why would it work on the new one?
the flat surfaces are something i doubt apple would do.
the slot and square hole on the side are obviously supposed to be holes for the silent switch and volume up and down.
the flat surfaces are something i doubt apple would do.
the slot and square hole on the side are obviously supposed to be holes for the silent switch and volume up and down.
citizenzen
Apr 15, 09:56 PM
Typical promotion of homosexuality. What else is new. They gotta find new ways to bankrupt us here in California.
I'm beginning to think that on a lonely, quiet Friday night this is the most action that Calidude can hope for.
I'm 50 ... and married, Calidude.
What's your excuse?
I'm beginning to think that on a lonely, quiet Friday night this is the most action that Calidude can hope for.
I'm 50 ... and married, Calidude.
What's your excuse?
zephxiii
Dec 23, 08:57 AM
i usually just read these and do not post, but i decided to finally register and join the action. i know the arguement against lte in the iphone for vzw, but i say why wouldnt they? they like to be on the cutting edge dont they? as to the arguement on the original being edge not 3g, there was no 3g android when the original iphone came out now android has a significant share of the smartphone market and they are coming out with lte devices at ces for verizon. why would apple wnat to be so far behind android phones in terms of lte and 3g. i think that if apple were to launch a lte phone in june, then why not just launch it in february? what is the difference in a few months when people will be buying up lte android phones in droves after CES
Apple usually isn't cutting edge. I mean why wasn't the first iPhone 3g when there was 3G in the US and EU? That and LTE chipsets are kinda new, voice isn't working over LTE yet. It would probably be easier and cheaper to just do CDMA (which Apple is already new at). LTE also might cause a negative effect on batt. life which Apple doesn't like etc. etc.
Remember all the reasons why the first iPhone didn't have 3g? something about chipsets not mature enough (i disagree), battery life (disagree), and I thought there was something about PCB space too but dunno.
Hell we haven't seen any job ads for LTE engineers either.
So no, it most likely will not have LTE, and there has not been any valid hints that it would either.
Apple usually isn't cutting edge. I mean why wasn't the first iPhone 3g when there was 3G in the US and EU? That and LTE chipsets are kinda new, voice isn't working over LTE yet. It would probably be easier and cheaper to just do CDMA (which Apple is already new at). LTE also might cause a negative effect on batt. life which Apple doesn't like etc. etc.
Remember all the reasons why the first iPhone didn't have 3g? something about chipsets not mature enough (i disagree), battery life (disagree), and I thought there was something about PCB space too but dunno.
Hell we haven't seen any job ads for LTE engineers either.
So no, it most likely will not have LTE, and there has not been any valid hints that it would either.
scu
Oct 19, 10:36 AM
Well my 1300 shares will become 2600 in less than an year.:D Apple will keep going up and up as long the economy does not tank.:)
dmr727
Jan 15, 01:17 PM
I liked it. I was happy with the update to the AppleTV - I think I'll finally get off the fence and buy one. The Capsule seems interesting. The MBA is outside of what I want to spend, but it's pretty awesome nonetheless.
It would have been nice to see updated specs on the Mini and other notebooks, but hey, you can't have everything! :)
It would have been nice to see updated specs on the Mini and other notebooks, but hey, you can't have everything! :)
Aeolius
Oct 4, 09:16 AM
Yep, and the average US 'car' looks more like a tank to the rest of the world.
Actually, I do drive a tank of sorts; a 10-passenger van with a wheelchair lift.
Define your own boundaries, and call them normal. Nice.
I never said it was normal for the "rest of the world". I was simply stating what was normally considered a mansion in the US.
As for boundaries, if money was no object I'd be living on a self-sufficient seastead out in international waters.
Actually, I do drive a tank of sorts; a 10-passenger van with a wheelchair lift.
Define your own boundaries, and call them normal. Nice.
I never said it was normal for the "rest of the world". I was simply stating what was normally considered a mansion in the US.
As for boundaries, if money was no object I'd be living on a self-sufficient seastead out in international waters.
No comments:
Post a Comment