-aggie-
May 4, 03:54 PM
I'd say go ahead, but I'm somewhat confused in what the villain can do. He gets to see our moves, so he can just put a trap anywhere?
I'm against splitting until we level up.
I'm against splitting until we level up.
iCrizzo
Mar 29, 11:22 AM
Dropbox is the same, only difference and it is a big difference if you purchase music from Amazon and store it, you can re-download all your music, that is huge. I can't tell you how many times I have lost music purchased through iTunes.
inlovewithi
Apr 26, 02:34 PM
Wow. A platform that is available on all four major carriers and has dozens of phones, passed the iPhone (which *just* became available on its second carrier) in overall usage. So I guess Google should be patting themselves on the back for this historic achievement.
Are you mad?
Are you mad?
grockk
Aug 11, 10:31 AM
Makes no sense to put these in Macbook so soon. Macbook Pro, yes, but not the macbook. Apple have always differentiated the two lines, the fact that current Macbooks are comparable to the Pros is just plain luck and won't last long, IMO.
You are reasoning from apple's history but it's all different now. The problem with this logic is that since Dell, HP and Gateway will be using the merom in consumer computers and apple is using the same chips as everyone else they have to use merom too or appear to be behind in the technology.
You are reasoning from apple's history but it's all different now. The problem with this logic is that since Dell, HP and Gateway will be using the merom in consumer computers and apple is using the same chips as everyone else they have to use merom too or appear to be behind in the technology.
CalBoy
May 6, 04:30 PM
So you're saying that science has nothing to do with everyday life? Cake for the elite and bread for everyone else??
I didn't say that at all.
Certain things are good for one thing but not as good for another. Basing your metrics off of water and light make a lot of sense when you have to measure a great deal of new items and compare them objectively.
On the other hand when you need metrics to be a guide through daily life and nothing else, the system that's born from daily necessity makes a lot more sense.
The reasoning gets worse when you'd ask 311 million to make a change because a smaller community of professionals would like their standards to be the standards for all of society. It's not like the two can't coexist; there might be a good argument there if the two were incompatible, but the fact is that they're not.
I see no good sense in that. If the metric system was intrinsically difficult to use in everyday life, then maybe you would have a point. But it's not � it's actually much, much easier to use once you learn it.
A distinction needs to be made here: just because something is easier to multiply by 10 (or 1/10th) doesn't mean that it's easier to use. How many times in your daily life do you need to multiply by 10, or even multiply what you measure? In most of my daily activities the metric system would do nothing new except provide a new set of numbers to get to know.
Even if you did occasionally multiply daily measurements, it would probably be with a smaller integer like 2, 3, or 4. In that case, the imperial system works very well because it provides very low factors and products that most people can do rapidly with nothing more than their 2nd grade 12x12 tables. In fact that's exactly how it came to be the way it is.
The metric system, as many people here keep pointing out, enables some pretty easy mental arithmetic. You'd use it if you had it.
How often does that easy arithmetic come up outside of science? Can you think of a real life example?
In any case, I do already have it. It's on every measuring device I have, from my ruler to my bathroom scale. I use it when it's necessary or more effective, but that's rare. Maybe you should accept that people can have a different preference.
You say it's about the 'ease of transition' but in the next breath you argue that it's all about 'economic return'. Personally I think you're clutching at straws to defend the fact that your country is behind the rest of the world in its ability to institute any kind of consistency with its system of measurements. But, we can agree to disagree.
They are not mutually exclusive values. Both are important factors in determining whether or not to switch. It's just like when a business decides to change it's logo; not only does the cost of marketing the new logo have to be factored in, but the potential lost sales also have to be weighed. In much the same way we have to decide if certain things being switched to metric will ever pay off and how disruptive they'll be. Some things that make sense like food and toiletries have already been metricated. Other things probably cost a lot more and won't be able to overcome their switching cost and they could also cost a lot.
I didn't say that at all.
Certain things are good for one thing but not as good for another. Basing your metrics off of water and light make a lot of sense when you have to measure a great deal of new items and compare them objectively.
On the other hand when you need metrics to be a guide through daily life and nothing else, the system that's born from daily necessity makes a lot more sense.
The reasoning gets worse when you'd ask 311 million to make a change because a smaller community of professionals would like their standards to be the standards for all of society. It's not like the two can't coexist; there might be a good argument there if the two were incompatible, but the fact is that they're not.
I see no good sense in that. If the metric system was intrinsically difficult to use in everyday life, then maybe you would have a point. But it's not � it's actually much, much easier to use once you learn it.
A distinction needs to be made here: just because something is easier to multiply by 10 (or 1/10th) doesn't mean that it's easier to use. How many times in your daily life do you need to multiply by 10, or even multiply what you measure? In most of my daily activities the metric system would do nothing new except provide a new set of numbers to get to know.
Even if you did occasionally multiply daily measurements, it would probably be with a smaller integer like 2, 3, or 4. In that case, the imperial system works very well because it provides very low factors and products that most people can do rapidly with nothing more than their 2nd grade 12x12 tables. In fact that's exactly how it came to be the way it is.
The metric system, as many people here keep pointing out, enables some pretty easy mental arithmetic. You'd use it if you had it.
How often does that easy arithmetic come up outside of science? Can you think of a real life example?
In any case, I do already have it. It's on every measuring device I have, from my ruler to my bathroom scale. I use it when it's necessary or more effective, but that's rare. Maybe you should accept that people can have a different preference.
You say it's about the 'ease of transition' but in the next breath you argue that it's all about 'economic return'. Personally I think you're clutching at straws to defend the fact that your country is behind the rest of the world in its ability to institute any kind of consistency with its system of measurements. But, we can agree to disagree.
They are not mutually exclusive values. Both are important factors in determining whether or not to switch. It's just like when a business decides to change it's logo; not only does the cost of marketing the new logo have to be factored in, but the potential lost sales also have to be weighed. In much the same way we have to decide if certain things being switched to metric will ever pay off and how disruptive they'll be. Some things that make sense like food and toiletries have already been metricated. Other things probably cost a lot more and won't be able to overcome their switching cost and they could also cost a lot.
finalcut
Apr 20, 05:58 AM
if the faster processor is the only upgrade, then I wont change my iphone 4 to 5 just like I did from 3G to 3GS. My wife will just wait more on my iphone 4 hehe
MacNut
Apr 14, 09:22 PM
So do you think the best idea is to just cut everybody equally?
To me that is mind-bogglingly simplistic.
We have to be intelligent enough to identify areas of need vs. those that are operating at a decent level of efficiency.
Here's an example ...
I work at a university that is undergoing cuts. But some departments actually make the university money. Does it make sense to cut departments that generate income as much as departments that don't? At least the people in charge here understand the difference and aren't applying "across the board cuts".If something is making money why would you cut it? You expand on it to make even more money. Trim the programs that are dead weight and is sinking the rest of the ship. Government gets into a mentality that once a program is created no matter how much it might fail they have to keep it around to stroke their ego. They can never admit that something might not be working.
To me that is mind-bogglingly simplistic.
We have to be intelligent enough to identify areas of need vs. those that are operating at a decent level of efficiency.
Here's an example ...
I work at a university that is undergoing cuts. But some departments actually make the university money. Does it make sense to cut departments that generate income as much as departments that don't? At least the people in charge here understand the difference and aren't applying "across the board cuts".If something is making money why would you cut it? You expand on it to make even more money. Trim the programs that are dead weight and is sinking the rest of the ship. Government gets into a mentality that once a program is created no matter how much it might fail they have to keep it around to stroke their ego. They can never admit that something might not be working.
X2468
Mar 30, 11:05 AM
That seems quite rude. Wikipedia happens to have a wealth of base level knowledge. I understand that one should not cite it when doing in depth research but when looking for general knowledge it is a great source.
Many of my professors have realized this and told us that if we need a different explanation of something to look it up on Wikipedia because it tends to use more common language than out text books. The do not allow citing Wikipedia no matter how well the article is sourced.
Just like any book you look at using for research you must weigh the quality before choosing to use it.
That being said, any college level class in history that covers the Cold War will talk about Alfred Sauvy and his contribution to how we talk about the world during that time period.
Kudos !
Well said, it's so refreshing to read an intelligent courteous response.
Many of my professors have realized this and told us that if we need a different explanation of something to look it up on Wikipedia because it tends to use more common language than out text books. The do not allow citing Wikipedia no matter how well the article is sourced.
Just like any book you look at using for research you must weigh the quality before choosing to use it.
That being said, any college level class in history that covers the Cold War will talk about Alfred Sauvy and his contribution to how we talk about the world during that time period.
Kudos !
Well said, it's so refreshing to read an intelligent courteous response.
CalBoy
Apr 15, 01:45 AM
Do you think there are any negative consequences to this? If I were starting a business and seeking investors, it would sure be a lot harder to get investors when the capital gains rate is 35% rather than 15%. That business would never materialize. Nobody's going to complain about it though because no one can see what could have been. The people who would have worked there can't complain the way an autoworker or public school teacher can complain. It's okay, it's not like we need jobs or anything. Let's just raise taxes enough on the top 1% of earners to employ everyone looking for a job. We can have them built a high speed rail network across the country. The only snag is our country would collapse before finishing one route. We would have a scattering of tracks as a reminder of our incompetence.
There's also positives that come along with this as well. If higher capital gains were able to support things like universal healthcare and better education, then more individuals would not only be able to innovate, but also take the risk on themselves because failure wouldn't mean dying as a pauper on the streets.
Our current tax system only encourages rewarding those who already have plenty. It does nothing for the small business owner that might lose his shirt if the business fails. We live in a land of extremes; you're either extremely wealthy or teetering on the brink of insolvency. That isn't the recipe for a successful society.
You're also operating from a false premise. Investors would continue to invest in whatever had the best returns. When you raise taxes across the board, all alternatives have the same tax exposure, which means the previously best option will remain the best option.
Unless you're seriously suggesting that a 35% (or higher) tax rate is really going to cause all billionaires to sit on their money and earn a lower return, just to stick it to Uncle Sam.
There's also positives that come along with this as well. If higher capital gains were able to support things like universal healthcare and better education, then more individuals would not only be able to innovate, but also take the risk on themselves because failure wouldn't mean dying as a pauper on the streets.
Our current tax system only encourages rewarding those who already have plenty. It does nothing for the small business owner that might lose his shirt if the business fails. We live in a land of extremes; you're either extremely wealthy or teetering on the brink of insolvency. That isn't the recipe for a successful society.
You're also operating from a false premise. Investors would continue to invest in whatever had the best returns. When you raise taxes across the board, all alternatives have the same tax exposure, which means the previously best option will remain the best option.
Unless you're seriously suggesting that a 35% (or higher) tax rate is really going to cause all billionaires to sit on their money and earn a lower return, just to stick it to Uncle Sam.
iliketyla
Mar 29, 02:06 PM
Up to another 50% on what they already cost?
Well even though my argument was already refuted by the citizens of other continents on here, in a perfect world the products would cost more yes, but we'd also be making more money with employment here in the U.S.
Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world, and the U.S. makes products that other countries have no interest in buying due to poor quality.
Well even though my argument was already refuted by the citizens of other continents on here, in a perfect world the products would cost more yes, but we'd also be making more money with employment here in the U.S.
Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world, and the U.S. makes products that other countries have no interest in buying due to poor quality.
0815
Apr 18, 03:36 PM
Yeah that looks similar, I was referring to the tablet/honeycomb.
Is the law suit really about the 'looks' ?
Is the law suit really about the 'looks' ?
tribalogical
May 6, 01:27 AM
My first reaction to the headline was, "Oh no, not again..." (having already weathered both the OS9 -> OSX and PowerPC -> Intel x86 transitions)...
But after that initial groan, a few other (more positive?) considerations came to mind.
First, Apple really did do a great job of transitioning from PPC to Ix86... it was far less painful than it could have been. Not perfect, but incredibly well-managed.
Now, OSX Lion is coming, and it appears to contain the beginnings of a convergence and consolidation between iOS and OSX. If we try to imagine where those OS's will be, say, 3 years out (and the hardware as well), by THAT time, it may be as simple as flipping a switch and hey-presto, you're on an ARM device without missing a beat...
I say this because, as devices like iPad evolve over the next few years, the applications written for them will also, and by the time 'higher end devices' like desktops and laptops are lining up for a platform change, those "mobile" app versions will already be 'full featured', and already written for ARM-based devices (I'll use the current Garageband pair - with cross-compatible OSX/iOS versions - as a very early-market example of that future). So, the painful prospect of rewriting/recompiling all your code won't be nearly as bad as it was for the OS9->X transition.
Another consideration is that tomorrow's mobile devices will be far more powerful than even today's desktop/laptops are. It's harder to imagine the future of the desktop/laptop as we know them today.
In fact, now would probably be a good time to remember that what Jobs is creating here isn't just "magical devices"... he's embarked on defining the "Post PC Era"...
It'll be interesting to see where all this leads, but my take on it is that it might not even feel much like a "platform switch" by the time we arrive there...
But after that initial groan, a few other (more positive?) considerations came to mind.
First, Apple really did do a great job of transitioning from PPC to Ix86... it was far less painful than it could have been. Not perfect, but incredibly well-managed.
Now, OSX Lion is coming, and it appears to contain the beginnings of a convergence and consolidation between iOS and OSX. If we try to imagine where those OS's will be, say, 3 years out (and the hardware as well), by THAT time, it may be as simple as flipping a switch and hey-presto, you're on an ARM device without missing a beat...
I say this because, as devices like iPad evolve over the next few years, the applications written for them will also, and by the time 'higher end devices' like desktops and laptops are lining up for a platform change, those "mobile" app versions will already be 'full featured', and already written for ARM-based devices (I'll use the current Garageband pair - with cross-compatible OSX/iOS versions - as a very early-market example of that future). So, the painful prospect of rewriting/recompiling all your code won't be nearly as bad as it was for the OS9->X transition.
Another consideration is that tomorrow's mobile devices will be far more powerful than even today's desktop/laptops are. It's harder to imagine the future of the desktop/laptop as we know them today.
In fact, now would probably be a good time to remember that what Jobs is creating here isn't just "magical devices"... he's embarked on defining the "Post PC Era"...
It'll be interesting to see where all this leads, but my take on it is that it might not even feel much like a "platform switch" by the time we arrive there...
G4-power
Nov 7, 06:43 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etCqq3-7ixo (in German)
I'm really sorry but I couldn't resist correcting. :D After I was halfway through the video I thought "why the heck don't I understand this if it's supposed to be German?" It was Danish. :D
I'm really sorry but I couldn't resist correcting. :D After I was halfway through the video I thought "why the heck don't I understand this if it's supposed to be German?" It was Danish. :D
ChazUK
Apr 18, 04:46 PM
Oh come on, we aren't really going to resort to the "there's only one way to design a mobile device" argument, are we? You're telling me the only way to design the Galaxy Tab was to make it look identical to the iPhone 3GS?
My iPhone 4 doesn't look anything like my wife's iPhone 3GS, so apparently there are at least two ways to design a mobile phone.
None of the other Android phones or tablets I've seen look like iPhones either. Only Samsung's.
The galaxy tab looks different to the phone 3gs from my experience with it.
It is lacking a chrome bezel & the sides are flattened, black matte plastic and lacks a physical "home" button.
They are similar but far from identical.
My iPhone 4 doesn't look anything like my wife's iPhone 3GS, so apparently there are at least two ways to design a mobile phone.
None of the other Android phones or tablets I've seen look like iPhones either. Only Samsung's.
The galaxy tab looks different to the phone 3gs from my experience with it.
It is lacking a chrome bezel & the sides are flattened, black matte plastic and lacks a physical "home" button.
They are similar but far from identical.
Number 41
Apr 20, 12:37 PM
[SIZE=1]
What are you people doing to scratch your phones so much? I don't use a case with my iPhone 4, carry it in my pocket (sometimes with my car keys) and there's not a noticeable scratch on the front or back.
Scratching isn't the issue, it's the shattering that happens when the phone is impacted. I watched an iPhone shatter on a drop of less than 3 feet onto a padded (industrial carpet) floor. I've had friends iPhones shatter from sliding off a table accidentally, being dropped when getting out of a car, and even one who had it with him at a concert and it shattered from the 100+ degree heat.
This wouldn't be an issue if they'd simply recessed the glass into the bezel on the front and used something sensible on the back.
There's a very good reason why nothing that needs to be durable is made out of glass.
What are you people doing to scratch your phones so much? I don't use a case with my iPhone 4, carry it in my pocket (sometimes with my car keys) and there's not a noticeable scratch on the front or back.
Scratching isn't the issue, it's the shattering that happens when the phone is impacted. I watched an iPhone shatter on a drop of less than 3 feet onto a padded (industrial carpet) floor. I've had friends iPhones shatter from sliding off a table accidentally, being dropped when getting out of a car, and even one who had it with him at a concert and it shattered from the 100+ degree heat.
This wouldn't be an issue if they'd simply recessed the glass into the bezel on the front and used something sensible on the back.
There's a very good reason why nothing that needs to be durable is made out of glass.
ChickenSwartz
Aug 3, 10:11 AM
Um, surely you're not that silly.
He was giving a "SteveQuote" similar to the one from WWDC '05 along the lines of "Oh by the way if you look up here you'll see this whole presentation is running on Intel processors."
I was confused as well.
Funny, I like.
He was giving a "SteveQuote" similar to the one from WWDC '05 along the lines of "Oh by the way if you look up here you'll see this whole presentation is running on Intel processors."
I was confused as well.
Funny, I like.
JapaneseMonkey
Mar 29, 09:49 PM
Well screw Japan
now Apple is being ruined by Japanese again ;;
now Apple is being ruined by Japanese again ;;
-aggie-
May 4, 10:01 PM
You got all that correct.
I'm surprised. :)
Why would the villain ever move out of the lair?
Are we to assume there are unlimited traps and monsters? Are these of all types, that is, 1 point type, 2 point type, etc.?
I'm surprised. :)
Why would the villain ever move out of the lair?
Are we to assume there are unlimited traps and monsters? Are these of all types, that is, 1 point type, 2 point type, etc.?
ChazUK
Mar 29, 01:10 PM
That reads quite a bit different from Amazon's "... or as we determine is necessary to provide the Service ..."
I'm not convinced it's as dire as people are making it out to be. Either way, both Apple and Amazon have full rights to access users files on both services for various reasons.
What are your fears on the Amazon terms that don't exist on the MobileMe ones? (Perhaps I'm being dense so some clarification is in need!) :D
I'm not convinced it's as dire as people are making it out to be. Either way, both Apple and Amazon have full rights to access users files on both services for various reasons.
What are your fears on the Amazon terms that don't exist on the MobileMe ones? (Perhaps I'm being dense so some clarification is in need!) :D
professor08
Apr 20, 05:07 AM
If you can have a bigger screen without a physically larger device size and weight, then yes, it is necessarily better.
I dont agree. A 4" screen would be larger real estate, but that would mean developers would have to rewrite their apps to fit the new size. For example, the iPad has an obviously larger screen space, which means that developers had to scale their software up to match, because lets face it, the 2x button just makes things look like pixels and thats just awful, this is not SNES system.
But the iPad has similar dimensions and screen ratio. But a 4" display would makes things look stretched, so developers would have to code each app to fit the new stretched screen. This would also be quite annoying on the app store, looking for apps which work on 3g, 3gs, i4 and i5 and iPad and iPad 2. It would just become a nuisance to download an app to see its stretched on older phones. this wouldn't be a good move by apple just yet. Apple like to care for older tech users, the 3g and 3gs users, and this larger screen would make apps not run as smoothly.
I dont agree. A 4" screen would be larger real estate, but that would mean developers would have to rewrite their apps to fit the new size. For example, the iPad has an obviously larger screen space, which means that developers had to scale their software up to match, because lets face it, the 2x button just makes things look like pixels and thats just awful, this is not SNES system.
But the iPad has similar dimensions and screen ratio. But a 4" display would makes things look stretched, so developers would have to code each app to fit the new stretched screen. This would also be quite annoying on the app store, looking for apps which work on 3g, 3gs, i4 and i5 and iPad and iPad 2. It would just become a nuisance to download an app to see its stretched on older phones. this wouldn't be a good move by apple just yet. Apple like to care for older tech users, the 3g and 3gs users, and this larger screen would make apps not run as smoothly.
Spooner83
Apr 26, 03:37 PM
Android is winning 'cause it's cheaper than apple, which is from the recession, people want cheap when they both do the same with a few minor exceptions.
Ballis
Apr 20, 03:23 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Aslong as the horrid proximity sensor is fixed om upgrading. LTE would be s nice bonus.
Aslong as the horrid proximity sensor is fixed om upgrading. LTE would be s nice bonus.
adamfilip
Sep 11, 02:05 PM
New Apple 30" 1080p IPOD
with Backpack straps for easy transport
with Backpack straps for easy transport
SandynJosh
Apr 26, 03:56 PM
I love that argument - who told Apple to only make 1 phone? Nobody it was their decision. This is PC vs Mac all over again - history repeating itself.
I can't wait to see how Steve Jobs spins this somehow at WWDC - my guess is he'll throw iPod Touches and iPads into their numbers so it doesn't look as horrible as the Nielsen chart shows.
At the end of the day, the truth hurts - Android is the new defacto platform for mobile and that means developers, developers, developers.
I suspect you're just trolling because I can't believe that you're as clueless as you pretend.
The Android platform is so highly fractured that to write an app for one Android phone doesn't mean you got the platform covered... far from it. Apple's IOS platform is huge, and has only shrunk in market share by a couple points (PIM is the one taking a beating) since the last survey.
The controlled environment of the IOS, which extends to iPods, and iPads, makes for a more profitable platform for developers. This not wishful dreaming, it's a fact any developer will tell you, or you can jump into the archives and learn for yourself.
I can't wait to see how Steve Jobs spins this somehow at WWDC - my guess is he'll throw iPod Touches and iPads into their numbers so it doesn't look as horrible as the Nielsen chart shows.
At the end of the day, the truth hurts - Android is the new defacto platform for mobile and that means developers, developers, developers.
I suspect you're just trolling because I can't believe that you're as clueless as you pretend.
The Android platform is so highly fractured that to write an app for one Android phone doesn't mean you got the platform covered... far from it. Apple's IOS platform is huge, and has only shrunk in market share by a couple points (PIM is the one taking a beating) since the last survey.
The controlled environment of the IOS, which extends to iPods, and iPads, makes for a more profitable platform for developers. This not wishful dreaming, it's a fact any developer will tell you, or you can jump into the archives and learn for yourself.