KeriJane
Apr 9, 08:40 PM
All the best Rumors have some humor and nonsense!
This is a RUMOR forum after all. What good is a dry, factual press-release thread in a RUMOR Forum? :p
But now that the theory of Apple copying Microsoft has been raised (Haha, a fine jest :D) let's see what they might be interested in copying from MS.
They could copy the Registry! :eek:
Or maybe Apple could adopt the concept of letting anyone at all, even trained chimpanzees in Zimbabwe toying with an EDGE cellphone, have complete access to all system functions and security features.... MS has had a monopoly on this for far too long.
Or how about Applications that are expected to embed themselves into the OS?
If these MS features don't abuse customers enough, perhaps Apple could adopt a paranoid and excessively complicated "Activation" scheme.
Maybe hire some top MS executives? Preferably an out of shape, middle-aged one that tries to dance and screams a lot. :p
Have a strange, voodoo-like gathering to proclaim the death of their competitors product like MS did when the Zune was announced?:eek:
But that's just a very silly alternate universe.
Win8 is going to have exclusive rights to all of these features and more for the foreseeable future.
Have Fun,
Keri
PS... Still got the silly giggles from thinking about the upcoming MS App store. :D:p:eek::p
This is a RUMOR forum after all. What good is a dry, factual press-release thread in a RUMOR Forum? :p
But now that the theory of Apple copying Microsoft has been raised (Haha, a fine jest :D) let's see what they might be interested in copying from MS.
They could copy the Registry! :eek:
Or maybe Apple could adopt the concept of letting anyone at all, even trained chimpanzees in Zimbabwe toying with an EDGE cellphone, have complete access to all system functions and security features.... MS has had a monopoly on this for far too long.
Or how about Applications that are expected to embed themselves into the OS?
If these MS features don't abuse customers enough, perhaps Apple could adopt a paranoid and excessively complicated "Activation" scheme.
Maybe hire some top MS executives? Preferably an out of shape, middle-aged one that tries to dance and screams a lot. :p
Have a strange, voodoo-like gathering to proclaim the death of their competitors product like MS did when the Zune was announced?:eek:
But that's just a very silly alternate universe.
Win8 is going to have exclusive rights to all of these features and more for the foreseeable future.
Have Fun,
Keri
PS... Still got the silly giggles from thinking about the upcoming MS App store. :D:p:eek::p
chaosbunny
May 4, 03:16 AM
... if it had accurate stylus input.
Sign! With this an iPad would be interesting for me for drawing. A stylus beats fingers for drawing, the Egypts knew that 5000 years ago, but seems like Steve doesn't.
Sign! With this an iPad would be interesting for me for drawing. A stylus beats fingers for drawing, the Egypts knew that 5000 years ago, but seems like Steve doesn't.
jessica.
Apr 12, 01:02 PM
a gift from my fiance. Not quite a personal purchase. I have a little obsession with cupcakes.
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/2345/photokhu.jpg (http://img26.imageshack.us/i/photokhu.jpg/)
I'm quite curious how well this works and if it is worth the hassle. It's not that hard to stick the batter in a pan and toss it in the oven. ;)
I have a small cupcake obsession. I'd rather bake them then eat them it seems because they often go to waste.
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/2345/photokhu.jpg (http://img26.imageshack.us/i/photokhu.jpg/)
I'm quite curious how well this works and if it is worth the hassle. It's not that hard to stick the batter in a pan and toss it in the oven. ;)
I have a small cupcake obsession. I'd rather bake them then eat them it seems because they often go to waste.
WestonHarvey1
Jul 21, 12:51 PM
You seem to have missed the "... MORE than iPhone 3gs" part.
A better antenna should drop FEWER calls (unless there's a flaw)
You don't get the real picture about performance from that average. What are the call drop numbers when people don't "hold it wrong"? Let's say they were 50 fewer on the 4. That would indicate a massively improved overall antenna design. So you'd have an antenna that holds on to calls about exactly as well on average, with the *ability to greatly exceed previous performance depending on use*. That can't be ignored.
And not all dropped calls are signal related. Some are capacity related and we have no idea how AT&T runs those numbers.
A better antenna should drop FEWER calls (unless there's a flaw)
You don't get the real picture about performance from that average. What are the call drop numbers when people don't "hold it wrong"? Let's say they were 50 fewer on the 4. That would indicate a massively improved overall antenna design. So you'd have an antenna that holds on to calls about exactly as well on average, with the *ability to greatly exceed previous performance depending on use*. That can't be ignored.
And not all dropped calls are signal related. Some are capacity related and we have no idea how AT&T runs those numbers.
rdowns
Apr 26, 09:04 AM
This guy was more than capable of defending himself...
If you have nothing to add to the discussion, don't post. Your act is wearing thin.
If you have nothing to add to the discussion, don't post. Your act is wearing thin.
Peace
Sep 12, 08:27 AM
Is this new? DLO Home Dock Deluxe
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/2.RSLID?mco=34809CF6&nplm=TH578LL%2FA
http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/th578lla_alt.jpg
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/2.RSLID?mco=34809CF6&nplm=TH578LL%2FA
http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/th578lla_alt.jpg
RobertD63
Apr 27, 05:54 PM
So it's like Reddit now. Cooleo
Edit: To fix the boxes around the images in IE just use a little CSS
tagName img{
border: none;
}
That should solve your woes there. IE likes to default the CSS border on images to visitable.
Edit: To fix the boxes around the images in IE just use a little CSS
tagName img{
border: none;
}
That should solve your woes there. IE likes to default the CSS border on images to visitable.
tjb1
Apr 6, 02:03 PM
I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on it once you've had a chance to get comfortable with it.
:apple:
I use one of those at work. It's an absolute necessity with CAD work, but it tends to 'walk' around my desk.
Well I dont really have a cad program set up right now but in mastercam and google maps its a little difficult to use. Cant wait to get started in solidworks or inventor with it and hopefully learn how to use the little bugger.
:apple:
I use one of those at work. It's an absolute necessity with CAD work, but it tends to 'walk' around my desk.
Well I dont really have a cad program set up right now but in mastercam and google maps its a little difficult to use. Cant wait to get started in solidworks or inventor with it and hopefully learn how to use the little bugger.
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 22, 09:58 AM
Anyone else hate the ugly purple square around the arrows? What purpose do they serve?
I do think there should only be "ups", but the icon could be a checkmark. When you click it some subtext would appear below/next to it. Something like "You liked this comment" or "You agree with comment" or "This comment was helpful".
Probably the first of the 3 suggestions is best, because it covers much broader scenarios. Additionally you could also break it down into different buttons like a "agree" button and a "helpful" button, but maybe we want to just keep it simple.
Also, I still think it would be good to accrue the number of "likes", "agrees", or "helpful", or whatever it would be to help the member obtain different statuses.
As I'm thinking about it, it may also be beneficial to weigh in the percentage of "liked" comments in addition to the amount. For Example, a person with 20,000 comments may have 500 likes, and a person with 50 comments could have the same 500 likes, but clearly the second person typically produces better comments and that should be considered accordingly. Of course this may be slightly difficult to factor exactly how to do it, especially when you consider that people have been using this site for years and already have accrued thounsands of posts. (perhaps this system of "percentages" would only apply to new posts after this system was in place)
Just spitballing here. am I out of line?
I do think there should only be "ups", but the icon could be a checkmark. When you click it some subtext would appear below/next to it. Something like "You liked this comment" or "You agree with comment" or "This comment was helpful".
Probably the first of the 3 suggestions is best, because it covers much broader scenarios. Additionally you could also break it down into different buttons like a "agree" button and a "helpful" button, but maybe we want to just keep it simple.
Also, I still think it would be good to accrue the number of "likes", "agrees", or "helpful", or whatever it would be to help the member obtain different statuses.
As I'm thinking about it, it may also be beneficial to weigh in the percentage of "liked" comments in addition to the amount. For Example, a person with 20,000 comments may have 500 likes, and a person with 50 comments could have the same 500 likes, but clearly the second person typically produces better comments and that should be considered accordingly. Of course this may be slightly difficult to factor exactly how to do it, especially when you consider that people have been using this site for years and already have accrued thounsands of posts. (perhaps this system of "percentages" would only apply to new posts after this system was in place)
Just spitballing here. am I out of line?
rhett7660
Apr 21, 11:14 AM
Will we be able to see who voted on our posts? That would be very interesting!
pakyooh
Apr 12, 04:25 PM
Amazon.. around $8..
That case is awesome, where did you purchase it?
That case is awesome, where did you purchase it?
T-Will
Apr 5, 04:07 PM
The iAd Gallery is a celebration of advertising, featuring iAd campaigns from some of the world's best brands and their advertising agencies. The iAd Gallery gives you easy access to a selection of the fun and informative ads that have run in some of your favorite apps. Use the Browse feature to discover ads you haven't seen, or to find those you want to see again. Even lets you tag your favorites to a Loved section that�s all your own.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v64/t-will/Forums/areyouseriouscat.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v64/t-will/Forums/areyouseriouscat.jpg
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.
dime21
May 5, 09:05 AM
My girlfriend is Chinese and she just doesn't understand our obsession with guns (understandably so). I don't either!
What are people so afraid of that they need guns to protect themselves from?
You must not read the news much. Or check out the robbery, rape, and murder statistics for your town. But I'll bet you're a nice friendly guy, and you live in the nice part of town, so it couldn't possibly happen to you, am I right? :rolleyes:
The better question here, is why do you feel so immune to violent crime?
Are you also confused about our obsessions with free speech? freedom of religion? or freedom of the press perhaps? Because those are protected in the Bill of Rights as well. Guns however, are unique in that they are the only material object, the only physical thing, that the Bill of Rights expressly protects ownership of. So we don't take to kindly to confused legislators who would try and take them away, or place unusual restrictions on that right.
What are people so afraid of that they need guns to protect themselves from?
You must not read the news much. Or check out the robbery, rape, and murder statistics for your town. But I'll bet you're a nice friendly guy, and you live in the nice part of town, so it couldn't possibly happen to you, am I right? :rolleyes:
The better question here, is why do you feel so immune to violent crime?
Are you also confused about our obsessions with free speech? freedom of religion? or freedom of the press perhaps? Because those are protected in the Bill of Rights as well. Guns however, are unique in that they are the only material object, the only physical thing, that the Bill of Rights expressly protects ownership of. So we don't take to kindly to confused legislators who would try and take them away, or place unusual restrictions on that right.
rhett7660
Apr 21, 12:09 PM
Could have been worse guys, they could have put in a Facebook "Like" button. :D
They actually one upped Facebook. We also have a dislike button!
They actually one upped Facebook. We also have a dislike button!
Chundles
Sep 12, 08:07 AM
I thought tht too, but there's already a section on the page for trailer. Just about the iTunes Videos
The link from Transporter 2 includes Movies+Trailers in the URL. As does the one below it, the other two include Games+Trailers.
Here's the full link from the Transporter 2 bit.
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/inboundRedirect?omni-ch=Store+Front&omni-pg=Movie+Trailers&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apple.com%2Fmoviesxml%2Fh%2Findex.xml
The link from Transporter 2 includes Movies+Trailers in the URL. As does the one below it, the other two include Games+Trailers.
Here's the full link from the Transporter 2 bit.
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/inboundRedirect?omni-ch=Store+Front&omni-pg=Movie+Trailers&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apple.com%2Fmoviesxml%2Fh%2Findex.xml
topmounter
Apr 29, 03:47 PM
Wow, if they don't get those changes implemented immediately Lion is going to be the Mac's Vista!!1! :p
valdore
Jan 12, 03:50 PM
I guess I missed any smugness in the keynote thanks to not watching the entirety of the boring thing. :rolleyes:
Amazing Iceman
May 4, 11:39 AM
In iTunes you can see a banner ad that says "Apps from iPad TV ads." That will take you to a page where you will see the apps.
Thanks, but as I wrote on my original post, I have already checked there but the list was not updated with the apps featured in the latest Ad.
Thanks, but as I wrote on my original post, I have already checked there but the list was not updated with the apps featured in the latest Ad.
Dragonforce
Mar 24, 03:10 PM
Yay! Now, where's the cake...
The cake is a lie.
The cake is a lie.
Mydriasis
Sep 25, 11:38 AM
I think it is a great update!!! Aperture will develop into an application that I just dont want to miss. I use both aperture and lightroom, both have their pros and cons. I can't wait to see where both apps stand in two years. I will go to the Photokina on wednesday and will let you know how aperture 1.5 feels.;)
todd2000
Oct 2, 03:06 PM
So Apple will figure out a way to block it, and just Sue him
Anuba
Jan 12, 05:03 PM
Whatever you are attempting to sell is failing the 'smell' test (if you follow me). You do not know the man I am fairly certain. I am always suspicious about how well screwed on people are, who see others as mindless droids and cannot keep their bowel movements under control. :confused:
Well, if you haven't met any of these mindless droids, consider yourself lucky. I've met enough of them to be sufficiently spooked. I've got a couple of them on a forum I moderate; one has a link to Apple store in his signature and spends most of his time posting the most contrived lies about Windows you could imagine (how you cannot switch a PC on without being drowned in a barrage of viruses etc), and the rest of his time coercing PC users into switching. It's quite clear from his descriptions of Windows he hasn't touched a PC since circa 1996, and any assurances that Windows has come a long way in terms of stability and security since Win95 are met with a kind of "lalalalalalalala...." At one point he insisted that a Mac Mini G4 1.42GHz is much faster than any PC ever made. When faced with real life benchmark tests where a midrange PC blasted the Mini into oblivion, he maintained that it was due to poor knowledge of Mac optimization on the part of the developers (whom I know to be Mac enthusiasts who port the software to Windows). This is just one example, over the years I've stumbled across way too many to list here.
It's great that people are enthusiastic about products, and most Mac users are regular joes who are just that, but it is my personal opinion that there also exists a 'Church of Apple' with 'members' who are smug, patronizing, holier-than-thou, basking in the glory of some perceived exclusivity and enlightenment, borderline brainwashed lodge brothers with a special handshake. It sickens me to no end. Again, this is merely one man's opinion, I know you wouldn't agree so let's just leave it there.
Regarding Steve, you're darn tootin' I don't know him. Only seen him in blurry keynote webcasts.
Well, if you haven't met any of these mindless droids, consider yourself lucky. I've met enough of them to be sufficiently spooked. I've got a couple of them on a forum I moderate; one has a link to Apple store in his signature and spends most of his time posting the most contrived lies about Windows you could imagine (how you cannot switch a PC on without being drowned in a barrage of viruses etc), and the rest of his time coercing PC users into switching. It's quite clear from his descriptions of Windows he hasn't touched a PC since circa 1996, and any assurances that Windows has come a long way in terms of stability and security since Win95 are met with a kind of "lalalalalalalala...." At one point he insisted that a Mac Mini G4 1.42GHz is much faster than any PC ever made. When faced with real life benchmark tests where a midrange PC blasted the Mini into oblivion, he maintained that it was due to poor knowledge of Mac optimization on the part of the developers (whom I know to be Mac enthusiasts who port the software to Windows). This is just one example, over the years I've stumbled across way too many to list here.
It's great that people are enthusiastic about products, and most Mac users are regular joes who are just that, but it is my personal opinion that there also exists a 'Church of Apple' with 'members' who are smug, patronizing, holier-than-thou, basking in the glory of some perceived exclusivity and enlightenment, borderline brainwashed lodge brothers with a special handshake. It sickens me to no end. Again, this is merely one man's opinion, I know you wouldn't agree so let's just leave it there.
Regarding Steve, you're darn tootin' I don't know him. Only seen him in blurry keynote webcasts.
dyler
Oct 8, 12:50 PM
This is false advertising, Verizon does not have that 3G coverage and ATT has more than that. Verizon is the worst service I have ever used with the worst Phones I have ever used, MY iPhone works in more places than my Verizon phone ever did, this is all lies and Congress should talk about that not exclusive carrier models!!
