Butler Trumpet
Apr 13, 02:44 PM
How does one get to become an analyst? And what gives this guy any credibility? Seems like they just come up with crazy claims for the purpose of having something to say.
Sam Yikin
Mar 31, 10:30 AM
Tacky
gooddog
Apr 25, 10:07 PM
It will have the nazi glozi skreeni and it will be just another Rear-view iMac like all the others: all screen - all glare.
Bitter Much,
---gooddog
Bitter Much,
---gooddog
Don Kosak
Nov 10, 04:56 PM
What's with all the developers that won't do Universal Apps?
If you're supporting both platforms anyway, it's actually far less code, and less testing to just do a Universal App. (I know, I've done two of them so far.)
If you're supporting both platforms anyway, it's actually far less code, and less testing to just do a Universal App. (I know, I've done two of them so far.)
MacBoobsPro
Aug 15, 01:29 PM
I think that black bezel stripe is IDENTICAL to the taskbar in VISTA. It looks good, but its too similar. eek!
They have been in iPhoto for ages. Its Vista robbing Apple again! ;)
One thing im not too keen on is the Safari loading icon. I think the loading bar in Tiger is much easier to see.
If you are working in another window you can see the bar shooting along (or not) the Safari window with out looking directly at it. If they keep this new one then you will have to 'actually look at it' to see where its at.
Some cynics will say im crazy but I think most of you guys know what i mean!
They have been in iPhoto for ages. Its Vista robbing Apple again! ;)
One thing im not too keen on is the Safari loading icon. I think the loading bar in Tiger is much easier to see.
If you are working in another window you can see the bar shooting along (or not) the Safari window with out looking directly at it. If they keep this new one then you will have to 'actually look at it' to see where its at.
Some cynics will say im crazy but I think most of you guys know what i mean!
einmusiker
Dec 31, 12:25 AM
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
ok, I'm sorry but how the hell do you know what I do or don't understand about nutrition?? your presumptions are offensive
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
ok, I'm sorry but how the hell do you know what I do or don't understand about nutrition?? your presumptions are offensive
AlmostJosh
Dec 5, 08:48 PM
A double industrial is all I want :)
twoodcc
Oct 13, 01:29 PM
well we just got passed again. we are now ranked #59 as a team. and there are plenty more teams on our heels
arkitect
Feb 1, 08:48 AM
You mean that hookers, cocaine and Ferrari's aren't everyone's dream? :confused:
Nope. Certainly not mine�
Are you the same NickZac who posts in PRSI? :confused:
Nope. Certainly not mine�
Are you the same NickZac who posts in PRSI? :confused:
chrmjenkins
Apr 22, 11:10 AM
Of all the things that iPhone needs soon, LTE is not one of them.
We can all wait until its widespread, and usable.
It's already available to 110 Americans. It will reach over half of the US by year's end thanks to Verizon. When you look at AT&T's 3G penetration at the time of the iPhone 3G launch, it's actually not that far off.
The real issue is having a radio that allows for decent battery life. Even if they can consolidate it into 1 chip, that doesn't mean Apple will be pleased with its battery performance enough to include it in their phones.
My understanding of the MDM9615 is that it's a powerhouse.
The next generation MDM9615 will support LTE (FDD and TDD), DC-HSPA+, EV-DO Rev-B and TD-SCDMA
Basically, that means it supports LTE, super high speed 3G HSPA+ (think T-mobile's 42 mbps) and EV-DO Rev-B (CDMA). That means it should be a worldphone chip, and it's also fabbed on the brand new 28nm process, which means it will be as low power as one could expect. That makes it an excellent candidate for the 2012 iPhone 6.
The MDM9615 and MDM8215 are designed to pair up with the WTR1605 radio frequency IC and PM8018 power management IC to provide a highly integrated chipset solution. The WTR1605 will be Qualcomm’s first Radio Transceiver in Wafer Level Package and will be a highly integrated radio transceiver with multi-mode (LTE FDD, LTE TDD, CDMA, WCDMA, TD-SCDMA, GSM) and multi-band support.
TD-SCDMA is the CDMA variant they use in China. Outside of penta-band GSM (which I don't know if this offers, and I don't see why it wouldn't since the current iPhone Gobi chip offers it), this radio can be used on every damn carrier out there in the world essentially.
source (http://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2011/02/14/qualcomm-introduces-28nm-mass-market-ltedc-hspa-chipsets-mobile-broadband-0)
We can all wait until its widespread, and usable.
It's already available to 110 Americans. It will reach over half of the US by year's end thanks to Verizon. When you look at AT&T's 3G penetration at the time of the iPhone 3G launch, it's actually not that far off.
The real issue is having a radio that allows for decent battery life. Even if they can consolidate it into 1 chip, that doesn't mean Apple will be pleased with its battery performance enough to include it in their phones.
My understanding of the MDM9615 is that it's a powerhouse.
The next generation MDM9615 will support LTE (FDD and TDD), DC-HSPA+, EV-DO Rev-B and TD-SCDMA
Basically, that means it supports LTE, super high speed 3G HSPA+ (think T-mobile's 42 mbps) and EV-DO Rev-B (CDMA). That means it should be a worldphone chip, and it's also fabbed on the brand new 28nm process, which means it will be as low power as one could expect. That makes it an excellent candidate for the 2012 iPhone 6.
The MDM9615 and MDM8215 are designed to pair up with the WTR1605 radio frequency IC and PM8018 power management IC to provide a highly integrated chipset solution. The WTR1605 will be Qualcomm’s first Radio Transceiver in Wafer Level Package and will be a highly integrated radio transceiver with multi-mode (LTE FDD, LTE TDD, CDMA, WCDMA, TD-SCDMA, GSM) and multi-band support.
TD-SCDMA is the CDMA variant they use in China. Outside of penta-band GSM (which I don't know if this offers, and I don't see why it wouldn't since the current iPhone Gobi chip offers it), this radio can be used on every damn carrier out there in the world essentially.
source (http://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2011/02/14/qualcomm-introduces-28nm-mass-market-ltedc-hspa-chipsets-mobile-broadband-0)
EazyWeazy3
Feb 16, 06:40 PM
He is definitely living life to the fullest.
:hat
:hat
mozmac
Jul 28, 11:51 AM
Microsoft sounds like it wants to start a revolution in the music industry, but they don't know how to do it. And besides, the music industry just went through a revolution with Apple, so consumers don't want to go through it again.
A part of me wants to say Microsoft should just stay out because they have no experience, but look at the spalsh they made with the Xbox. People said the same thing to Microsoft back then. The video game market was crowded and seemingly had no room for another player, especially one who eats Rabbit poo for breakfast, but somehow M$ muscled its way in there. I just don't see the same thing happening this time with Zune-i-wanna-go-stick-my-hand-in-a-crocodile's-mouth.
A part of me wants to say Microsoft should just stay out because they have no experience, but look at the spalsh they made with the Xbox. People said the same thing to Microsoft back then. The video game market was crowded and seemingly had no room for another player, especially one who eats Rabbit poo for breakfast, but somehow M$ muscled its way in there. I just don't see the same thing happening this time with Zune-i-wanna-go-stick-my-hand-in-a-crocodile's-mouth.
SMM
Oct 23, 08:40 PM
I know that Bootcamp is not virtualization. What i am saying is that to run the OS in Bootcamp and a copy in parallels (legally) you would need to by the business or premium edition (or whatever they are called).
I have no issues with having the software installed once, although Apple allowing certain products to be installed on a desktop AND a laptop is great. But, I do not steal software. I really like what Apple does with their 'Family Packs'. You can add ~ 25-30% to the price and install it on five machines. That is great marketing and very fair.
I am not sure who is interpreting this EULA correctly and this thread sure does not need my uninformed opinion. But, if a single instance of a retail version of Vista cannot be installed anyway you like, that is a crock. With that being said, I have certainly not found a single 'scaled down' MS offering that was worth having, especially in a business environment.
It is part of my job responsibilities to evaluate and implement new technology. I am not even looking at Vista right now. Not that I like XP. MS is making my life very difficult.
I have no issues with having the software installed once, although Apple allowing certain products to be installed on a desktop AND a laptop is great. But, I do not steal software. I really like what Apple does with their 'Family Packs'. You can add ~ 25-30% to the price and install it on five machines. That is great marketing and very fair.
I am not sure who is interpreting this EULA correctly and this thread sure does not need my uninformed opinion. But, if a single instance of a retail version of Vista cannot be installed anyway you like, that is a crock. With that being said, I have certainly not found a single 'scaled down' MS offering that was worth having, especially in a business environment.
It is part of my job responsibilities to evaluate and implement new technology. I am not even looking at Vista right now. Not that I like XP. MS is making my life very difficult.
aaronfzr
Oct 24, 08:33 AM
Just called up the apple store on regent st - they didnt put me down on a waiting list or anything, but said they're getting them in the next couple of days (not weeks, huzzah!).
I'm stoked - with 2gb as standard, its already saved me the �200 I was gonna spend on the RAM upgrade!!! Including firewire800 and the small speedbump, oh yeah DL burning....I'm quite impressed! The only thing I could have hoped for (aside from cosmetics like maglatch) was a graphics card upg, but that didnt seem likely anyhow.
I'm stoked - with 2gb as standard, its already saved me the �200 I was gonna spend on the RAM upgrade!!! Including firewire800 and the small speedbump, oh yeah DL burning....I'm quite impressed! The only thing I could have hoped for (aside from cosmetics like maglatch) was a graphics card upg, but that didnt seem likely anyhow.
zulgand04
Oct 23, 08:12 AM
i was reading solmewhere the other day, don't rember where but it was sayin something along the lines of not being able to transfer a copy from one computer to another. example runing a copy of vista on a pc1, then get rid of that one takeing windows off it and wanting to run it on my new pc2 will not work. Due to the licences is resticted to the one computer you instal it on the first time. It was on digg the other day.
-Neal
-Neal
Westyfield2
May 3, 08:27 AM
Nice upgrade :) ... but I was hoping for an 500GB SSD option :(
Apple's SSDs are always overpriced and slower than third-party ones anyways.
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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
maybe our day will come soon,
Just seems mental how the iMacs are now on second generation Core i processors, yet the Mini is still on C2D.
Apple's SSDs are always overpriced and slower than third-party ones anyways.
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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
maybe our day will come soon,
Just seems mental how the iMacs are now on second generation Core i processors, yet the Mini is still on C2D.
csalm87
Apr 15, 03:09 PM
Looks like mostly bug fixes. Only thing new I have found is the result of putting a window out of focus.
iCal is still same design too.
Looks like the website icons are showing up now. They didn't before, at least for me no matter what I tried. Yay.
iCal is still same design too.
Looks like the website icons are showing up now. They didn't before, at least for me no matter what I tried. Yay.
ericinboston
Apr 11, 02:39 PM
This couldn't be further from the truth. TB is so much more versatile than USB can really ever be with tons more speed
I've seen what TB can do and it's great. But what I'm saying is that it will be HARD for TB to step into a USB-dominated computer industry and just kill USB altogether from all angles. Will TB be faster than USB 3.0?...in real world use by 90% of the consumers/prosumers out there? Maybe. Maybe not. It's like asking Bluray to come in and just dominate the DVD market...it's been trying and 3+ years BluRay is doing well, but the average Joe understands he needs to re-purchase all this movies as well as purchase a hi-def tv and stereo receiver to take advantage of all the features of Bluray (I love Bluray, by the way). It's time, money, and not everyone sees the value or HAS A NEED for that value.
Will people throw out all their USB devices and twiddle their thumbs waiting for TB devices other than hard drives (cameras, printers, video cams, keyboards, mice, flash keys,)? No. Of course not.
Speed vs. Speed is 1 argument...versatility is another. But again, what I'm really saying is to look around you and ask yourself if the world is just going to dump USB technology for TB? Nope. TB will likely coincide with USB 3.0 just like eSATA and Firewire.
We'll see in a few years where we are.
I've seen what TB can do and it's great. But what I'm saying is that it will be HARD for TB to step into a USB-dominated computer industry and just kill USB altogether from all angles. Will TB be faster than USB 3.0?...in real world use by 90% of the consumers/prosumers out there? Maybe. Maybe not. It's like asking Bluray to come in and just dominate the DVD market...it's been trying and 3+ years BluRay is doing well, but the average Joe understands he needs to re-purchase all this movies as well as purchase a hi-def tv and stereo receiver to take advantage of all the features of Bluray (I love Bluray, by the way). It's time, money, and not everyone sees the value or HAS A NEED for that value.
Will people throw out all their USB devices and twiddle their thumbs waiting for TB devices other than hard drives (cameras, printers, video cams, keyboards, mice, flash keys,)? No. Of course not.
Speed vs. Speed is 1 argument...versatility is another. But again, what I'm really saying is to look around you and ask yourself if the world is just going to dump USB technology for TB? Nope. TB will likely coincide with USB 3.0 just like eSATA and Firewire.
We'll see in a few years where we are.
Popeye206
Apr 13, 02:00 PM
Will it support Flash???? :p
longofest
Jul 24, 07:12 PM
You'll get no argument from me here. Been using the MX-1000 since my PC days and love it to death. My trackpad sees the use isntead of a MM, but same feelings :)
But I can see Steve Jobs announcing the improved bluetooth MM:
It's WWDC and he's in the middle of his stevenote. he 'accidentally hits something' and messes something or other up. He acts angry and yanks the MM away from its cord.
The cord just pops off and he pulls it out of hte USB port.
Then he keeps on using it as if nothing happened.
"oh, and we have the new bluetooth mighty mouse available now!
that's at least 3 MX-1000 users we have that are well-satisfied :-)
But I can see Steve Jobs announcing the improved bluetooth MM:
It's WWDC and he's in the middle of his stevenote. he 'accidentally hits something' and messes something or other up. He acts angry and yanks the MM away from its cord.
The cord just pops off and he pulls it out of hte USB port.
Then he keeps on using it as if nothing happened.
"oh, and we have the new bluetooth mighty mouse available now!
that's at least 3 MX-1000 users we have that are well-satisfied :-)
AHDuke99
Apr 14, 03:32 PM
That animation crap only started with 4.3. The previous releases were all fine.
Truffy
Mar 31, 11:07 AM
The new look gives the appearance of a physical desktop calendar with leather binding along the top edge, and like the iPad application shows remnants of torn-off pages for additional realism.
Oh, for the love of the children, NO! What's this need to make a computer application look like it's made of anything other than what it is? It's not made of paper and leather, why try to make it look like it is? I really don't get it...tacky, tacky, tacky. :mad:
Oh, for the love of the children, NO! What's this need to make a computer application look like it's made of anything other than what it is? It's not made of paper and leather, why try to make it look like it is? I really don't get it...tacky, tacky, tacky. :mad:
Aduntu
May 2, 02:23 AM
This is not for the faint of heart.
first released of Osama bin Laden dead (http://www.glittarazzi.com/storage/osama_bin_laden_dead-photo.jpg).
No way that's real.
first released of Osama bin Laden dead (http://www.glittarazzi.com/storage/osama_bin_laden_dead-photo.jpg).
No way that's real.
peapody
Jan 29, 10:57 AM
I'm currently testing one out :)
Wow that guy is a lot smaller than I thought it would be!
Shipping for a couple items just sold..including an Asus Gaming Laptop.
Wow that guy is a lot smaller than I thought it would be!
Shipping for a couple items just sold..including an Asus Gaming Laptop.
No comments:
Post a Comment