katanna
Jan 5, 10:30 AM
Oh, no...I don't think much of anyone expects there to be live coverage. They did away with that some time ago. But the QT archived video should be up within a few hours after the keynote ends.
Right... I am talking about the "archive" video that they host after the event... I SO miss the live feeds (I remember when they canceled them)!!!
The reason for the post here was in hopes that there would be others like me... enough to warrant a page, link, RSS, e-mail, something of the sort. Guess not. No biggie.
Matthew
Right... I am talking about the "archive" video that they host after the event... I SO miss the live feeds (I remember when they canceled them)!!!
The reason for the post here was in hopes that there would be others like me... enough to warrant a page, link, RSS, e-mail, something of the sort. Guess not. No biggie.
Matthew
flopticalcube
Apr 16, 11:58 AM
Why does it matter that he was gay? I thought that gay people where supposed to be the same as everyone else. Did his being gay give him some sort of super powers to break codes?
Positive role models for others. Perhaps attitudes towards the LGBT community will change when they see that some of the great contributors to civilization where also a part of that community. Up until the civil rights movement, most history classes were about dead white men (presumably straight). Now we have a much broader sense of history including minorities and aboriginal histories. This just fills things in a bit more.
Positive role models for others. Perhaps attitudes towards the LGBT community will change when they see that some of the great contributors to civilization where also a part of that community. Up until the civil rights movement, most history classes were about dead white men (presumably straight). Now we have a much broader sense of history including minorities and aboriginal histories. This just fills things in a bit more.
Poolo
Apr 25, 10:34 PM
Oh sweet. Looks really good, can always do with a bigger screen!!
twoodcc
Apr 10, 11:21 PM
I know... but I can always hope :p
It used to be worse when we had to wait for Motorola/IBM to produce enough chips, there were almost always delays in production because of yield issues or something else.
yeah that's true, but now what's the excuse? the processors are out now!
It used to be worse when we had to wait for Motorola/IBM to produce enough chips, there were almost always delays in production because of yield issues or something else.
yeah that's true, but now what's the excuse? the processors are out now!
robogobo
May 3, 05:49 AM
And your option is...?
Personally, I'd like to know if the deletion that results from turning off Location Services results in slower response time when you turn it back on. Does turning it back on give you a sufficient download from the mothership to get you up and running again quickly?
I turn off Location Services frequently for a variety of reasons... battery life, roaming internationally, etc. I'd hate to have this non-issue result in slower GPS every time I toggle Location.
Bingo, where are the options? This is the thing with the cache. Five bucks says people will be complaining about poor Location Services performance after the update.
Personally, I'd like to know if the deletion that results from turning off Location Services results in slower response time when you turn it back on. Does turning it back on give you a sufficient download from the mothership to get you up and running again quickly?
I turn off Location Services frequently for a variety of reasons... battery life, roaming internationally, etc. I'd hate to have this non-issue result in slower GPS every time I toggle Location.
Bingo, where are the options? This is the thing with the cache. Five bucks says people will be complaining about poor Location Services performance after the update.
ChrisA
Oct 28, 10:06 PM
I don't blame Apple. The OSS community abused what they had and turned to piracy by stealing the GUI. Kudos Apple.
You CAN'T abuse a BSD license. Have you read the BSD license? It sais basically "Do what you want with this software but don't sue the University of California" You can't seal BSD because it is free for everyone.
So you can run BSD UNIX on a generic PC or a wrist watch if you want. or you can even do whet Next did: Down load it and put it on your own hardware and sell it. Then Apple bought Next and we have OSX. Next got it for free and so can you or I. Apple can put the code on the web or take it off the web. The license only says to leave the U of C alone.
You CAN'T abuse a BSD license. Have you read the BSD license? It sais basically "Do what you want with this software but don't sue the University of California" You can't seal BSD because it is free for everyone.
So you can run BSD UNIX on a generic PC or a wrist watch if you want. or you can even do whet Next did: Down load it and put it on your own hardware and sell it. Then Apple bought Next and we have OSX. Next got it for free and so can you or I. Apple can put the code on the web or take it off the web. The license only says to leave the U of C alone.
DoFoT9
Aug 11, 09:44 PM
i was running around 90C. i've now taken it down to just 3.9 ghz. it's still up close to around 85C. i really don't feel like messing with water cooling on this system. maybe next time
fair call, added power, costs, fuss etcetc. not worth it i guess
fair call, added power, costs, fuss etcetc. not worth it i guess
AppliedVisual
Oct 17, 02:33 PM
Tape!?! :confused: who on earth uses tape anymore? This is.. 2006. And I was always under the impression that a medium with moving parts would be more prone to failure than one without. Certainly my VHS and cassette library have had their share of tapes being chewed up by the machine or worn out from use.
Tape is still the most reliable, long-term archival media available. Newer tape systems can transfer over 150MB/sec. to and from the tape and store several hundred GB on a single tape. Cost-wise, tape is expensive to buy into, but if you have sufficeint archival needs, it pays for itself over time. Many tape solutions once they reach their ROI point afer a year or two, often are cheaper than HDD storage by half or more. Sounds weird, I know, but that's the way it still is.
Most large data centers covering everything from web storage, insurance databases, financial institutions etc... Have mostly converted over to large-scale redundant servers and storage networks using RAID subsystems. This serves all their immediate storage and backup needs on site and is very reliable if managed properly. But nearly all of them still use an additional tape archival workflow for off-site data storage. There really is no other way right now... Wish there was. Hence the reason tape systems also keep evolving and pretty much match HDD capacity with tape capacity in most cases and transfer rates continue to improve. Comparing tape archival systems to VHS or miniDV tape is not a good comparison, data tapes (or at least the good ones) are very robust and actually very hard to damage. Short of placing them in a magnetic field for a period of time, they're mostly indestructable. They do have moving parts, but hardly any compared to a hard drive.
Using hard drives as an archival solution is a bad idea... Hard drives are not designed for this and can corrupt data over time. Not to mention, the platter system and motors are not designed to sit stationary for years at a time for long-term storage. Optical media isn't too bad, but most photo-sensitive dyes and films used in optical media will decay over time. CD-R media was originally claimed to have a lifespan of 30 to 100 years. Now that it's been around for 30+ years, we're finding out that claim was somewhat exaggerated. Recordable DVD media and HD-DVD and BD are no different, just higher data density on the discs. And also not anywhere near practical for large-scale solutions. Just how do you archive and manage 300 petabytes per year to DVD-R???
For small business type users and home users though, DVD-R media in addition to a good redundant RAID setup probably makes the most sense. Unless they're pushing lots of data doing HD video editing or something like that. In which case, it may still make sense to give tape a consideration as the long-term archive solution. Prosumer level tape archive systems exist and are not that expensive and much more reliable than shelved hard drives and much easier to manage than optical media. The VXA2 format can afford someone an external Firewire tape system w/2 tapes for < $1K. Tapes hold up to 160GB each and factoring in the cost of the drive plus enough tapes to back up about 3 terrabytes of data, the cost becomes cheaper than individual hard drives. So a few terrabytes down the road and you could be wishing you had considered tape if you're still using DVD-R. OTOH, DVD-R is just fine and dandy if a terrabyte or two is all you need. Because you can fit a lot of discs in a shoebox and sharpie pen to label them is pretty cheap too.
External drives are *not* long term archiving solutions. They are useful for storing vast amounts of data that presumably you want to actually access and use (and possibly modify) on a regular basis; also, they are good for the kind of incremental backups you refer to, Time Machine, Retrospect, other 3rd party backup tools can be used for this. But if you have important files you know aren't going to change, while having them on HDD is useful for instant access, that's not where they should be permanently archived -- they should be burned to a permanent medium, preferably more than one copy, and stored in a safe place (or places). If your drive fails and you still need the data to be on that drive, you can then restore from the permanent medium.
Um... I guess I got carried away and didn't mean to elaborate on what you already said. But, er... um.. Yep, I agree.
Tape is still the most reliable, long-term archival media available. Newer tape systems can transfer over 150MB/sec. to and from the tape and store several hundred GB on a single tape. Cost-wise, tape is expensive to buy into, but if you have sufficeint archival needs, it pays for itself over time. Many tape solutions once they reach their ROI point afer a year or two, often are cheaper than HDD storage by half or more. Sounds weird, I know, but that's the way it still is.
Most large data centers covering everything from web storage, insurance databases, financial institutions etc... Have mostly converted over to large-scale redundant servers and storage networks using RAID subsystems. This serves all their immediate storage and backup needs on site and is very reliable if managed properly. But nearly all of them still use an additional tape archival workflow for off-site data storage. There really is no other way right now... Wish there was. Hence the reason tape systems also keep evolving and pretty much match HDD capacity with tape capacity in most cases and transfer rates continue to improve. Comparing tape archival systems to VHS or miniDV tape is not a good comparison, data tapes (or at least the good ones) are very robust and actually very hard to damage. Short of placing them in a magnetic field for a period of time, they're mostly indestructable. They do have moving parts, but hardly any compared to a hard drive.
Using hard drives as an archival solution is a bad idea... Hard drives are not designed for this and can corrupt data over time. Not to mention, the platter system and motors are not designed to sit stationary for years at a time for long-term storage. Optical media isn't too bad, but most photo-sensitive dyes and films used in optical media will decay over time. CD-R media was originally claimed to have a lifespan of 30 to 100 years. Now that it's been around for 30+ years, we're finding out that claim was somewhat exaggerated. Recordable DVD media and HD-DVD and BD are no different, just higher data density on the discs. And also not anywhere near practical for large-scale solutions. Just how do you archive and manage 300 petabytes per year to DVD-R???
For small business type users and home users though, DVD-R media in addition to a good redundant RAID setup probably makes the most sense. Unless they're pushing lots of data doing HD video editing or something like that. In which case, it may still make sense to give tape a consideration as the long-term archive solution. Prosumer level tape archive systems exist and are not that expensive and much more reliable than shelved hard drives and much easier to manage than optical media. The VXA2 format can afford someone an external Firewire tape system w/2 tapes for < $1K. Tapes hold up to 160GB each and factoring in the cost of the drive plus enough tapes to back up about 3 terrabytes of data, the cost becomes cheaper than individual hard drives. So a few terrabytes down the road and you could be wishing you had considered tape if you're still using DVD-R. OTOH, DVD-R is just fine and dandy if a terrabyte or two is all you need. Because you can fit a lot of discs in a shoebox and sharpie pen to label them is pretty cheap too.
External drives are *not* long term archiving solutions. They are useful for storing vast amounts of data that presumably you want to actually access and use (and possibly modify) on a regular basis; also, they are good for the kind of incremental backups you refer to, Time Machine, Retrospect, other 3rd party backup tools can be used for this. But if you have important files you know aren't going to change, while having them on HDD is useful for instant access, that's not where they should be permanently archived -- they should be burned to a permanent medium, preferably more than one copy, and stored in a safe place (or places). If your drive fails and you still need the data to be on that drive, you can then restore from the permanent medium.
Um... I guess I got carried away and didn't mean to elaborate on what you already said. But, er... um.. Yep, I agree.
TomCondon
Apr 5, 03:08 PM
haha this is as lame as a tv station bringing out a half hour of the most "unique" and "fascinating" ads, wow.
also, maybe if they were some good, funny ads it would be ok, but no. The ads shown in the pic are just "EAT MCRIB" and "MAYBELLINE"...
also, maybe if they were some good, funny ads it would be ok, but no. The ads shown in the pic are just "EAT MCRIB" and "MAYBELLINE"...
charlituna
Dec 19, 01:26 PM
On your first point: It is also the company that came out with the iphone 4 and its antenna problems.
yes the tragic design flaw that only existed in the US in the areas where ATT service blows.
Same design flaw recently confirmed on the HTC even
As for these rumors, I don't believe said site on anything. Their record is so spotty it is a joke. Also if Apple was going to release a CDMA phone why haven't they for countries like China where I is the dominate cell phone tech. Instead they went with the second place carrier who supports GSM. Even all the talk that they are hiring CDMA knowledged engineers which 'proves' they are working on a Verizon phone falls apart when you consider the unlocked, no exclusives iPad. So that staff could be working on the product.
I won't go so far as to say that a CDMA iPhone would never happen, or an LTE Verizon iPhone. I just do buy that it is coming this soon. For a number of reasons. And no one has shown me proof reasonable enough to think otherwise
Because it is easy to leave
Easy Hairstyles For Curly Hair
African-American cool short
makes this easy hairstyle
Hairstyle cool
Quick easy hair styles
cool mens haircuts hairstyles
Cool Short Messy Women
quot;cool hairstyles for super
yes the tragic design flaw that only existed in the US in the areas where ATT service blows.
Same design flaw recently confirmed on the HTC even
As for these rumors, I don't believe said site on anything. Their record is so spotty it is a joke. Also if Apple was going to release a CDMA phone why haven't they for countries like China where I is the dominate cell phone tech. Instead they went with the second place carrier who supports GSM. Even all the talk that they are hiring CDMA knowledged engineers which 'proves' they are working on a Verizon phone falls apart when you consider the unlocked, no exclusives iPad. So that staff could be working on the product.
I won't go so far as to say that a CDMA iPhone would never happen, or an LTE Verizon iPhone. I just do buy that it is coming this soon. For a number of reasons. And no one has shown me proof reasonable enough to think otherwise
iBug2
Apr 30, 06:48 PM
Is there? They're already controlling what can and cannot be sold on the iOS platform (and it is an entire platform now with full-fledged computers in the form of the iPad). They've proven themselves beyond contempt by insisting that in-app subscriptions be the same or lower on the App store than direct, despite the fact that they demand 1/3 of all the selling price. They've added an 'App' store for OSX proper and have the same 30% "grab" for everything on there. They're advertising and bragging about bringing iOS features back to OSX. I'm just doing simple math here. You can make 1+1 = 1 if you say it's a bigger one, but in my world, 2 is still the more likely answer.
And you are the ones using the words "foolish". I think it's quite possibly a business-savvy solution to ensuring profits stay high into the future. What you or I may want in OSX is irrelevant to both Apple and Steve Jobs. Steve has essentially said that consumers don't know what's best for them and that it takes a visionary to move forward. We know Steve's 'vision' is smaller/thinner/more mobile at almost any cost. So I'm not saying it will happen like that, but that it's looking more likely every day. Only time will tell for sure. But I know if it does happen, I'll no longer have an interest in OSX. I don't want Apple deciding for me what I can or cannot buy or watching developers get 1/3 their gross taken from them (same % as a typical injury lawyer BTW. You don't get paid until they get paid FIRST and your bills 2nd and you last; in this case it would be taxes instead of bills). You can think it's good/fair/right. I don't agree and I don't want Apple telling me I have to use Safari because they don't want Firefox or Chrome competing with them.
I don't know about that. There will always be a market for faster/more powerful (i.e. most people may drive a Ford Focus or Chevy Impala or Toyota Corrola and hybrids may capture larger and larger market penetration in the future, but that doesn't mean there isn't a market for the WRX, Mustang, Corvette, etc. even if it shrinks over time) and so even if Apple AND Microsoft bail out of traditional computing, that just means someone else will likely take over. They can't make Linux go away, for example. And if people didn't BUY it, the lines would stop. Newton didn't exactly go over so well the first time around....
Remember what Steve said. PC's as we use today will be like trucks. Yes they will be around but nobody, not you nor me are going to use them.
And no. Are you currently using a 64 core workstation? I bet not. But they are available. So no, we don't need the fastest even today. In 15 years, an iPad will be more powerful than our 12 core Mac Pro's. And nobody will pick anything up. All computer industry will go post pc devices, because it makes much more sense. They are much easier to use, we hate them now because we can use actual PC's, but most of the population can't. Not just old people, most of the young people have tons of issues with regular PC's as well.
And don't worry, we won't be too down about it when it finally happens, since it'll happen very slowly.
Like I said, that's not even the weird part. We won't even have CPU's in our computers, just inputs. :)
And you are the ones using the words "foolish". I think it's quite possibly a business-savvy solution to ensuring profits stay high into the future. What you or I may want in OSX is irrelevant to both Apple and Steve Jobs. Steve has essentially said that consumers don't know what's best for them and that it takes a visionary to move forward. We know Steve's 'vision' is smaller/thinner/more mobile at almost any cost. So I'm not saying it will happen like that, but that it's looking more likely every day. Only time will tell for sure. But I know if it does happen, I'll no longer have an interest in OSX. I don't want Apple deciding for me what I can or cannot buy or watching developers get 1/3 their gross taken from them (same % as a typical injury lawyer BTW. You don't get paid until they get paid FIRST and your bills 2nd and you last; in this case it would be taxes instead of bills). You can think it's good/fair/right. I don't agree and I don't want Apple telling me I have to use Safari because they don't want Firefox or Chrome competing with them.
I don't know about that. There will always be a market for faster/more powerful (i.e. most people may drive a Ford Focus or Chevy Impala or Toyota Corrola and hybrids may capture larger and larger market penetration in the future, but that doesn't mean there isn't a market for the WRX, Mustang, Corvette, etc. even if it shrinks over time) and so even if Apple AND Microsoft bail out of traditional computing, that just means someone else will likely take over. They can't make Linux go away, for example. And if people didn't BUY it, the lines would stop. Newton didn't exactly go over so well the first time around....
Remember what Steve said. PC's as we use today will be like trucks. Yes they will be around but nobody, not you nor me are going to use them.
And no. Are you currently using a 64 core workstation? I bet not. But they are available. So no, we don't need the fastest even today. In 15 years, an iPad will be more powerful than our 12 core Mac Pro's. And nobody will pick anything up. All computer industry will go post pc devices, because it makes much more sense. They are much easier to use, we hate them now because we can use actual PC's, but most of the population can't. Not just old people, most of the young people have tons of issues with regular PC's as well.
And don't worry, we won't be too down about it when it finally happens, since it'll happen very slowly.
Like I said, that's not even the weird part. We won't even have CPU's in our computers, just inputs. :)
systole
Mar 28, 07:39 PM
Isn't the design awards just a fancy carrot in disguise?
Personally, I think that the biggest detriment to developers is control. If you find an app on their website, the developer controls the shopping environment, and licensee terms. By submitting their app, developers loose control first, profit second.
Personally, I think that the biggest detriment to developers is control. If you find an app on their website, the developer controls the shopping environment, and licensee terms. By submitting their app, developers loose control first, profit second.
itgoesforfun
Nov 24, 08:39 PM
The Apple store onine and the retail stores are not offering double dicounts...you will have to choose the sale price OR your education / corporate discount. If you found a location that gives both, they aren't following the published guidelines. Good for you, but it doesn't mean the other locations will follow suite.
You can get the corporate discount with the sale price using the online store. I did it earlier today.
You need to add the items to the cart to see the additional "sale" discount from the already reduced corporate discount.
You can get the corporate discount with the sale price using the online store. I did it earlier today.
You need to add the items to the cart to see the additional "sale" discount from the already reduced corporate discount.
Calidude
Apr 17, 12:26 PM
You really don't get that it's not promotion. There is a big swath of gray area between promotion and concealment. The GLBT struggle for equality is part of our culture whether you are involved in it or not. It should be entered into the records.
They're not in the records?
Come on, guy. Does it really matter if somebody were gay? I thought people of a liberal mindset are supposed to be "colorblind" or what have you, yet all of a sudden their sexuality, which has nothing to do with their achievements, should be made an important part of history?
How hypocritical.
They're not in the records?
Come on, guy. Does it really matter if somebody were gay? I thought people of a liberal mindset are supposed to be "colorblind" or what have you, yet all of a sudden their sexuality, which has nothing to do with their achievements, should be made an important part of history?
How hypocritical.
Al Coholic
Apr 8, 12:58 PM
Oh crap. 400 fear-mongering posts in the other thread were for naught. :eek:
LOL!
Come on people, think next time. Like Apple gives a rat's ass how their retailers horde iPads when Apple themselves can't even supply them.
LOL!
Come on people, think next time. Like Apple gives a rat's ass how their retailers horde iPads when Apple themselves can't even supply them.
SirROM
Sep 12, 01:16 AM
I had a thought about what would drive people to purchase movies from Apple in droves and totally fsck the other studios, making them BEG the Steve to let them play in his sandbox:
Disney allows Apple to release movies BEFORE they are released on DVD, similar to what they have done a couple of time with music tracks. Imagine being able to have a copy of the recent Pirates movies a week or two before it can be bought with packaging. If the quality were good enough, people would probably be willing to forgo the packaging itself and pay an "early-adopter" fee of $14.99 just for the bragging rights. The media would be all over this and it would be seen as yet another Apple coup in Hollywood. After all, Walmart and Blockbuster would join Ballmer in throwing chairs because of the money they would start losing when people didn't buy or rent DVDs from them and they couldn't do anything about it for a couple of weeks. "Hey Walmart! Wanna play dirty? I'll show you dirty..."
I'll bet Steve has some other plan like this or similar in mind so this doesn't come off looking weak and like he lost against the studios.
Disney allows Apple to release movies BEFORE they are released on DVD, similar to what they have done a couple of time with music tracks. Imagine being able to have a copy of the recent Pirates movies a week or two before it can be bought with packaging. If the quality were good enough, people would probably be willing to forgo the packaging itself and pay an "early-adopter" fee of $14.99 just for the bragging rights. The media would be all over this and it would be seen as yet another Apple coup in Hollywood. After all, Walmart and Blockbuster would join Ballmer in throwing chairs because of the money they would start losing when people didn't buy or rent DVDs from them and they couldn't do anything about it for a couple of weeks. "Hey Walmart! Wanna play dirty? I'll show you dirty..."
I'll bet Steve has some other plan like this or similar in mind so this doesn't come off looking weak and like he lost against the studios.
KnightWRX
Mar 6, 11:40 AM
Why is Apple the only tech company that makes unique products? All the other big ones seem to just drop in behind Apple after they invent something...
Apple doesn't invent. Apple refines.
Apple didn't invent anything with the iPhone as an example, it had all been there in the industry, sometimes for years before Apple came to market. They simply packaged it up and marketed it. App stores, SDKs, touch screens, Internet browsers, wifi, etc.. name it and we can find another device/company that did it before Apple.
That's what Apple does, they tie existing concepts and features together and put them through the marketing grinder to sell it. They are successful at this, sometimes where the pioneers of a particular technology failed.
Apple doesn't invent. Apple refines.
Apple didn't invent anything with the iPhone as an example, it had all been there in the industry, sometimes for years before Apple came to market. They simply packaged it up and marketed it. App stores, SDKs, touch screens, Internet browsers, wifi, etc.. name it and we can find another device/company that did it before Apple.
That's what Apple does, they tie existing concepts and features together and put them through the marketing grinder to sell it. They are successful at this, sometimes where the pioneers of a particular technology failed.
puuukeey
Jan 9, 01:26 PM
someone posted the whole thing on youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDfRvcjBQlM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDfRvcjBQlM
leekohler
Mar 3, 09:44 PM
Go Ohio! Crush the unions! Return to fiscal sanity. No more hiding behind a union... time to return to personal responsibility. Ohio today, Wisconsin tomorrow, who's next? Sweep the states clean, Tea Party!
BTW, there is no 'RIGHT' to collective bargaining.
Collective bargaining is a legislative privilege granted by friendly law makers in some localities which can be quickly and abruptly eliminated (as you've all just observed.)
Public unions are idiotic. Imagine a private sector union where the union members themselves were able to contribute to the election and vote for the individual whom they'd be bargaining against. BRILLIANT! It's a conflict of interest - straight up.
Interesting quote by Bill Gates recently: (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/foundationnotes/Pages/bill-gates-110302-ted-2011-line-up.aspx) (thanks for the help twice in one day, Billy boy!)
Hahaha, keep telling yourself that! http://www.gallup.com/poll/125066/State-States.aspx ;)
Fivepoint- you act as if teachers make lots of money. The don't, even though they are required to have masters degrees. People understand if the belt is tight. People do NOT understand being denied the right to unionize and fight when they feel taken advantage of. NO ONE should ever be jailed for striking. That you support this is nothing short of sickening. I am absolutely disgusted. Just wait- you guys will get yours soon enough, trust me.
BTW, I don;t know what your point was with that link, but it indicates for the most part that the political tide can tip quite easily.
And Bill Gates said nothing about union busting. Fail to see your point there as well.
I heard somewhere that federal employees are not able to collectively bargain for their benefits package. If this is true, why are recent states' attempts to restrict unionized bargaining seen as being so draconian, and why isn't there an outcry to give federal employees the same "rights"?
Will federal employees be jailed if they unionize?
BTW, there is no 'RIGHT' to collective bargaining.
Collective bargaining is a legislative privilege granted by friendly law makers in some localities which can be quickly and abruptly eliminated (as you've all just observed.)
Public unions are idiotic. Imagine a private sector union where the union members themselves were able to contribute to the election and vote for the individual whom they'd be bargaining against. BRILLIANT! It's a conflict of interest - straight up.
Interesting quote by Bill Gates recently: (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/foundationnotes/Pages/bill-gates-110302-ted-2011-line-up.aspx) (thanks for the help twice in one day, Billy boy!)
Hahaha, keep telling yourself that! http://www.gallup.com/poll/125066/State-States.aspx ;)
Fivepoint- you act as if teachers make lots of money. The don't, even though they are required to have masters degrees. People understand if the belt is tight. People do NOT understand being denied the right to unionize and fight when they feel taken advantage of. NO ONE should ever be jailed for striking. That you support this is nothing short of sickening. I am absolutely disgusted. Just wait- you guys will get yours soon enough, trust me.
BTW, I don;t know what your point was with that link, but it indicates for the most part that the political tide can tip quite easily.
And Bill Gates said nothing about union busting. Fail to see your point there as well.
I heard somewhere that federal employees are not able to collectively bargain for their benefits package. If this is true, why are recent states' attempts to restrict unionized bargaining seen as being so draconian, and why isn't there an outcry to give federal employees the same "rights"?
Will federal employees be jailed if they unionize?
mozmac
Oct 6, 10:46 AM
Finally, a Verizon commercial that I like!
*LTD*
Mar 11, 01:08 PM
I thought the iPod succeeded due to integration with an online music source, as well as finally being a useable HD based mp3 player.
I wasn't aware computing had changed. Please detail this.
Milestone 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0FtgZNOD44
Milestone 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftf4riVJyqw
Milestone 3 (the most recent):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBhYxj2SvRI
Any questions?
I wasn't aware computing had changed. Please detail this.
Milestone 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0FtgZNOD44
Milestone 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftf4riVJyqw
Milestone 3 (the most recent):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBhYxj2SvRI
Any questions?
v66jack
Mar 5, 03:43 PM
Apple don't do all that much innovating themselves. They just buy small companies who innovate then sell it as their own.
It's a bit more complicated than that in reality but generally that's where their stuff comes from.
It's a bit more complicated than that in reality but generally that's where their stuff comes from.
JackAxe
Mar 24, 06:11 PM
Happy birthday to Apple's 'ONLY' good OS! :)
UTclassof89
Jul 21, 01:39 PM
1) What isn't factored into your calculations is that because of its more-sensitive antenna, the iP4 was able to make calls, in marginal signal areas, where the 3GS showed no signal and was not able to attempt or receive a call... dropping any of these "never-before-possible" calls would reflect poorly on the iP4, and be included in the "< 1 call per hundred" more dropped calls by the iP4.
True, but a dropped call is a dropped call.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
We both know that's a crock. If "<1" was anything less than 0.8, Apple would have said "barely over one half of one percent". But they didn't. That means it's more like .97 or .98 (bet me an iPhone!)
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
Wow. Mr. Jobs, I didn't realize it was you.
The point isn't whether a case mitigates the issue--I have no doubt that it does. But Apple is spinning facts and pretending the issue is the typical attenuation issue other phones has. It isn't (otherwise the iphone 4's that left the store without a case would be dropping fewer calls, not more)
True, but a dropped call is a dropped call.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
We both know that's a crock. If "<1" was anything less than 0.8, Apple would have said "barely over one half of one percent". But they didn't. That means it's more like .97 or .98 (bet me an iPhone!)
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
Wow. Mr. Jobs, I didn't realize it was you.
The point isn't whether a case mitigates the issue--I have no doubt that it does. But Apple is spinning facts and pretending the issue is the typical attenuation issue other phones has. It isn't (otherwise the iphone 4's that left the store without a case would be dropping fewer calls, not more)
No comments:
Post a Comment