plinden
Oct 19, 10:31 AM
Although it's not spelled out, Gartner estimate 59 million computers were sold worldwide last quarter. Apple says they sold 1.6 million, so that makes 2.7%. This is up from 2.2% (1.2 million out of 55 million) last quarter.
Still well behind the fifth placed Toshiba's 4.3% (according to Appleinsider (http://appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2158))
So if they continue growing at this rate, they won't be in the top 5 for 6-9 months.
Still well behind the fifth placed Toshiba's 4.3% (according to Appleinsider (http://appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2158))
So if they continue growing at this rate, they won't be in the top 5 for 6-9 months.
croasmun
Oct 2, 03:11 PM
Since when is Apple not a litigious company?
Santabean2000
Oct 4, 07:08 AM
This is the Mac mini of houses at best.
Wow. Some of you really are hooked on the bigger is better buzz.
Seriously, get out and see some of the world. Perspective people. The world is NOT just the US.
Anyone tootin' on these forums (including myself) can consider themselves truly blessed.
A Mac mini house..? Hardly. It's a mansion by any worldly measure.
Wow. Some of you really are hooked on the bigger is better buzz.
Seriously, get out and see some of the world. Perspective people. The world is NOT just the US.
Anyone tootin' on these forums (including myself) can consider themselves truly blessed.
A Mac mini house..? Hardly. It's a mansion by any worldly measure.
H00513R
Apr 15, 01:51 PM
Using aluminum would hinder the cellular reception wouldn't it ?
Yep. Just like the iPad.
Yep. Just like the iPad.
more...
charliex5
Sep 28, 01:25 PM
In an age where architect and design firms are just starting to apply to Apple's design principles to the building of homes, Steve Jobs has gone and designed the iPhone of houses.
WTH? Whoever wrote this clearly doesn't have any idea about what has been going on in architecture in, oh, the past 150 years. I met Peter Bohlin last year and we got to talking about his design strategies. He's been doing similar work throughout his career, even before BCJ (then Bohlin Powell) was founded in 1965. Check out Japanese architecture from the past 1,500 years.
As an architecture major and architectural history minor I find this comment to be Jobs-worship. Thinking that nobody else could come up with the concept of a simple and sophisticated design is just asinine.
My rant aside, I love the floor plan and can't wait to see some elevations/perspectives. Go BCJ!
Also, on a side note, BCJ is the firm that designed Bill Gates' house...
WTH? Whoever wrote this clearly doesn't have any idea about what has been going on in architecture in, oh, the past 150 years. I met Peter Bohlin last year and we got to talking about his design strategies. He's been doing similar work throughout his career, even before BCJ (then Bohlin Powell) was founded in 1965. Check out Japanese architecture from the past 1,500 years.
As an architecture major and architectural history minor I find this comment to be Jobs-worship. Thinking that nobody else could come up with the concept of a simple and sophisticated design is just asinine.
My rant aside, I love the floor plan and can't wait to see some elevations/perspectives. Go BCJ!
Also, on a side note, BCJ is the firm that designed Bill Gates' house...
TrulyYuki
Apr 6, 01:43 PM
for the wife
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5069/5593508856_f7ddb60cb8_b.jpg
good job. Smart man. i know my future hubby will be just as brilliant. He's even waited in line with me on launch day for an iphone 4. And did not complain when we didn't get one.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5069/5593508856_f7ddb60cb8_b.jpg
good job. Smart man. i know my future hubby will be just as brilliant. He's even waited in line with me on launch day for an iphone 4. And did not complain when we didn't get one.
more...
hb234
May 1, 10:43 AM
Does anyone have problems with launching launchpad? After installing the build, launchpad didn't even launch anymore. It only shows some screens flickering and then returns to the homescreen. Does someone have a solution for this problem?
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
Branskins
Apr 29, 03:45 PM
I wish they would keep the slider buttons. I really really liked them :/
more...
trunkster
Oct 6, 02:47 PM
Verizon really doesn't offer any good phones. The phones with cheap data plans can hardly handle the processing speed of loading the websites so sure it's 3G, it will load just as slow as edge.
Reventon
Apr 10, 09:15 PM
Pre-ordered the Duke Nukem Collector's Edition for PS3.
http://www.platformnation.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Duke-Nukem-Forever-Balls-Of-Steel-Collectors-Edition.jpg
Always bet on the Duke! :cool:
http://www.platformnation.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Duke-Nukem-Forever-Balls-Of-Steel-Collectors-Edition.jpg
Always bet on the Duke! :cool:
more...
Lord Blackadder
Aug 10, 01:10 PM
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
Northgrove
May 3, 02:28 PM
Because you then sign a contract that says how you agree to use it. This is outside of that agreement. If you want to sign an agreement to use the data in a different way, I'm sure the carrier will accommodate you. But get your wallet open.
Where I live, and with the operator I use, this isn't out of the contract though. I don't know which contract you have.
Where I live, and with the operator I use, this isn't out of the contract though. I don't know which contract you have.
more...
digitalbiker
Oct 4, 10:11 AM
Clovertown doesn't ship until November so I'm thinking Apple could add a BTO option for them +$800 for Dual Quad 2.33GHz Clovertowns in December without rocking too many boats. Then the choice will be between 4 fast 3GHz cores (12GHz) or 8 slower 2.33GHz cores (18.64GHz) for the same $3,300.
FYI Each of those processors are priced precisely the same $851 - in case you thought 8 cores were going to cost more. They won't.
I'm afraid the new Intel Apple is going to be the same as the old PPC Apple.
Apple, (in the past), always blamed slow implementation of new processors and long shipping wait times on low Motorola or IBM processor yields.
Now Apple doesn't have the same excuse with Intel but I bet we don't see a Merom MBP or an Octo-MacPro until MacWorld SF or later.
Anyone taking bets!
FYI Each of those processors are priced precisely the same $851 - in case you thought 8 cores were going to cost more. They won't.
I'm afraid the new Intel Apple is going to be the same as the old PPC Apple.
Apple, (in the past), always blamed slow implementation of new processors and long shipping wait times on low Motorola or IBM processor yields.
Now Apple doesn't have the same excuse with Intel but I bet we don't see a Merom MBP or an Octo-MacPro until MacWorld SF or later.
Anyone taking bets!
Ommid
Apr 25, 01:09 PM
No. 4s is reality. 5 next June/July. Then every June/July after. :apple:
What??
What??
more...
NDA74
Jan 12, 09:01 PM
Anyone who leaps to a conclusion over this is foolish and shooting themselves in the foot. Print media is dead in its current form so you'll never see events banning people just because they have an online presence.
No, you will not. But what you will see are event planners being much more selective about who they credential, until the only media you see at events are the same big media companies that have always been there, except now they're online instead of in print. Same monopolies, different medium.
No, you will not. But what you will see are event planners being much more selective about who they credential, until the only media you see at events are the same big media companies that have always been there, except now they're online instead of in print. Same monopolies, different medium.
*LTD*
Apr 23, 06:09 PM
Read the first line.
Hack the computers, not the iPhones.
In which case nearly *all* your personal data is vulnerable. Cell tower tracking is not a special case, and relatively not especially more dangerous or compromising than anything else you've got stored on your computer.
Again, there's no egregious violation taking place here, and it's not especially worse than any other way to keep tabs on someone.
Let's reserve the lynching for when we actually find out what this tracking data is for specifically and how widespread the issue is with other companies (i.e., Google, MS, etc.)
If there is no actual cause for concern to the average person (which there really isn't), I fail to see that need to take a flip over it.
Anyway, that's all Il'll post about this for now. I really don't have a lot more to say. This topic is already way off-course, mostly my fault.
You must not read many of LTD's posts.
Admiring a winner is *very* wrong. Sorry.
Apple makes a lot of the competition look pretty damn stupid on a continual basis, but you can't call attention to it too often, because you'll end up stepping one someone's toes.
My view is: wear thicker boots.
The latest in my rogues gallery of idiots is RIM (first prize for laying the Playbook egg.)
Hack the computers, not the iPhones.
In which case nearly *all* your personal data is vulnerable. Cell tower tracking is not a special case, and relatively not especially more dangerous or compromising than anything else you've got stored on your computer.
Again, there's no egregious violation taking place here, and it's not especially worse than any other way to keep tabs on someone.
Let's reserve the lynching for when we actually find out what this tracking data is for specifically and how widespread the issue is with other companies (i.e., Google, MS, etc.)
If there is no actual cause for concern to the average person (which there really isn't), I fail to see that need to take a flip over it.
Anyway, that's all Il'll post about this for now. I really don't have a lot more to say. This topic is already way off-course, mostly my fault.
You must not read many of LTD's posts.
Admiring a winner is *very* wrong. Sorry.
Apple makes a lot of the competition look pretty damn stupid on a continual basis, but you can't call attention to it too often, because you'll end up stepping one someone's toes.
My view is: wear thicker boots.
The latest in my rogues gallery of idiots is RIM (first prize for laying the Playbook egg.)
more...
tuartboy
Jan 9, 03:27 PM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
I just searched for something on google and saw it all.
NOOOOOOOOO! NO! NO! NO!
no
I just searched for something on google and saw it all.
NOOOOOOOOO! NO! NO! NO!
no
Bistroengine
Apr 5, 05:51 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
and I'm surprised at the angry people like yourself being so angry at another grown ups choice of words!who are you to tell me what i can and can't say?do yourself a favor and don't reply i don't suffer fools. think il quit this forum to many ignorant people
Well then, I'll do brogers a favor and reply on his behalf. I think you've again misinterpreted another persons emotions. I don't see that brogers is angry, he's simply disappointed at the number of forum members who resort to name calling and labeling when they don't agree with another's opinion. (Something I've been vehemently opposed to as well my entire life) Also, he is not trying to tell you what you can and can't say. The beginning of his post clearly states you can say whatever you want. Again, he's simply disappointed that ones right to freedom of speech on this forum usually ends with name calling. I find it highly ironic that YOU want to leave this forum because of too many ignorant people.
and I'm surprised at the angry people like yourself being so angry at another grown ups choice of words!who are you to tell me what i can and can't say?do yourself a favor and don't reply i don't suffer fools. think il quit this forum to many ignorant people
Well then, I'll do brogers a favor and reply on his behalf. I think you've again misinterpreted another persons emotions. I don't see that brogers is angry, he's simply disappointed at the number of forum members who resort to name calling and labeling when they don't agree with another's opinion. (Something I've been vehemently opposed to as well my entire life) Also, he is not trying to tell you what you can and can't say. The beginning of his post clearly states you can say whatever you want. Again, he's simply disappointed that ones right to freedom of speech on this forum usually ends with name calling. I find it highly ironic that YOU want to leave this forum because of too many ignorant people.
TheWheelMan
Mar 17, 12:53 PM
Really VictoriaStudent, lol I agree with BForstal on what people would do in the same situation 100 percent, and I'm not trying to brag about anything, and I cant even believe this thread has reached 3 pages. Sec I have no reason to troll!!! I have been a member of this forum since and even though I have never really posted anything I have found wealth of knowledge over the years from people in these forums. Wow and you cannot judge a person's character by a mistake a cashier made in a store!!! Like I said everybody is entitled to there own opinion, If you were to make note of the mistake to the store if it happened to you and it makes you feel so highly above any one else, more power to you. As far as I'm concerned this is one time I actually got a break on a apple product.
You're probably right, but the difference is that most would either have enough of a guilty conscience, or at least enough fear of getting busted, to NOT go telling it in a public forum and then copping some sort of superior attitude over it when criticized about it.
By knowingly taking it you did in fact break the law, and now you've publicly incriminated yourself to boot. Your morality is unfair to question given how the majority of people may have done the same thing (Meaning, "Who are we to judge?"). Your stupidity, however, is quite evident, and those are the ones who usually end up paying for their crimes one way or another. Karma is, in fact, a b@tch. Especially when you paint a bullseye on your @ss and dare it to strike you down.
You're probably right, but the difference is that most would either have enough of a guilty conscience, or at least enough fear of getting busted, to NOT go telling it in a public forum and then copping some sort of superior attitude over it when criticized about it.
By knowingly taking it you did in fact break the law, and now you've publicly incriminated yourself to boot. Your morality is unfair to question given how the majority of people may have done the same thing (Meaning, "Who are we to judge?"). Your stupidity, however, is quite evident, and those are the ones who usually end up paying for their crimes one way or another. Karma is, in fact, a b@tch. Especially when you paint a bullseye on your @ss and dare it to strike you down.
Dmac77
Oct 6, 03:21 PM
I honestly don't understand why people are always complaining about AT&T. I and no one else that I know has ever had an issue with AT&T in our area (Ann Arbor, MI). But everyone who has Verizon has issues.
We used to be on Verizon, and we would always get dropped calls. And my friends who are still on Verizon still drop calls all the time.
It's the same if I drive out into the middle of nowhere. (Which me as some friends did recently). I had 3G coverage in the middle of nowhere, but my friend on Verizon had no coverage at all.
And the funny thing is that according to the maps, Verizon is supposed to have better 3G coverage in my area which is total BS.
EDIT: I also forgot to mention the crappy customer service from Verizon. Like the manager at a Verizon store telling my mom to ****** off and die, because she was pissed that there had been a service outage for over a week.
AT&T will bend over backwards for us though. The one time we had a problem (a day long outage) they prorated 25% of our bill for that month, without us even asking.
Don
We used to be on Verizon, and we would always get dropped calls. And my friends who are still on Verizon still drop calls all the time.
It's the same if I drive out into the middle of nowhere. (Which me as some friends did recently). I had 3G coverage in the middle of nowhere, but my friend on Verizon had no coverage at all.
And the funny thing is that according to the maps, Verizon is supposed to have better 3G coverage in my area which is total BS.
EDIT: I also forgot to mention the crappy customer service from Verizon. Like the manager at a Verizon store telling my mom to ****** off and die, because she was pissed that there had been a service outage for over a week.
AT&T will bend over backwards for us though. The one time we had a problem (a day long outage) they prorated 25% of our bill for that month, without us even asking.
Don
imuk
Aug 16, 09:14 AM
I received a 2A62XXX Display last week with a May production date. No idea whether it is an old or a new one. However, I did notice a few dead pixels last night after watching a movies. (The movie credits came with a black background. Great for dead pixel discovery!)
By just looking at it, I noticed at least 4 dead pixels, some appeared stronger than others. They are all on the left half of the screen. Is this considered an acceptable or normal number of dead pixels? I am tempted to return it while I can. Any suggestions?
By just looking at it, I noticed at least 4 dead pixels, some appeared stronger than others. They are all on the left half of the screen. Is this considered an acceptable or normal number of dead pixels? I am tempted to return it while I can. Any suggestions?
mikelegacy
Dec 13, 12:23 PM
We can all dream right? I hope to god this is true. I need better service. To me, it'd be worth the $200 termination fee...
Nekbeth
Apr 26, 09:02 PM
Thanks for the explanation Knight, I got confuse with pointers and objects.
I'll give a try now. See how it goes.
Man, we could go forever here. hahaa.
wlh99 , you just described exactly what I want to do.
I'll give a try now. See how it goes.
Man, we could go forever here. hahaa.
wlh99 , you just described exactly what I want to do.
BoyBach
Oct 17, 01:51 PM
I think the humble DVD-9 is going to be the 'top dog' for movies for quite a while yet. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, plus HD televisions with 780/1080i/p etc resolutions are difficult for the average consumer to understand, never mind get excited about enough to pay out thousands of pounds/dollars for - unless they're cimema-philes or geeks. (No offence meant.)
These massive storage mediums are only useful for computer users for the foreseeable future, where photo & music collections can be backed up to fewer discs.
My unimportant view on the topic, but I'm always right :p
These massive storage mediums are only useful for computer users for the foreseeable future, where photo & music collections can be backed up to fewer discs.
My unimportant view on the topic, but I'm always right :p
No comments:
Post a Comment