pika2000
Feb 24, 12:16 PM
Parents need to do their part, but government needs to try to protect from the greed that that brought us to the mess we are in today....
Oh sure, like the banks for example.... oh wait, the government actually gave them our tax money! :rolleyes:
Oh sure, like the banks for example.... oh wait, the government actually gave them our tax money! :rolleyes:
basesloaded190
Mar 23, 03:46 PM
I would like this implemented for this reason:
If i wanted to watch something via AirPlay and my Apple TV, I would have to switch my input on my receiver, have the Apple TV load up, then stream the content from my Idevice.
If I could stream from my phone or Ipad with out having to change anything on my receiver or tv input, this would be amazing for me!
If i wanted to watch something via AirPlay and my Apple TV, I would have to switch my input on my receiver, have the Apple TV load up, then stream the content from my Idevice.
If I could stream from my phone or Ipad with out having to change anything on my receiver or tv input, this would be amazing for me!
hulugu
Apr 5, 12:28 AM
Thing about the Laffer curve is that there was/is no research or data to back it up. Arthur Laffer pulled it out of a dark place and scribbled it down on a cocktail napkin. Its actual shape may have no actual correlation to the smooth bell we always see, it is all fiction because no one has tried to demonstrate its validity or accuracy.
I won't disagree with you.
I believe I have seen it suggested somewhere that raising taxes puts pressure on business, which may have the effect of stimulating growth by forcing the businesses to make up the lost revenue (ramping up).
Interesting and just as sensible.
What effect government policy has on the economy is not clear because the economy is made up of a mass of Brownian particles that move in unpredictable and befuddling ways....
And, I think this is the money quote; nice use of physics term.
I won't disagree with you.
I believe I have seen it suggested somewhere that raising taxes puts pressure on business, which may have the effect of stimulating growth by forcing the businesses to make up the lost revenue (ramping up).
Interesting and just as sensible.
What effect government policy has on the economy is not clear because the economy is made up of a mass of Brownian particles that move in unpredictable and befuddling ways....
And, I think this is the money quote; nice use of physics term.
str1f3
Dec 27, 06:31 PM
http://consumerist.com/2009/12/att-customer-service-new-york-city-is-not-ready-for-the-iphone.html
A call from The Consumerist to AT&T online sales:
Daphne: Welcome to AT&T online Sales support. How may I assist you with placing your order today?
Laura: Hi, I was looking at the iPhone 3Gs and the system tells me that I cannot order one in my ZIP code. My zip code is 11231. (Brooklyn, NY) Is this true? Are iPhones no longer available in New York City?
Daphne: I am happy to be helping you today . Yes, this is correct the phone is not offered to you because New York is not ready for the iPhone.
Daphne: You don't have enough towers to handle the phone.
Laura: Thank you for your help. So the phone is not available to people anywhere in the city?
Daphne: Yes this is correct Laura.
-----------
This is an effing joke. You are actually trying to stop paying customers from using your service? AT&T, you're an embarrassment. Apple had better make sure this exclusivity ends next year. This is about as ridiculous as it can get.
A call from The Consumerist to AT&T online sales:
Daphne: Welcome to AT&T online Sales support. How may I assist you with placing your order today?
Laura: Hi, I was looking at the iPhone 3Gs and the system tells me that I cannot order one in my ZIP code. My zip code is 11231. (Brooklyn, NY) Is this true? Are iPhones no longer available in New York City?
Daphne: I am happy to be helping you today . Yes, this is correct the phone is not offered to you because New York is not ready for the iPhone.
Daphne: You don't have enough towers to handle the phone.
Laura: Thank you for your help. So the phone is not available to people anywhere in the city?
Daphne: Yes this is correct Laura.
-----------
This is an effing joke. You are actually trying to stop paying customers from using your service? AT&T, you're an embarrassment. Apple had better make sure this exclusivity ends next year. This is about as ridiculous as it can get.
more...
DiamondMac
Apr 1, 10:58 AM
TV is trash anyway. Who has time left to waste watching commercials & shodily slapped together shows?
Have time to kill? Do something constructive on Inkpad or iDraw.
Want some light entertainment on while you do something productive? Netflix
Want something cheap and raunchy? Youpr0n
There is nothing TV does that one of these other things doesn't do better.
Well, keep feeding me the trash. I really do NOT have anything better to do after working 7am-7pm
Have time to kill? Do something constructive on Inkpad or iDraw.
Want some light entertainment on while you do something productive? Netflix
Want something cheap and raunchy? Youpr0n
There is nothing TV does that one of these other things doesn't do better.
Well, keep feeding me the trash. I really do NOT have anything better to do after working 7am-7pm
solientblack
May 1, 04:42 PM
I found it after scouring pages of Google returns.
Dungeon Raid is the name.. pretty fun, I'd recommend it.
Dungeon Raid is the name.. pretty fun, I'd recommend it.
more...
Mac-Addict
Oct 27, 05:13 PM
:rolleyes: i liked the flapjacks and the chocolate, coffee would have been nice.
apple didnt tell the council early enough, so they couldnt put up barriers.
where about in the line were you BTW :confused:
4th :D 3 Hours flew by, I got coffee hand delivered by my mum lol! I'm only 13 so I had to come down with her and my dad but they went off shopping and I met up with them after.
apple didnt tell the council early enough, so they couldnt put up barriers.
where about in the line were you BTW :confused:
4th :D 3 Hours flew by, I got coffee hand delivered by my mum lol! I'm only 13 so I had to come down with her and my dad but they went off shopping and I met up with them after.
ericlewis91
Nov 11, 09:49 AM
I can speak mac japanese! WHOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
more...
edesignuk
Dec 18, 10:42 AM
Oh I guess you must be right then. :rolleyes:No more right than you are, but I'm not the one trying to stamp on everyone's parade. :rolleyes: indeed.
iSimx
Mar 28, 08:23 AM
Hoping Lion will be launched then! :)
more...
HobeSoundDarryl
Mar 23, 02:53 PM
TVs are being marketed because they have Facebook on them. If you don't think electronics manufacturers would not heavily promote that it supported Apple Airplay, just for the halo benefit alone, you are mistaken.
I just bought a new cutting-edge TV, and I researched the crap out of them. As such, I was exposed to tons of TV advertising. If in the course of all if that, if one of them made a Facebook app a headline point for why I should buy their TV, I missed that ad.
And by the way, the TV that I bought happens to have a Facebook App. But that's certainly was NOT a factor in why I bought it.
Again, I'm not saying the idea of incorporating Airplay into TVs is a bad idea- quite the contrary. My point is about getting it entrenched in all TVs by giving it away rather than trying to get $4 per unit for it. Those that want it win by it entrenching in all TVs. I question whether the $4 will yield a situation that it only gets into select TVs when it could eventually be everywhere.
I just bought a new cutting-edge TV, and I researched the crap out of them. As such, I was exposed to tons of TV advertising. If in the course of all if that, if one of them made a Facebook app a headline point for why I should buy their TV, I missed that ad.
And by the way, the TV that I bought happens to have a Facebook App. But that's certainly was NOT a factor in why I bought it.
Again, I'm not saying the idea of incorporating Airplay into TVs is a bad idea- quite the contrary. My point is about getting it entrenched in all TVs by giving it away rather than trying to get $4 per unit for it. Those that want it win by it entrenching in all TVs. I question whether the $4 will yield a situation that it only gets into select TVs when it could eventually be everywhere.
fistful
Feb 12, 09:17 PM
or just set the album as a compilation by clicking "part of a compilation" in the info tab. after you do this "compilations" will show up in the artist list.
more...
Tiauguinho
Sep 19, 01:57 PM
HEHEHEHE!!! That is great to see!!! Go PowerMac! Flame everything!
skunk
Feb 26, 05:15 PM
Where's Bill Gates?Not in California. This was for people based in California.
more...
cr2sh
Sep 20, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by wilburpan
Please reread my post above. According to the www.cpuscorecard.com website, an iMac 800 MHz machine is comparable in performance to a 1.8Ghz P4 machine. And if you compare the cost of the iMac to a similarly equipped Dell 1.8Ghz P4 machine, the iMac is actually the cheaper of the two.
This was a real eye opener for me.
Fine, lets just assume that a 800mhz imac and a 1.8gigahertz dell are similar in performance, equiptment and cost... this thread is about speed. i realize the differences in the two chips, and i agree largely with apple that frequency isnt everything.. that aside, intel is still kicking motorola's ass (for the time being).
the g4 cannot beat the p4 in performance, so you drag cost ratios in to muddy up the water.. why? the p4 beats the g4. if you want an imac fine, buy it. but dont confuse yourself by saying 'the g4 is just as fast as the p4...' because its not. :)
we're all mac lovers here, and a lot of the pc equivalent software to iapps is total crap! ill agree with you there. you get a LOT of high quality software within the max os. (xp doesnt even include a dvd playing app does it?)
the imac is pretty, its more pleasant to use, and it might bench equivalently.. but like i said, toe to toe... the p4 comes out swining at 2.8gigahertz, the g4 is having a hardtime beating that.
Please reread my post above. According to the www.cpuscorecard.com website, an iMac 800 MHz machine is comparable in performance to a 1.8Ghz P4 machine. And if you compare the cost of the iMac to a similarly equipped Dell 1.8Ghz P4 machine, the iMac is actually the cheaper of the two.
This was a real eye opener for me.
Fine, lets just assume that a 800mhz imac and a 1.8gigahertz dell are similar in performance, equiptment and cost... this thread is about speed. i realize the differences in the two chips, and i agree largely with apple that frequency isnt everything.. that aside, intel is still kicking motorola's ass (for the time being).
the g4 cannot beat the p4 in performance, so you drag cost ratios in to muddy up the water.. why? the p4 beats the g4. if you want an imac fine, buy it. but dont confuse yourself by saying 'the g4 is just as fast as the p4...' because its not. :)
we're all mac lovers here, and a lot of the pc equivalent software to iapps is total crap! ill agree with you there. you get a LOT of high quality software within the max os. (xp doesnt even include a dvd playing app does it?)
the imac is pretty, its more pleasant to use, and it might bench equivalently.. but like i said, toe to toe... the p4 comes out swining at 2.8gigahertz, the g4 is having a hardtime beating that.
RacerX
Apr 3, 01:43 PM
Great post. I've heard of Pages by Pages, but I didn't think that Apple's Pages was a direct descendant. While I took programming classes in college on a NeXT box, I never used the app and thought it was more of a classic word processor.
A lot of people didn't give Pages a try back then... it was a little expensive ($795), and I was using FrameMaker for papers on NeXT systems back then.
As for the rest of the discussion about comparing Pages to other apps...
I think it's absolutely fair to compare Pages to what else is out there...
What I see Pages as trying to do (again) is to define a new category.
I've seen the same thing happen with Create. When people try to do a toe-to-toe line up on some other app's specialty area, it is going to fall short. Compare Create to Illustrator in doing illustration and Illustrator wins... But it should, after all it is a dedicated illustration app, while Create is not. Compare Create to InDesign or QuarkXPress for page layout and those other apps win... But they should, after all they are dedicated layout apps. Further, all those dedicated apps cost far more than Create.
The problem is that most people hold up what is new to what they know. I think that if something like Create was held up to QuarkXPress looking at both apps illustration abilities, that would be just as fair. It is when we restrict these newer (to most people) apps to categories that they are not attempting to compete in directly that the comparisons fall far short.
I truly believe that apps like Pages and Create fill voids that exist in the software industry today. First, they don't cost as much as high end solutions. Second, they address some ranges of users which other companies try to force into high or low end apps. The gulf between the high end and low end has been getting larger over the years.
Pages lets people with little background make quality documents. Create provides a middle ground for people with experience that don't have the money or need for the top of the line professional apps.
Rather than pushing these into other categories, we should embrace these apps for filling these gaps in our (collective) software selection.
As I said, Pages, is not for me... but it is a solution for someone and I recognize that. And I sure don't need (or want) Apple to redefine it around my needs at the expense of those it is design to serve.
:rolleyes:
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that just because Pages isn't the app that some people want it to be doesn't make it a bad app or one that doesn't have it's place in the computing world.
A lot of people didn't give Pages a try back then... it was a little expensive ($795), and I was using FrameMaker for papers on NeXT systems back then.
As for the rest of the discussion about comparing Pages to other apps...
I think it's absolutely fair to compare Pages to what else is out there...
What I see Pages as trying to do (again) is to define a new category.
I've seen the same thing happen with Create. When people try to do a toe-to-toe line up on some other app's specialty area, it is going to fall short. Compare Create to Illustrator in doing illustration and Illustrator wins... But it should, after all it is a dedicated illustration app, while Create is not. Compare Create to InDesign or QuarkXPress for page layout and those other apps win... But they should, after all they are dedicated layout apps. Further, all those dedicated apps cost far more than Create.
The problem is that most people hold up what is new to what they know. I think that if something like Create was held up to QuarkXPress looking at both apps illustration abilities, that would be just as fair. It is when we restrict these newer (to most people) apps to categories that they are not attempting to compete in directly that the comparisons fall far short.
I truly believe that apps like Pages and Create fill voids that exist in the software industry today. First, they don't cost as much as high end solutions. Second, they address some ranges of users which other companies try to force into high or low end apps. The gulf between the high end and low end has been getting larger over the years.
Pages lets people with little background make quality documents. Create provides a middle ground for people with experience that don't have the money or need for the top of the line professional apps.
Rather than pushing these into other categories, we should embrace these apps for filling these gaps in our (collective) software selection.
As I said, Pages, is not for me... but it is a solution for someone and I recognize that. And I sure don't need (or want) Apple to redefine it around my needs at the expense of those it is design to serve.
:rolleyes:
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that just because Pages isn't the app that some people want it to be doesn't make it a bad app or one that doesn't have it's place in the computing world.
more...
Thomas Veil
Apr 9, 07:38 PM
All right, let me rephrase that: government funds plenty of things, like libraries and parks, that aren't "necessary" but wanted. If you want to keep the argument on the federal level, substitute your own examples, including national parks. (Remember Bush trying to push them towards privatization?)
If you have a balanced budget, and you suddenly unbalance it with tax cuts, the difference between revenue loss and spending is pretty much a matter of semantics. You had the money, and now you don't. At least when you spend it on a service, you expect to get something for it.
Maybe one of the problems with House Republicans is that they don't think of tax cuts that they can't afford as spending.
If you have a balanced budget, and you suddenly unbalance it with tax cuts, the difference between revenue loss and spending is pretty much a matter of semantics. You had the money, and now you don't. At least when you spend it on a service, you expect to get something for it.
Maybe one of the problems with House Republicans is that they don't think of tax cuts that they can't afford as spending.
Snowy_River
Aug 14, 03:04 PM
Worst Apple ads ever. You attract more flies with sugar than vinegar, and Apple's all about the vinegar.
I strongly disagree. These ads are based on humor. Humor seems more like a sweet enticement than a sour one.
Oh, and by the way, it's honey, not sugar.
I'm not claiming to say that these ads have hurt or helped boost the market shares.
Well, actually you are:
Not because of these commercials.
That seems pretty much like your denying the possibility that they have helped, explicitly.
...I'm only saying that I have only heard negative things about them.
I feel embarrassed watching them.
Well, you know, that's your experience and your issue. I find them funny. Everyone I know finds them funny. And that includes a number of PC users, including IT professionals. The only person who didn't quite let himself laugh openly about them is my dad, and he has a personal bias against Macs.
I strongly disagree. These ads are based on humor. Humor seems more like a sweet enticement than a sour one.
Oh, and by the way, it's honey, not sugar.
I'm not claiming to say that these ads have hurt or helped boost the market shares.
Well, actually you are:
Not because of these commercials.
That seems pretty much like your denying the possibility that they have helped, explicitly.
...I'm only saying that I have only heard negative things about them.
I feel embarrassed watching them.
Well, you know, that's your experience and your issue. I find them funny. Everyone I know finds them funny. And that includes a number of PC users, including IT professionals. The only person who didn't quite let himself laugh openly about them is my dad, and he has a personal bias against Macs.
gwangung
Sep 25, 11:02 PM
So? Some words like "Podcast" are adopted from popular culture. I still talk about Walkmans, not "Portable Audio Cassette Decks". Imagine how annoying that would be to say every time?
I can understand why they want to protect the iPod name. That is their name, and that is their product. However, they really should leave "Podcast" alone. Having a "Podcast" is like the ultimate insult to everyone like Creative, Microsoft, etc. The name "Podcast" exists not because people want to leech off of the iPod's popularity, but because of the iPods popularity, and how endeared it is by our culture. These "Podcasts" were created to be downloaded onto iPods so that people can listen. In our society, iPod comes to mind first. Nobody was thinking of creating these audiocasts with the Creative Zen or MS Zune in mind. If they end up on a Zune, that's fine, but the thought was to get their content on iPods, which is really quite a compliment to Apple when you think about it.
Apple should really reconsider their actions.
Hm?
This really doesn't make sense.
The word "Podcast" is derived from iPod, of course, but the CONCEPT of podcast is not inherently ipod-related. Because of that, it inherently dilutes the iPod trademark. You could just as easily call it an MP3-cast, and not have people be confused that it's coming from Apple (and the fact that Apple has been continually trying to trademark iPodcast itself for quite some time is another interesting bit of info).
The very fact that you're trying to have it cover Zune, Creative, etc. when it's derived from a specific product shows that Apple HAS to protect its trademark, particularly when another company is trying to profit from that name.
I can understand why they want to protect the iPod name. That is their name, and that is their product. However, they really should leave "Podcast" alone. Having a "Podcast" is like the ultimate insult to everyone like Creative, Microsoft, etc. The name "Podcast" exists not because people want to leech off of the iPod's popularity, but because of the iPods popularity, and how endeared it is by our culture. These "Podcasts" were created to be downloaded onto iPods so that people can listen. In our society, iPod comes to mind first. Nobody was thinking of creating these audiocasts with the Creative Zen or MS Zune in mind. If they end up on a Zune, that's fine, but the thought was to get their content on iPods, which is really quite a compliment to Apple when you think about it.
Apple should really reconsider their actions.
Hm?
This really doesn't make sense.
The word "Podcast" is derived from iPod, of course, but the CONCEPT of podcast is not inherently ipod-related. Because of that, it inherently dilutes the iPod trademark. You could just as easily call it an MP3-cast, and not have people be confused that it's coming from Apple (and the fact that Apple has been continually trying to trademark iPodcast itself for quite some time is another interesting bit of info).
The very fact that you're trying to have it cover Zune, Creative, etc. when it's derived from a specific product shows that Apple HAS to protect its trademark, particularly when another company is trying to profit from that name.
Thomas Veil
Apr 9, 10:40 AM
You cannot simply go "oh we are spending more money than we have, lets just go get more money" or "what do we want to do? let's get the money to do it" and expect to keep a balanced budget. Because the next time you have the problem, you'll do the same thing. This obviously is not repeatable indefinitely.And nobody said it was, or that you should repeat it indefinitely. But you can't expect people to get on board with severe cuts -- especially the ones they're now talking about to Medicare, Medicaid and SS -- if you're still overspending on defense, tax cuts for the rich, and corporate loopholes.
The way to keep a balanced budget does not change when you are the government as compared with individual. It's about not spending more than you have and then finding ways to get more money. It's about spending money on things which are necessary, not merely wanted.The government funds plenty of things, like libraries and parks, that aren't "necessary" but wanted. In the end it's all about how much we're willing to pay for. What's odd is that you see the middle class wanting to keep many of those services; it's the rich and the corporations that are screaming bloody murder about them.
The way to keep a balanced budget does not change when you are the government as compared with individual. It's about not spending more than you have and then finding ways to get more money. It's about spending money on things which are necessary, not merely wanted.The government funds plenty of things, like libraries and parks, that aren't "necessary" but wanted. In the end it's all about how much we're willing to pay for. What's odd is that you see the middle class wanting to keep many of those services; it's the rich and the corporations that are screaming bloody murder about them.
Origin
Sep 20, 09:43 AM
What's up doc ? Wrong forum ???? :D
peharri
Aug 15, 10:58 AM
WOW! the evidence youve accumulated is astounding:confused::rolleyes:
No advertising=more sales:confused: :eek:
Want to quote where I said that? Perhaps you and the ready2switch can find a set of words in my comment that actually mean that. I can't. Not even in the parts you quoted.
What I've said are:
- Sales would be higher now than six months ago regardless of what advertising Apple did. No advertising, bad advertising, good advertising. The fact is that Apple's PowerPC line was Osbourned. People were waiting for Intel Macs. They weren't about to buy machines Steve Jobs was telling the world were obsolete.
- Apple's current advertising is bad. It insults its current target audience. If Apple wasn't insulting its target audience, sales would be higher.
It's easy. It's also blatantly obvious.
Why are you pushing your opnions as fact?....
I agree with ready2switch below me
I don't have an opinion on what an opnion is. If you meant "opinion" though, I suggest you avoid any further posting. After all, you wouldn't want to express your opinions would you? Doing so would be "pushing" them as facts, right?
No advertising=more sales:confused: :eek:
Want to quote where I said that? Perhaps you and the ready2switch can find a set of words in my comment that actually mean that. I can't. Not even in the parts you quoted.
What I've said are:
- Sales would be higher now than six months ago regardless of what advertising Apple did. No advertising, bad advertising, good advertising. The fact is that Apple's PowerPC line was Osbourned. People were waiting for Intel Macs. They weren't about to buy machines Steve Jobs was telling the world were obsolete.
- Apple's current advertising is bad. It insults its current target audience. If Apple wasn't insulting its target audience, sales would be higher.
It's easy. It's also blatantly obvious.
Why are you pushing your opnions as fact?....
I agree with ready2switch below me
I don't have an opinion on what an opnion is. If you meant "opinion" though, I suggest you avoid any further posting. After all, you wouldn't want to express your opinions would you? Doing so would be "pushing" them as facts, right?
gmikesell
Mar 11, 10:55 AM
I'm here at stonebriar, #30 when I first got here, about 15 minutes later, I'm #32. no worries so far as long as there aren't spouses yet to join for everyone here currently. Lol. Line is up to The Sunglasses hut, on the corner from the skate rink.
hob
Nov 11, 04:04 AM
Ironically the Japanese site seems to crash Safari on my powerbook...
Firefox works though :rolleyes:
Firefox works though :rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment