joueboy
Apr 28, 04:43 PM
So you've waited this long for the white iPhone 4, then you put it in the case!? ROFL!
yg17
Apr 29, 03:28 PM
With all the improvements made to Amazon MP3 lately, there really is NO reason to buy music from the iTunes store anymore. None.
Agreed. I'm glad Amazon is using MP3. I refuse to spend a dime on AAC files. My car doesn't play them, I don't want them.
Agreed. I'm glad Amazon is using MP3. I refuse to spend a dime on AAC files. My car doesn't play them, I don't want them.
ann713
Apr 27, 05:54 PM
I get the impression that one of the staff was videotaping and laughing along. Fortunately the older lady intervened. That was just awful. Was that hair towards the end?
John Jacob
Oct 19, 05:09 AM
I'm leaning towards MacPhone for the Blackberry/Treo/PocketPC killer with an embedded/lite version of Mac OS X.
Remember, any Apple product using Mac OS has to have "Mac" in it's name from now on per SJ.
So consumer iPhone and MacPhone, or, MacPhone and MacPhone Pro, if the consumer phone has an even more slimmed down version of Mac OS X on it.
Not very likely that a phone product would use a version of Mac OS X, however slimmed down. Mac OS X does not have the real-time capabilities that are required for a phone to handle call processing. Symbian OS, Windows Smartphone OS (based on WinCE) and Linux do have real-time extensions.
Remember, any Apple product using Mac OS has to have "Mac" in it's name from now on per SJ.
So consumer iPhone and MacPhone, or, MacPhone and MacPhone Pro, if the consumer phone has an even more slimmed down version of Mac OS X on it.
Not very likely that a phone product would use a version of Mac OS X, however slimmed down. Mac OS X does not have the real-time capabilities that are required for a phone to handle call processing. Symbian OS, Windows Smartphone OS (based on WinCE) and Linux do have real-time extensions.
solvs
Jul 21, 05:31 PM
I have heard Gates owns a some shares of Apple and was wondering how many or what percentage he owns.
I don't know how much personally he has, if he even has any, but MS used to own some. It was part of an agreement where Apple agreed to use IE and not sue them in exchange for the promise that Office would still be developed. They bought a sizable amount of stock in Apple, but they were the non-voting variety, so they couldn't get a say in anything. They sold it off some years later when they could, at a large profit I might add.
That was back when Apple wasn't doing so good and MS were feeling the heat from the DOJ.
I don't know how much personally he has, if he even has any, but MS used to own some. It was part of an agreement where Apple agreed to use IE and not sue them in exchange for the promise that Office would still be developed. They bought a sizable amount of stock in Apple, but they were the non-voting variety, so they couldn't get a say in anything. They sold it off some years later when they could, at a large profit I might add.
That was back when Apple wasn't doing so good and MS were feeling the heat from the DOJ.
ct2k7
Apr 25, 08:41 AM
You mean Ayatollah assahola? :)
I don't have respect for those who completely disrespect others in that way.
I don't have respect for those who completely disrespect others in that way.
twoodcc
Nov 2, 06:23 AM
We have reached 200k PPD, nice power up...
Keep going, we need more bigadv users...
yeah we've came a long way. just gotta keep it going
Keep going, we need more bigadv users...
yeah we've came a long way. just gotta keep it going
hhaydenn
Apr 25, 11:44 AM
On May 3rd, there are a lot of performances in the Apple stores, one performance is a singer called Breanne Duran, who is some what popular so maybe there trying to draw a crowd in to check out the new iMacs p:
TBR
Oct 24, 07:46 AM
If the prices havn't changed as mentioned above then this may make some people who were thinking of getting macbooks justify paying the extra for the pro, it seems more worth while now. I was in that position in june but I went for the Macbook.
Zepaw
Mar 29, 10:55 PM
It's my guess that many here seriously think WWDC is just a show for Apple to give a keynote and call it a day.
That is all it is for most people. I barely know what WWDC is, I just know I usually end up watching a keynote online from it.
That is all it is for most people. I barely know what WWDC is, I just know I usually end up watching a keynote online from it.
0815
Apr 22, 08:34 AM
Apple contributes about 4% to samsung annual revenue. And how many of apple product line use apple components? Like 95% (pure guess)?
And that is reason enough that Samsung should be allowed to rip off Apple products? - I don't think so.
And that is reason enough that Samsung should be allowed to rip off Apple products? - I don't think so.
robtarren
May 3, 09:08 AM
Just ordered mine, can't wait as my 2008 model is starting to struggle, especially with some of the photo editing software that plugs in to Photoshop, and Premiere Pro CS5 dies a death when trying to do anything remotely exciting!
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
8GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
2TB Serial ATA Drive
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
Apple Magic Mouse
Apple Wireless Keyboard
As with Zomberunner, I will upgrade memory to 16GB at a later date from Crucial.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
8GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
2TB Serial ATA Drive
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
Apple Magic Mouse
Apple Wireless Keyboard
As with Zomberunner, I will upgrade memory to 16GB at a later date from Crucial.
einmusiker
Dec 31, 12:25 AM
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
ok, I'm sorry but how the hell do you know what I do or don't understand about nutrition?? your presumptions are offensive
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
ok, I'm sorry but how the hell do you know what I do or don't understand about nutrition?? your presumptions are offensive
Mystikal
Mar 16, 08:51 AM
Good luck people! Seems like people heard about yesterday and got in line even earlier.
louis Fashion
Apr 13, 08:22 PM
Might get this, might not. Don't do contracts so it would be a simple case of buying and selling. Something most people I know do. You lot (Americans) should start doing the same and stop being beholden to 24 month contracts.
Good pont London, I don't do contracts either, but I don't think the telcoms here in the US of Corporations will let us go with the UK plan. And if we do go on a 24 month contract I do believe that there is no cost reduction after the equipment is "paid" for. That is the 25 month cost the same as the 24th month.
Good pont London, I don't do contracts either, but I don't think the telcoms here in the US of Corporations will let us go with the UK plan. And if we do go on a 24 month contract I do believe that there is no cost reduction after the equipment is "paid" for. That is the 25 month cost the same as the 24th month.
diamornte
Apr 12, 11:04 AM
omfg i am never going to buy apple products again because of this, how dare they, no way, the world is going to end
���rrrRAWRrrr!!!
���rrrRAWRrrr!!!
samcraig
Apr 30, 08:36 AM
I'm talking about portable music players that store music with a hard drive or flash memory that are NOT the Apple iPod models. In that case, it's only the higher-end players that support the AAC format, unless you buy Sony's current Walkman line of portable music players.
And I'll add/paraphrase from those who defend Apple to the end.
The average consumer doesn't want to think about formats and codecs - they just want to download a song and listen to it on whatever device they want to.
Stings a bit when the same argument praising Apple's "it just works" is used against them, aye?
And I'll add/paraphrase from those who defend Apple to the end.
The average consumer doesn't want to think about formats and codecs - they just want to download a song and listen to it on whatever device they want to.
Stings a bit when the same argument praising Apple's "it just works" is used against them, aye?
dvdgorila
Sep 14, 09:25 PM
http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/7559/applekeyboard.jpg (http://img16.imageshack.us/i/applekeyboard.jpg/)
Not my pic
Not my pic
Leondunkleyc
Aug 15, 03:29 PM
.
raygungirl
Apr 27, 04:49 AM
That video is disgusting for a million reasons, which have all already been brought up in this thread, so I won't bring them up again. I'm glad the victim is all right, I was worried there might be some serious damage.
Also, just wanted to weigh in on the "big hands" thing - I'm a woman, born a woman, never any question about it, but my hands are as big as most men's, especially considering I'm only 5'4". So are you going to beat me up just in case I'm a man?
I'll just put this out there: People who freak you out are not necessarily a threat to you, no matter how much they freak you out. And just because someone's sexual/gender preferences are outside your definition of normal does NOT mean that they're a frigging pedophile. That is such a leap in logic it's making my head spin. It's also really offensive. It's just as offensive as if I assumed that because of your race (whatever it is), you're more likely to molest MY child. That's not fair, is it? Doesn't make sense, does it? So you shouldn't make that assumption about a transgender person, either.
And don't give me any of this "race isn't a choice but gender is" BS. That's a common excuse and it's an incorrect assumption. Nobody would choose to live as a gender they didn't identify with if they didn't feel they needed to. If you've ever lived and struggled with something you were mortified to let anyone know, you'd have more sympathy for this transgendered woman. It must be nice to be you, but not everybody has it so great. Show a little empathy and don't automatically assume everyone is out to get you.
Oh, and using the "you don't have kids so you don't know" argument is the biggest load of ********* I can imagine. But it's nice to know that when I'm finally a parent, it means I can become an absolutely horrible human being. No better role model for a kid than a close-minded bigot, I always say.
Also, just wanted to weigh in on the "big hands" thing - I'm a woman, born a woman, never any question about it, but my hands are as big as most men's, especially considering I'm only 5'4". So are you going to beat me up just in case I'm a man?
I'll just put this out there: People who freak you out are not necessarily a threat to you, no matter how much they freak you out. And just because someone's sexual/gender preferences are outside your definition of normal does NOT mean that they're a frigging pedophile. That is such a leap in logic it's making my head spin. It's also really offensive. It's just as offensive as if I assumed that because of your race (whatever it is), you're more likely to molest MY child. That's not fair, is it? Doesn't make sense, does it? So you shouldn't make that assumption about a transgender person, either.
And don't give me any of this "race isn't a choice but gender is" BS. That's a common excuse and it's an incorrect assumption. Nobody would choose to live as a gender they didn't identify with if they didn't feel they needed to. If you've ever lived and struggled with something you were mortified to let anyone know, you'd have more sympathy for this transgendered woman. It must be nice to be you, but not everybody has it so great. Show a little empathy and don't automatically assume everyone is out to get you.
Oh, and using the "you don't have kids so you don't know" argument is the biggest load of ********* I can imagine. But it's nice to know that when I'm finally a parent, it means I can become an absolutely horrible human being. No better role model for a kid than a close-minded bigot, I always say.
TwinCities Dan
Jan 25, 09:30 PM
I want to see the whole setup.
Don't tempt me! I just blew $100 at the hobby store on a whim. I'm not sure I want to be the guy with the "Train Palace" in his basement just yet... :p :o
Don't tempt me! I just blew $100 at the hobby store on a whim. I'm not sure I want to be the guy with the "Train Palace" in his basement just yet... :p :o
moneyman118
Apr 28, 07:04 PM
Title still applies:cool:
Stores will go down on Tuesday May 3rd! Get your plastic ready!
Stores will go down on Tuesday May 3rd! Get your plastic ready!
MacVibe
Apr 13, 07:28 PM
Right on schedule!
toddybody
Apr 22, 09:17 AM
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/05/17/southpark_scientology.jpg
We are so going to sue you!
Fine! Sue Me!
We are so going to sue you!
Fine! Sue Me!
No comments:
Post a Comment