davidjearly
Dec 21, 05:44 AM
Well you're a cheery lad. I thought it's all been pretty funny.
I'm perfectly cheery thanks - just don't have any time for this. Either way, I don't think Cowell and Co will be bothered much. Both artists sell records for Sony.
I'm perfectly cheery thanks - just don't have any time for this. Either way, I don't think Cowell and Co will be bothered much. Both artists sell records for Sony.
DPinTX
Mar 10, 11:16 PM
What are the odds one of you Friscoans will post an update around 3:30-4:00ish and let me know what the line (or lack thereof) at Stonebriar is looking like?? Now I'm debating between Willow Bend and Stonebriar...
I will post updates through out the day. I will be there early
DP
I will post updates through out the day. I will be there early
DP
colmaclean
Mar 26, 05:20 PM
Is this a still from the next series of Curb Your Enthusiasm?
twoodcc
Feb 20, 09:14 PM
so any updates for this? cuz the widget doesn't seem to be working for me
more...
kashimo
Nov 13, 01:59 AM
Actually, it is the taste of Kanto (around Tokyo) not that of Kansai (around Osaka). But for the image of Apple in Japan, Kansai plot is not suitable, I guess. Because the image of Kansai is not cool.
As a native Japanese, good one is iLife one (someone calls it "iRife" BTW).
Actors are comedian duo called "Ramens" (you know ramen as in chinese noodle)
Eh Kansai not cool? No way...Shock!
Kind of unique that instead of using regular actors they are using a manzai group. Way to go manzai boom. Cultrually unique.
The Rahmens (http://www.twinkle-co.co.jp/profile/rahmens.html)
More about the Rahmens (http://tvinjapan.blogspot.com/2006/05/japanese-tradition-more-fr_114654121352258176.html)
Why? Oh Why use Kanto Manzai.... damn manzai boom. Drives me nuts. Much of it is painful. I would prefer wearing braces to watching kanto humor. Kanto humor is drier than a desert.
As a native Japanese, good one is iLife one (someone calls it "iRife" BTW).
Actors are comedian duo called "Ramens" (you know ramen as in chinese noodle)
Eh Kansai not cool? No way...Shock!
Kind of unique that instead of using regular actors they are using a manzai group. Way to go manzai boom. Cultrually unique.
The Rahmens (http://www.twinkle-co.co.jp/profile/rahmens.html)
More about the Rahmens (http://tvinjapan.blogspot.com/2006/05/japanese-tradition-more-fr_114654121352258176.html)
Why? Oh Why use Kanto Manzai.... damn manzai boom. Drives me nuts. Much of it is painful. I would prefer wearing braces to watching kanto humor. Kanto humor is drier than a desert.
gregdeeg
May 2, 11:36 PM
I just activated my first iPhone (white) a few hours ago on VZW. The clear Incase Snap Case I bought for it a week ahead of time DOES NOT FIT...no matter how hard I try. It seems the white lip is bigger than the black lip, and this is the part the snap case secures to. Anyone else find this?
more...
longofest
Nov 6, 09:49 AM
So the fact that AT&T can currently know everything about you from miles away is ok, but if they add a chip that works for 30 or 40 feet...that's a problem?
I like your point, but just to emphasize even further... The RFID that we're likely to see in use in an iPhone wouldn't have that far of a useful range. We'd be talking 2 feet max. See previous post.
I like your point, but just to emphasize even further... The RFID that we're likely to see in use in an iPhone wouldn't have that far of a useful range. We'd be talking 2 feet max. See previous post.
advorak
Sep 5, 05:12 AM
Apple has a history of that... making their OS'es run faster than the previous one on the same hardware. At least that's what my experience has been with Panther, Tiger and Leopard preview.
When I bought my Powerbook G4 3 years ago, it came with Panther, then I upgraded to Tiger and it seemed to run much faster... much more responsive. After its hard drive died, I sold it and repaced it with a MacBook Pro with Tiger pre-installed and now that I am running on Leopard, it's running just as fast and sometimes even faster than Tiger. I am very pleased.*:)
Of what minimal programming experience I have, I was concerned by this code I found in one of the system startup scripts:
setmaxcomputerspeed(.22113*MacOSXVersion);
just being silly... :D
--Andy
When I bought my Powerbook G4 3 years ago, it came with Panther, then I upgraded to Tiger and it seemed to run much faster... much more responsive. After its hard drive died, I sold it and repaced it with a MacBook Pro with Tiger pre-installed and now that I am running on Leopard, it's running just as fast and sometimes even faster than Tiger. I am very pleased.*:)
Of what minimal programming experience I have, I was concerned by this code I found in one of the system startup scripts:
setmaxcomputerspeed(.22113*MacOSXVersion);
just being silly... :D
--Andy
more...
mikes63737
Jun 19, 09:16 AM
Something I'd like to see is a rackmount SDXC RAID array. Think how many sd slots would fit in a 1U array. I know, probably won't happen, but still interesting to see.
Can you imagine taking all of those SD cards out of their blister packaging (http://media.photobucket.com/image/sd%20card%20blister%20packaging/mave0206/memory%2520cards/Sandisk%2520Micro%2520Sdhc/sandisk4gbmicrosdhc.jpg)?
Can you imagine taking all of those SD cards out of their blister packaging (http://media.photobucket.com/image/sd%20card%20blister%20packaging/mave0206/memory%2520cards/Sandisk%2520Micro%2520Sdhc/sandisk4gbmicrosdhc.jpg)?
MikeTheC
Nov 3, 01:19 AM
I'd like to tackle a few points in the discussion here.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
more...
Infinity
Sep 25, 10:52 AM
From http://loop.worldofapple.com/
"....Aperture 1.5 update available this week, free to existing customers
That�s it folks."
The event is over.
No MBP to be seen :(
"....Aperture 1.5 update available this week, free to existing customers
That�s it folks."
The event is over.
No MBP to be seen :(
iDutchman
Mar 17, 12:01 PM
The gas price (EURO95) as of today (Netherlands):
€1,675/Liter <--> €6,35/US Gallon
€6,35=$8,90/US Gallon.
So.. It's always been expensive but this is bad.
----
The picture that is shown tells you how much cheaper (in %) the other countries are (compared to The Netherlands).
--- goedkoper=cheaper --- Verenigd Koninkrijk= UK --- Griekenland=Greece --- Oostenrijk=Austria
€1,675/Liter <--> €6,35/US Gallon
€6,35=$8,90/US Gallon.
So.. It's always been expensive but this is bad.
----
The picture that is shown tells you how much cheaper (in %) the other countries are (compared to The Netherlands).
--- goedkoper=cheaper --- Verenigd Koninkrijk= UK --- Griekenland=Greece --- Oostenrijk=Austria
more...
chuckles:)
Jun 10, 09:01 PM
Stop complaining. You get the iPhone 4 a month before your neighbours do.
And with cheaper plans and shorter contracts.
And with cheaper plans and shorter contracts.
walnuts
Mar 25, 09:40 AM
Instead of suing everyone, kodak needs to get on this retro kick and start selling kodachrome camera's and film again for cheap. Stop using digital, start developing.
Second that. There's a niche market (I think) amongst a few for film. Unfortunately, its become really expensive proposition. Even if you pay $2 for a roll and $10 for developing/processing, its crazy expensive compared to digital. If they could some how make it cheaper it could be successful.
Second that. There's a niche market (I think) amongst a few for film. Unfortunately, its become really expensive proposition. Even if you pay $2 for a roll and $10 for developing/processing, its crazy expensive compared to digital. If they could some how make it cheaper it could be successful.
more...
ten-oak-druid
May 2, 02:27 PM
I believe it is all statistical variance in manufacturing.
Get larger sample sizes of each color.
On a previous thread, the weight of the iphones was found to be slightly different. Some people claimed manufacturing processes are too exact for the difference in mass shown in the pictures posted in the thread. But these people were ignoring the fact that the masses of each color iphone shown in the pictures were less than the mass of the iphone as stated on Apple's site.
Get larger sample sizes of each color.
On a previous thread, the weight of the iphones was found to be slightly different. Some people claimed manufacturing processes are too exact for the difference in mass shown in the pictures posted in the thread. But these people were ignoring the fact that the masses of each color iphone shown in the pictures were less than the mass of the iphone as stated on Apple's site.
iJohnHenry
Apr 27, 07:27 PM
I thought this was funny.
Imagine President Trump feuding with global enemies. �I�ve met Kim Jong Il. Guy�s a midget. Who cares what a midget thinks! I take dumps bigger than that guy.
Easy to do, when you are full of it.
Imagine President Trump feuding with global enemies. �I�ve met Kim Jong Il. Guy�s a midget. Who cares what a midget thinks! I take dumps bigger than that guy.
Easy to do, when you are full of it.
more...
Mac_Max
Apr 16, 02:48 PM
The way I taught myself SQL was by creating simple C++ apps that manipulated data and using this site (http://www.1keydata.com/sql/sql-commands.html) as a reference.
mcrain
Apr 8, 01:26 PM
Ok, I was going to post something with substance, but I can't stop laughing...
And what's with this rhetoric? "overthrow"? Really? And you do realize you just Goodwin-ed this discussion...
If that didn't, I'm pretty sure this did -->
Fascists show no mercy to ANYONE.. Tea Party = the new modern NAZI PARTY.
By the way, what's so controversial about NPR and PBS?
(edit) Considering Planned Parenthood uses ZERO federal funds to provide abortions, what is so controversial about a womens' health provider, birth control, and an entity that helps with education and treatment regarding sexually transmitted diseases?
And what's with this rhetoric? "overthrow"? Really? And you do realize you just Goodwin-ed this discussion...
If that didn't, I'm pretty sure this did -->
Fascists show no mercy to ANYONE.. Tea Party = the new modern NAZI PARTY.
By the way, what's so controversial about NPR and PBS?
(edit) Considering Planned Parenthood uses ZERO federal funds to provide abortions, what is so controversial about a womens' health provider, birth control, and an entity that helps with education and treatment regarding sexually transmitted diseases?
Beaverman3001
Apr 24, 08:43 PM
3G, a cpu option that doesn't mean a garbage gpu.
jsimpson
Jan 4, 12:13 PM
Yeah, I need the maps to be available if I'm out of coverage so it's a no sale for me too. I was really happy to hear they finally released something and now this. :(
Mr. Anderson
Aug 19, 08:19 AM
well, speaking figuratively here, there is a free iPod. If I were to give you one as a gift, then it would be free, no? :p
D
D
kavika411
Apr 4, 11:17 AM
How can you discuss tax rates and NOT acknowledge that the rates we have today are the rates that include the Bush tax cuts? How can you discuss deficits and spending when there were surplusses when Clinton left office and he had higher tax rates and spending than Bush? If you ignore history, you are doomed to repeat it. Right?
It isn't a matter of spite, it's merely a matter of looking at what works and what doesn't, and cutting taxes does not, in and of itself work. Reasonable spending that targets necessary services, along with reasonably higher tax rates, has worked in the past. The current political climate has us arguing about cutting spending and cutting services and cutting taxes. It's bizarroland. We are undoing decades of progress so that we can push an economic model that has never worked in the past.
It's not Republican vs. Democrat, it's what hasn't worked vs. what has worked. The only reason to continually repeat who is responsible or who is pushing a proposal is to make certain that people don't fall for the economic conservative language being used by the people who are anything but being conservative.
That's all neat; it's got a beat and you can dance to it. But you were, by your choice, responding to itcheroni, and his/her quoted points had nothing to do with your ongoing diatribe against all things even tacitly related to Republicans.
It isn't a matter of spite, it's merely a matter of looking at what works and what doesn't, and cutting taxes does not, in and of itself work. Reasonable spending that targets necessary services, along with reasonably higher tax rates, has worked in the past. The current political climate has us arguing about cutting spending and cutting services and cutting taxes. It's bizarroland. We are undoing decades of progress so that we can push an economic model that has never worked in the past.
It's not Republican vs. Democrat, it's what hasn't worked vs. what has worked. The only reason to continually repeat who is responsible or who is pushing a proposal is to make certain that people don't fall for the economic conservative language being used by the people who are anything but being conservative.
That's all neat; it's got a beat and you can dance to it. But you were, by your choice, responding to itcheroni, and his/her quoted points had nothing to do with your ongoing diatribe against all things even tacitly related to Republicans.
Natural Science
Mar 23, 10:50 PM
Will the Lion Server allow me to keep one set of data accessible from my iMac & MBP so they are basically working with only one set of files? I don't want to migrate data from my iMac to my new MBP because between the iLife projects I don't want them living on separate machines... I simply want to close iMovie or excel for example and pick right up where I left up on the MBP once I'm upstairs! I set up file sharing and accessing the iPhoto library from the iMac takes forever to load, nevermind the loss of certain features like location tagging and I've yet to get iMovie to open the iMac library without having it crash. I know I sound like an total moron here, but the good news is when it comes to computers, I am, and I've accepted that.;)
Blondie :)
Aug 22, 02:11 PM
I think this is actually kind of a cool idea. I've done that before where I've been somewhere, and then finding out that my friends were there and all that good stuff. If you have your own close knit friends, no one is going to break into your house when you're gone, and as far as the privacy rights go, why post something you don't want everyone to see? I mean really lol
No comments:
Post a Comment