marksman
Mar 29, 03:56 PM
It is funny the same people who would have blasted Apple to the moon for doing something like this not only don't call Amazon out on it, but actually blame Apple for it.
It is silly yet predictable.
It is silly yet predictable.
Dr Kevorkian94
Nov 2, 02:47 PM
when my mac gets a virus ill be shocked, il buy it when i do. (not that ill know when i have one anyway0
while typing this one of those 20 year animal adoption commercials, they make me want to punch the puppy more than help it. gosh they cant just make a short to the point video no they have to get in your face about it!:mad:
while typing this one of those 20 year animal adoption commercials, they make me want to punch the puppy more than help it. gosh they cant just make a short to the point video no they have to get in your face about it!:mad:
macman4291
Jul 24, 12:39 AM
No. Processors Are Soldered In MacBooks and MacBook Pros So No Upgrades Are Possible.
The way you do the upgrade is by selling your current model and buying the next one. It's called rolling over your Mac for the next one. Some of us here have done it numerous times. It's not hard to get a good price for your used Mac. By doing this at the beginning of every update, it only cost you a few hundred dollars to move up each time.
Would it be worth it rolling over my 17 in macbook pro, w/ a 2.16 core duo to a macbook pro w/ merom chip and other new attributes. Would there be a significant difference in speed , ect. that would make it worth it. , and if so, what would i do about my registered applecare protection plan?
The way you do the upgrade is by selling your current model and buying the next one. It's called rolling over your Mac for the next one. Some of us here have done it numerous times. It's not hard to get a good price for your used Mac. By doing this at the beginning of every update, it only cost you a few hundred dollars to move up each time.
Would it be worth it rolling over my 17 in macbook pro, w/ a 2.16 core duo to a macbook pro w/ merom chip and other new attributes. Would there be a significant difference in speed , ect. that would make it worth it. , and if so, what would i do about my registered applecare protection plan?
bense27
Aug 5, 09:24 AM
I am really interested to see what this iPhone is all about. And of course Leopard.
srathi
Apr 26, 02:22 PM
As much as I want to see Apple sell phones, I also like to see healthy competition to keep away anti-trust issues. Apple is for people who like quality high-end stuff and Android is for Kmart shoppers ;)
iPhone 3GS is available for $49 at Walmart. Your point?
iPhone 3GS is available for $49 at Walmart. Your point?
huskerchad
Mar 28, 12:22 PM
There is a 0% chance that Apple is going to go another year or more without an iPhone release.
FFS if they released an iPhone 4.01 with 2 megs more ram and a .01% faster processor, about 10 million people would line up on launch day for it. They're leaving money on the table if they don't release something. Anything.
FFS if they released an iPhone 4.01 with 2 megs more ram and a .01% faster processor, about 10 million people would line up on launch day for it. They're leaving money on the table if they don't release something. Anything.
Akme
Mar 30, 08:10 PM
Still downloading (10 more hours to go)...
Those who experienced non-quitting iCal in DP1, can you quit it in DP2?
Also, can the Launchpad icon be dragged out of the dock?
Please, say 'yes' to the above 2 questions. :o
Yes to both!
Those who experienced non-quitting iCal in DP1, can you quit it in DP2?
Also, can the Launchpad icon be dragged out of the dock?
Please, say 'yes' to the above 2 questions. :o
Yes to both!
iMeowbot
Nov 23, 12:54 PM
o.O Mactracker has no information on this. Do you have links? I would be very interested in seeing a pict of it.
The product was called PowerCD (http://guides.macrumors.com/PowerCD).
The product was called PowerCD (http://guides.macrumors.com/PowerCD).
Skika
May 6, 02:23 AM
So many derpy comments that just have "omg my mac is gonna be an iOS device, toys toys everywhere "
I seriously cant believe how some think Apple would just destroy itself by putting crappy chips for no reason. If they are going to put ARM in notebooks they have good reason for doing that, either they will be a better choice for the Air or maybe ARM has some serious power chips planned.
u have no idea so stop hatin
I seriously cant believe how some think Apple would just destroy itself by putting crappy chips for no reason. If they are going to put ARM in notebooks they have good reason for doing that, either they will be a better choice for the Air or maybe ARM has some serious power chips planned.
u have no idea so stop hatin
McGiord
Apr 10, 06:19 PM
They�re not making any assumptions. You are.
The results of this poll are sad.
What is my assumption?
They are assuming that all the engineers know the right answer, and that math is a language that is the same all over the world.
Cry then if it makes you sad.
The results of this poll are sad.
What is my assumption?
They are assuming that all the engineers know the right answer, and that math is a language that is the same all over the world.
Cry then if it makes you sad.
DakotaGuy
May 6, 12:44 AM
Another option:
they may include an instant-on iOS in addition to an intel OSX environment. Several other manufacturers have done something similar.
Unless they want to make you pay for something you don't need... not necessary. The new Intel Macs that are being released right now have so much power that they could run every iOS app in emulated mode and the processor would hardly even notice it. That's today. Imagine where Intel will be in a couple of years? An ARM chip sitting next to an Intel powerhouse is not needed. As far as being instant on... I'd say my iMac wakes up from a sleep just about as fast as my iPad.
they may include an instant-on iOS in addition to an intel OSX environment. Several other manufacturers have done something similar.
Unless they want to make you pay for something you don't need... not necessary. The new Intel Macs that are being released right now have so much power that they could run every iOS app in emulated mode and the processor would hardly even notice it. That's today. Imagine where Intel will be in a couple of years? An ARM chip sitting next to an Intel powerhouse is not needed. As far as being instant on... I'd say my iMac wakes up from a sleep just about as fast as my iPad.
ticman
Nov 20, 10:53 AM
I just sent BLT an email and wii let I know what I get back. Something doesn't sound right. Must not be getting 20000 units. Just strange
rickdollar
Mar 26, 11:22 PM
With the increased competition of Android I doubt Apple will be dragging their feet when it comes to moving forward with iOS. The new Web OS will be out this summer, too.
Guess we'll see soon enough.
Guess we'll see soon enough.
Xenious
Sep 11, 10:02 AM
While I am excited I'm still not convienced we can conquer the bandwidth issues for higher resolution sources. What I would really like to see (yes I'm dreaming, copywrite, etc) is iTunes to let me do what I do for music with my movies. I realize you can do this today, but lets make it built in and easy. I put a DVD in and iTunes asks me if I want to "rip" it into my video library. The fattest download pipe is when I buy a DVD off the shelf and take it home.
At 15$ a pop I'd rather have a physical DVD. I'm one of the odd ones that was/is hoping for rental subscriptions. I would like the same model as netflix except with the downloads. I pay a monthly fee and can download and watch x movies at the same time. The beauty over netflix there is if I want to watch a movie, I can have it relatively faster then waiting for it to ship.
Finally I of course want a real video ipod. Even if the content isn't all available yet from iTunes, I can make my own and will have the new hardware form factor. One year and holding I am waiting to upgrade my old 3G ipod with dying battery.
-jim
At 15$ a pop I'd rather have a physical DVD. I'm one of the odd ones that was/is hoping for rental subscriptions. I would like the same model as netflix except with the downloads. I pay a monthly fee and can download and watch x movies at the same time. The beauty over netflix there is if I want to watch a movie, I can have it relatively faster then waiting for it to ship.
Finally I of course want a real video ipod. Even if the content isn't all available yet from iTunes, I can make my own and will have the new hardware form factor. One year and holding I am waiting to upgrade my old 3G ipod with dying battery.
-jim
skyline r34
Apr 21, 11:17 PM
i think the Mac Pro is going to remain the same just with upgraded CPU, GPU and thunder bolt but the Mac Pro server will have redesign case but who know until it comes out
OttawaGuy
Apr 9, 08:24 PM
We use/say bedmas in Canada.
Brackets, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction
Brackets, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction
Bonte
Aug 7, 05:39 PM
Are these specific Mac GPU's with Mac roms or can we finally use a selection of PC GPU's? If so then the base GPU isn't an issue, just use it for the second screen.
what will happen if I use bootcamp and put in a PC grafic card?
Interesting, if we get Windows to work with PC GPU cards then Apple has no other option than to support these cards also or at least try to. If these are normal PC cards then the MacPro wil be the coolest machine on earth in the hard core gaming community. :cool:
what will happen if I use bootcamp and put in a PC grafic card?
Interesting, if we get Windows to work with PC GPU cards then Apple has no other option than to support these cards also or at least try to. If these are normal PC cards then the MacPro wil be the coolest machine on earth in the hard core gaming community. :cool:
iMikeT
Sep 11, 02:26 AM
I hope that the free iPod nano educational deal is still in effect if new iPods are released this week.
pavetheforest
Sep 15, 09:40 PM
I really hope they update the MBP with the C2D, a new enclosure would be great too, heres to hoping...
EricNau
May 3, 09:48 PM
I don't have the time to write an exhaustive response to this magnum opus, but I'm going to leave with a few concluding points:
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
CalBoy
May 6, 04:30 PM
So you're saying that science has nothing to do with everyday life? Cake for the elite and bread for everyone else??
I didn't say that at all.
Certain things are good for one thing but not as good for another. Basing your metrics off of water and light make a lot of sense when you have to measure a great deal of new items and compare them objectively.
On the other hand when you need metrics to be a guide through daily life and nothing else, the system that's born from daily necessity makes a lot more sense.
The reasoning gets worse when you'd ask 311 million to make a change because a smaller community of professionals would like their standards to be the standards for all of society. It's not like the two can't coexist; there might be a good argument there if the two were incompatible, but the fact is that they're not.
I see no good sense in that. If the metric system was intrinsically difficult to use in everyday life, then maybe you would have a point. But it's not � it's actually much, much easier to use once you learn it.
A distinction needs to be made here: just because something is easier to multiply by 10 (or 1/10th) doesn't mean that it's easier to use. How many times in your daily life do you need to multiply by 10, or even multiply what you measure? In most of my daily activities the metric system would do nothing new except provide a new set of numbers to get to know.
Even if you did occasionally multiply daily measurements, it would probably be with a smaller integer like 2, 3, or 4. In that case, the imperial system works very well because it provides very low factors and products that most people can do rapidly with nothing more than their 2nd grade 12x12 tables. In fact that's exactly how it came to be the way it is.
The metric system, as many people here keep pointing out, enables some pretty easy mental arithmetic. You'd use it if you had it.
How often does that easy arithmetic come up outside of science? Can you think of a real life example?
In any case, I do already have it. It's on every measuring device I have, from my ruler to my bathroom scale. I use it when it's necessary or more effective, but that's rare. Maybe you should accept that people can have a different preference.
You say it's about the 'ease of transition' but in the next breath you argue that it's all about 'economic return'. Personally I think you're clutching at straws to defend the fact that your country is behind the rest of the world in its ability to institute any kind of consistency with its system of measurements. But, we can agree to disagree.
They are not mutually exclusive values. Both are important factors in determining whether or not to switch. It's just like when a business decides to change it's logo; not only does the cost of marketing the new logo have to be factored in, but the potential lost sales also have to be weighed. In much the same way we have to decide if certain things being switched to metric will ever pay off and how disruptive they'll be. Some things that make sense like food and toiletries have already been metricated. Other things probably cost a lot more and won't be able to overcome their switching cost and they could also cost a lot.
I didn't say that at all.
Certain things are good for one thing but not as good for another. Basing your metrics off of water and light make a lot of sense when you have to measure a great deal of new items and compare them objectively.
On the other hand when you need metrics to be a guide through daily life and nothing else, the system that's born from daily necessity makes a lot more sense.
The reasoning gets worse when you'd ask 311 million to make a change because a smaller community of professionals would like their standards to be the standards for all of society. It's not like the two can't coexist; there might be a good argument there if the two were incompatible, but the fact is that they're not.
I see no good sense in that. If the metric system was intrinsically difficult to use in everyday life, then maybe you would have a point. But it's not � it's actually much, much easier to use once you learn it.
A distinction needs to be made here: just because something is easier to multiply by 10 (or 1/10th) doesn't mean that it's easier to use. How many times in your daily life do you need to multiply by 10, or even multiply what you measure? In most of my daily activities the metric system would do nothing new except provide a new set of numbers to get to know.
Even if you did occasionally multiply daily measurements, it would probably be with a smaller integer like 2, 3, or 4. In that case, the imperial system works very well because it provides very low factors and products that most people can do rapidly with nothing more than their 2nd grade 12x12 tables. In fact that's exactly how it came to be the way it is.
The metric system, as many people here keep pointing out, enables some pretty easy mental arithmetic. You'd use it if you had it.
How often does that easy arithmetic come up outside of science? Can you think of a real life example?
In any case, I do already have it. It's on every measuring device I have, from my ruler to my bathroom scale. I use it when it's necessary or more effective, but that's rare. Maybe you should accept that people can have a different preference.
You say it's about the 'ease of transition' but in the next breath you argue that it's all about 'economic return'. Personally I think you're clutching at straws to defend the fact that your country is behind the rest of the world in its ability to institute any kind of consistency with its system of measurements. But, we can agree to disagree.
They are not mutually exclusive values. Both are important factors in determining whether or not to switch. It's just like when a business decides to change it's logo; not only does the cost of marketing the new logo have to be factored in, but the potential lost sales also have to be weighed. In much the same way we have to decide if certain things being switched to metric will ever pay off and how disruptive they'll be. Some things that make sense like food and toiletries have already been metricated. Other things probably cost a lot more and won't be able to overcome their switching cost and they could also cost a lot.
gkarris
May 4, 03:19 PM
From the article:
"Apple is said to presumably be planning to also release Mac OS X Lion on physical media to support users who are running older Mac OS X versions incompatible with the Mac App Store or who have slow Internet connections that would make downloading the large update unwieldy."
From the source article:
"While the Mac App Store will be the preferred method for installing Mac OS X 10.7 Lion, set for release this summer, it's logical to presume that Apple will also offer an optical disc for people who may not have broadband. At least person with knowledge of the situation claims that this will indeed be the case "for those with slower connections, or [for those who for whatever reason do] not want to download it.""
Furthermore, what if the app store download is just a dmg that allows you to burn it to a disk or copy it to a thumb drive? Wouldn't that alleviate your concerns too? Way too early to be getting bent out of shape over this.
So we all have to "wait in line" at the Apple Store for Lion upgrades?
Do we have to try to get there before the eBay Scalpers? :eek:
"Apple is said to presumably be planning to also release Mac OS X Lion on physical media to support users who are running older Mac OS X versions incompatible with the Mac App Store or who have slow Internet connections that would make downloading the large update unwieldy."
From the source article:
"While the Mac App Store will be the preferred method for installing Mac OS X 10.7 Lion, set for release this summer, it's logical to presume that Apple will also offer an optical disc for people who may not have broadband. At least person with knowledge of the situation claims that this will indeed be the case "for those with slower connections, or [for those who for whatever reason do] not want to download it.""
Furthermore, what if the app store download is just a dmg that allows you to burn it to a disk or copy it to a thumb drive? Wouldn't that alleviate your concerns too? Way too early to be getting bent out of shape over this.
So we all have to "wait in line" at the Apple Store for Lion upgrades?
Do we have to try to get there before the eBay Scalpers? :eek:
Don't panic
May 4, 11:36 AM
Did you ever define who is in your group?
since no one split up, everyone is.
we are just waiting for raven or chris to tell us if we found anything in the start room, and (with the caveat above) to know what happens when we enter the next room
since no one split up, everyone is.
we are just waiting for raven or chris to tell us if we found anything in the start room, and (with the caveat above) to know what happens when we enter the next room
JAT
Apr 5, 04:42 PM
It's: "Do not buy iPhone. Go with Android." That's how I see it. Companies like Toyota will have no choice but to double their efforts in serving Android users.
0 x 2 = 0
Something tells me "jail broken community" grossly overstates the size of this segment of the population.
Mega corporation A asks Mega corporation T to stop messing with a key product outside the terms of use and Mega corporation T is more interested in having good ongoing relations with a potential major technology partner than it is in five anti-conformist iconoclasts. File this in not really news.
QFT.
Silly people. No one OWNS an iPhone. They own the right to use the iPhone. Welcome to the new world where buying a product does not mean that you can do what you want with it. You can only do what the manufacturers say you can do with it.
Sarcasm online is fun. But you do realize this is correct for software or other media, and not true for hardware. Right?
0 x 2 = 0
Something tells me "jail broken community" grossly overstates the size of this segment of the population.
Mega corporation A asks Mega corporation T to stop messing with a key product outside the terms of use and Mega corporation T is more interested in having good ongoing relations with a potential major technology partner than it is in five anti-conformist iconoclasts. File this in not really news.
QFT.
Silly people. No one OWNS an iPhone. They own the right to use the iPhone. Welcome to the new world where buying a product does not mean that you can do what you want with it. You can only do what the manufacturers say you can do with it.
Sarcasm online is fun. But you do realize this is correct for software or other media, and not true for hardware. Right?