r1ch4rd
Apr 10, 08:45 AM
Dammit, I fell at the last hurdle. I get 288 but then clicked 2 by mistake!
Should be split 50/50 but I have skewed it a little.
As many others have said, I followed BODMAS
Brackets
Order
Division
Multiplication
Addition
Subtraction
Should be split 50/50 but I have skewed it a little.
As many others have said, I followed BODMAS
Brackets
Order
Division
Multiplication
Addition
Subtraction
milo
May 4, 03:32 PM
I'm only "hung up" on that because that's what everything points to right now.
Except that NOTHING points to that right now. There has never been an OS for sale on the app store before. Assuming that it will be handled exactly the same as an app is lunacy.
This reminds me of the thread a couple weeks back about FCS where the "professional experts" were all ranting because they assumed that since only Final Cut was shown it meant all the other apps in the suite were discontinued, and assumed that any feature that wasn't shown in the presentation was removed from the app.
Except that NOTHING points to that right now. There has never been an OS for sale on the app store before. Assuming that it will be handled exactly the same as an app is lunacy.
This reminds me of the thread a couple weeks back about FCS where the "professional experts" were all ranting because they assumed that since only Final Cut was shown it meant all the other apps in the suite were discontinued, and assumed that any feature that wasn't shown in the presentation was removed from the app.
tekmoe
Sep 16, 12:24 PM
looking good boys. all of the pieces are fitting together now. delayed orders, resellers saying the same thing, BTO's taking much longer. i think it's finally gonna happen.
MacRumors
Nov 26, 10:20 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Smarthouse.com.au claims (http://www.smarthouse.com.au/Automation/Display_Panels?Article=/Automation/Display%20Panels/H9R6N2M2) that Apple has a full working prototype of a Mac tablet PC within their labs with plans for a 2007 launch.
According to sources in Taiwan, the targets for this unreleased Mac tablet are expected to be home and education markets rather than the enterprise market.
The Mac tablet has been designed to handle third party applications such as home automation software that will allow users to control lighting, audio, entertainment devices and security feeds. It also acts as a full blown PC has wireless linking for a new generation of Wireless Hi Fi speakers that are currently being tested by Apple.
The Intel-based Tablet Mac would also offer a docking station to provide HDMI output to the appropriate screen. Beyond using the technology documented in Apple's recent patent applications for touch-screen/tablet Macs, Apple is reportedly licensing at least three patents from 3rd party companies.
This is not the first time that there have been rumors about a Mac tablet. In fact, rumors of a Mac tablet culminated in early 2003 with significant evidence that a Mac tablet project was in the works at that time. At the time, one description of the tablet at the time was as follows:
A device that superficially resembles a large iPod with an 8-inch diagonal screen, lacks a keyboard, packs USB and FireWire ports, and runs Mac OS X along with a variety of multimedia goodies.
The tablet, of course, never saw the light of day... though its unclear why Apple never released the tablet (if it did indeed exist).
Smarthouse.com.au claims (http://www.smarthouse.com.au/Automation/Display_Panels?Article=/Automation/Display%20Panels/H9R6N2M2) that Apple has a full working prototype of a Mac tablet PC within their labs with plans for a 2007 launch.
According to sources in Taiwan, the targets for this unreleased Mac tablet are expected to be home and education markets rather than the enterprise market.
The Mac tablet has been designed to handle third party applications such as home automation software that will allow users to control lighting, audio, entertainment devices and security feeds. It also acts as a full blown PC has wireless linking for a new generation of Wireless Hi Fi speakers that are currently being tested by Apple.
The Intel-based Tablet Mac would also offer a docking station to provide HDMI output to the appropriate screen. Beyond using the technology documented in Apple's recent patent applications for touch-screen/tablet Macs, Apple is reportedly licensing at least three patents from 3rd party companies.
This is not the first time that there have been rumors about a Mac tablet. In fact, rumors of a Mac tablet culminated in early 2003 with significant evidence that a Mac tablet project was in the works at that time. At the time, one description of the tablet at the time was as follows:
A device that superficially resembles a large iPod with an 8-inch diagonal screen, lacks a keyboard, packs USB and FireWire ports, and runs Mac OS X along with a variety of multimedia goodies.
The tablet, of course, never saw the light of day... though its unclear why Apple never released the tablet (if it did indeed exist).
aswitcher
Aug 6, 07:03 AM
If new monitors are introduced with built in isights, does this mean Apple will discontinue the standalone isight as all macs will now come with built in isights ? (presuming you buy Apples monitor)
Its certainly possible. I hope though that they upgrade the isight to higher res for pros and include an IR receiver in it. That way I can mount it anywhere around my big TV and dont need my mac visible to use it.
Another possiblity is that they will put out a smaller model designed to be used with an iPod as well turning the ipod into a camera/video camera.
Its certainly possible. I hope though that they upgrade the isight to higher res for pros and include an IR receiver in it. That way I can mount it anywhere around my big TV and dont need my mac visible to use it.
Another possiblity is that they will put out a smaller model designed to be used with an iPod as well turning the ipod into a camera/video camera.
el3ktro
May 8, 05:34 AM
That would be awesome. They should at least cut the price. MobileMe adds so much value to your iProducts, I have a MacBook, an iPhone and since yesterday an iPad, and MobileMe makes all three of them so much more valuable. But I know lots of people who would like to use MobileMe, but who say that 79� is just to much for it.
Thunderhawks
Mar 31, 07:00 AM
Enjoy your brand new 129$ Mac OS X latest revision (the most advanced, the most unique, the most... bla bla bla bla...) carrying more than XXX features (aka... just making the Mac OS X experience more iOS-alike so you get used to AppStore since soon you'll have to go through this method of delivery as there won't be any other one, because Mr. Jobs wants more money...)
Yep... I think that 129$ sounds quite ok, for nothing :D
Though I'm not surprise... there's nothing shocking that they can implement. This "update" is aimed at training people into AppStore (aka money)... and they even charge for it :D
The nerve of these money grabbing Apple monsters to charge for their work.
What will they think of next, selling us computers we have to pay for?
Yep... I think that 129$ sounds quite ok, for nothing :D
Though I'm not surprise... there's nothing shocking that they can implement. This "update" is aimed at training people into AppStore (aka money)... and they even charge for it :D
The nerve of these money grabbing Apple monsters to charge for their work.
What will they think of next, selling us computers we have to pay for?
navguy
Dec 13, 09:02 AM
I found this on the Magellan website. It appears that their Bluetooth is set up differently than the TomTom kit:
Can I undock the iPhone from the Premium Car Kit and keep my Bluetooth� connection?
chicago bulls 2011 logo.
chicago bulls 2011 logo.
![chicago bulls 2011 logo. [Updated May 1, 2011]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvDo535WEVtvszhWJFQFSf6LXG8a3q46uVdHU4H_svLrrnGh-8qzJb-tRagBR97Cuwp4SVwHM6HnWv_KZqCaBl-_Q-Ol9B3YHPw8vwbjkaoygDrY3vCiReBEeP3LDkriRk94P_jbvwtc8/s400/nba_logo.jpg "[Updated May 1, 2011]")
[Updated May 1, 2011]
chicago bulls 2011 logo.
chicago bulls 2011 logo.
chicago bulls 2011 logo.
Chicago Bulls 2011 Wall
chicago bulls 2011 logo.
chicago bulls 2011 logo.
chicago bulls 2011 logo.
New Chicago Bulls 1# Derrick
Can I undock the iPhone from the Premium Car Kit and keep my Bluetooth� connection?
pubwvj
Mar 27, 10:49 AM
With the cloud computing stuff there is too much additional fees. I'm not interested.
I already pay for my hardware that sits in my house.
I already pay for my mobile hardware that goes with me.
I already pay for operating system and other software updates for both.
I already pay my ISP for connectivity.
I already pay my phone provider for connectivity (actually my ISP).
I already pay my web host company for bandwidth and disk space.*
I'm NOT interested in paying Apple another subscription fee on top of all that.
Access to my data from my mobile devices should be transparent and should be part of their shared OS. No need for more billing complexity.
K.I.S.S.
*Why don't I self-host on my home machine? Bandwidth limits of my ISP and the fact that they are a monopoly. A server farm offers orders of magnitude faster connectivity.
I already pay for my hardware that sits in my house.
I already pay for my mobile hardware that goes with me.
I already pay for operating system and other software updates for both.
I already pay my ISP for connectivity.
I already pay my phone provider for connectivity (actually my ISP).
I already pay my web host company for bandwidth and disk space.*
I'm NOT interested in paying Apple another subscription fee on top of all that.
Access to my data from my mobile devices should be transparent and should be part of their shared OS. No need for more billing complexity.
K.I.S.S.
*Why don't I self-host on my home machine? Bandwidth limits of my ISP and the fact that they are a monopoly. A server farm offers orders of magnitude faster connectivity.
jephrey
Jul 29, 11:10 PM
So I thought... Would apple release a phone-only? No chance. It will most definitely have music features including wireless downloads from the iTMS (including a way to put the songs on your computer)... If this rumor is true of course.
My hope is for the phone to work on the Nextel / Sprint network not just because I have a Nextel, but because they have had time with their walkie-talkie feature, and I'd imagine that that would benefit the use of something like iChat over the phone.
Ah well, only a little over a week till the big day!
Jephrey
My hope is for the phone to work on the Nextel / Sprint network not just because I have a Nextel, but because they have had time with their walkie-talkie feature, and I'd imagine that that would benefit the use of something like iChat over the phone.
Ah well, only a little over a week till the big day!
Jephrey
beebler
Apr 20, 01:18 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
How many people think this is some elaborate scheme to get people to think it will come out in the fall, when they might be setting people up for a surprise with the release of iphone 4 -white as the new ip5?
It's not. Apple doesn't do that and they have been set on a September release for some months now.
How many people think this is some elaborate scheme to get people to think it will come out in the fall, when they might be setting people up for a surprise with the release of iphone 4 -white as the new ip5?
It's not. Apple doesn't do that and they have been set on a September release for some months now.
Tailpike1153
Apr 21, 02:46 PM
I hope they call it the MacServe :D
:). I like the name. Alot better than iServe.
:). I like the name. Alot better than iServe.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
iVeBeenDrinkin'
Apr 9, 08:55 PM
(48/2)(9+3) would be straight forward. The way the formula was originally typed lends interpretation as:
48/
2(9+3)
Why would someone choose to group one set with parentheses and not another unless they were being intentionally ambiguous?
Did you call your elementary school teacher? I didn't. They taught me well enough the first time.
iVeBeenDrinkin' likes this.
48/
2(9+3)
Why would someone choose to group one set with parentheses and not another unless they were being intentionally ambiguous?
Did you call your elementary school teacher? I didn't. They taught me well enough the first time.
iVeBeenDrinkin' likes this.
vincenz
Mar 28, 10:46 AM
Surprised by the turn of events... but as all rumors, we have to take it with a grain of salt. Who knows who's right but Steve and his coterie?
ticman
Nov 20, 09:00 AM
Wcfyee,
man u have just ruined my day. LOL I had convinced myself to wait until beginning of Dec and now I am going to have to go the Apple store and pay full retail unless someone else finds an alternative.
I wonder what happened--sounds like forces came to bear.
anyway, thanks as usual for keeping us informed.
Mike
man u have just ruined my day. LOL I had convinced myself to wait until beginning of Dec and now I am going to have to go the Apple store and pay full retail unless someone else finds an alternative.
I wonder what happened--sounds like forces came to bear.
anyway, thanks as usual for keeping us informed.
Mike
Stella
Apr 18, 04:24 PM
NO It's not, are you crazy. That looks horrid. iOS icons have unique look to them, placement is not patented. The look is.
The lawsuit goes after Samsung trying to replicate and confuse customers into thinking that it's an iPhone.
I said *conceptually* they are the same, they both share the same common properties and looks - i.e., grid, shortcuts, status bar etc ( as I pointed out ), yes, the placement it different - but that is irrelevent?
It doesn't matter if it looks 'horrid', thats an opinion - by today's standards OS9 looks 'horrid' - IMO.
The lawsuit goes after Samsung trying to replicate and confuse customers into thinking that it's an iPhone.
I said *conceptually* they are the same, they both share the same common properties and looks - i.e., grid, shortcuts, status bar etc ( as I pointed out ), yes, the placement it different - but that is irrelevent?
It doesn't matter if it looks 'horrid', thats an opinion - by today's standards OS9 looks 'horrid' - IMO.
iBug2
May 4, 03:43 PM
what makes you think that you can copy it to a USB drive or disc? I have disc for Tiger, Leopard, and Snow Leopard. None of those disc can be copied, some of them can only be used on their original machine (or the exact model). the past 3 OSes can't be copied, and so far there's nothing to suggest we can just make backup copies of Lion.
All OS's can be copied. I copied all my Leopard Tiger original discs without any issues. Also the current Lion previews can be copied as many times as you want to.
All OS's can be copied. I copied all my Leopard Tiger original discs without any issues. Also the current Lion previews can be copied as many times as you want to.
Reed Rothchild
Mar 29, 02:44 PM
I'm really neutral toward all this, but I really just have one very valid question.......... Why, WHY does EVERYTHING Amazon does have to be sooooooooooooo DISGUSTINGLY HIDEOUS!!!??? :rolleyes:
I challenge anyone in here to show me a website uglier than amazon.com! Seriously!!!
I think amazonmp3.com looks pretty good. A bit lacking in some extra metadata that I'd like to see but certainly not hideous. Everything works, and works well. Much faster to navigate around my music than via iTunes. Give me speed over superfluous eye-candy any day.
The AmazonMP3 Android app looks very nice btw...
I challenge anyone in here to show me a website uglier than amazon.com! Seriously!!!
I think amazonmp3.com looks pretty good. A bit lacking in some extra metadata that I'd like to see but certainly not hideous. Everything works, and works well. Much faster to navigate around my music than via iTunes. Give me speed over superfluous eye-candy any day.
The AmazonMP3 Android app looks very nice btw...
rdowns
Apr 14, 04:29 PM
Repeating myself ...
I find this approach highly irrational. If you're overweight, it's important to lose fat. It does no good whatsoever to treat brain the same as fat ... to treat vital organs the same as fat ... to treat limbs and digits the same as fat.
I think we can all agree that there is a lot of waste in government. The fact is, a lot of it is hard to find. At this point in our financial situation, I agree with across the board cuts. After that, then you continue to cut, where it makes sense, surgically.
The Democrats agreed to historic spending cuts. Where are the Republicans who agree to tax increases?
That's crap and you know it.
According to a Congressional Budget Office comparison, the bill would produce only $350 million in tangible savings this year, partly because cuts in domestic programs were offset by an increase of about $5 billion for Pentagon programs.
When projected emergency contingency spending overseas is figured in by the budget office, estimated outlays for this year actually increase by over $3 billion.
The agreement does put the brakes on what had been a steady growth in spending by federal agencies. Future savings would be greater as the cuts took hold — a point Republican aides emphasized by noting that the plan is estimated to cut spending by $312 billion over the next decade.
Link (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/14/us/politics/14congress.html?_r=2&hp)
I find this approach highly irrational. If you're overweight, it's important to lose fat. It does no good whatsoever to treat brain the same as fat ... to treat vital organs the same as fat ... to treat limbs and digits the same as fat.
I think we can all agree that there is a lot of waste in government. The fact is, a lot of it is hard to find. At this point in our financial situation, I agree with across the board cuts. After that, then you continue to cut, where it makes sense, surgically.
The Democrats agreed to historic spending cuts. Where are the Republicans who agree to tax increases?
That's crap and you know it.
According to a Congressional Budget Office comparison, the bill would produce only $350 million in tangible savings this year, partly because cuts in domestic programs were offset by an increase of about $5 billion for Pentagon programs.
When projected emergency contingency spending overseas is figured in by the budget office, estimated outlays for this year actually increase by over $3 billion.
The agreement does put the brakes on what had been a steady growth in spending by federal agencies. Future savings would be greater as the cuts took hold — a point Republican aides emphasized by noting that the plan is estimated to cut spending by $312 billion over the next decade.
Link (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/14/us/politics/14congress.html?_r=2&hp)
trip1ex
Mar 29, 01:00 PM
Not enough for my collection.
And never felt like I had to download music at work and anywhere else.
Maybe I'm out of touch, but ...
I do like the idea of not having to back stuff up in case I lose it to a hard drive crash.
5gb ain't enough to cover my collection however.
And never felt like I had to download music at work and anywhere else.
Maybe I'm out of touch, but ...
I do like the idea of not having to back stuff up in case I lose it to a hard drive crash.
5gb ain't enough to cover my collection however.
CalBoy
Apr 10, 01:25 AM
Whenever you write math symbols out using a keyboard, the "/" symbol always means division; it is not a fraction bar. Therefore, I treat the "/" symbol as a division operation, and get 288.
If one reads the "/" symbol as a fraction bar, then the answer is 2. However, because of the limitations of a standard QWERTY keyboard (which I assume is all we have to work with), it is wise to always represent numerators and denominators with master brackets. To make this equation equal 2, it should read 48/(2(9+3))
If one reads the "/" symbol as a fraction bar, then the answer is 2. However, because of the limitations of a standard QWERTY keyboard (which I assume is all we have to work with), it is wise to always represent numerators and denominators with master brackets. To make this equation equal 2, it should read 48/(2(9+3))
tuna
Mar 29, 09:23 AM
You can't even begin to compare this service to MobileMe's current offerings. This is just space. (And a music player.) MobileMe offers address book, calendar, photo browsing, and other features.
Those services are readily available for free elsewhere. I used to subscribe to MobileMe back when it was the only reliable way to get push email, calendar, and contacts on my iPhone. Since then Google services have been allowed to be compatible and work about as well. I let my MobileMe subscription lapse. Towards the end, the only thing I was using my MobileMe for was the iDisk.
Huh? :confused: I think redundancy is the only valid argument here. What do you mean by bandwidth? Transfer speeds uploading to the cloud are hideous compared to USB 2.0. Syncing tools are also readily available for any external drive. External drives barely use any power, 20W during access. Processing power? You're not compressing or analyzing data. Just transferring and storing it. :confused:
Those are the costs associated with the cloud. You have to send the data over the internet and you have to build servers to support the storage space. In return you get unlimited access anywhere. My dropbox folder syncs across 3 computers and is easily accessible by my iPhone, plus I have shared folders with other users that sync across all my computers plus all the computers of my friends. That is value-added over simply buying an external hard drive.
Those services are readily available for free elsewhere. I used to subscribe to MobileMe back when it was the only reliable way to get push email, calendar, and contacts on my iPhone. Since then Google services have been allowed to be compatible and work about as well. I let my MobileMe subscription lapse. Towards the end, the only thing I was using my MobileMe for was the iDisk.
Huh? :confused: I think redundancy is the only valid argument here. What do you mean by bandwidth? Transfer speeds uploading to the cloud are hideous compared to USB 2.0. Syncing tools are also readily available for any external drive. External drives barely use any power, 20W during access. Processing power? You're not compressing or analyzing data. Just transferring and storing it. :confused:
Those are the costs associated with the cloud. You have to send the data over the internet and you have to build servers to support the storage space. In return you get unlimited access anywhere. My dropbox folder syncs across 3 computers and is easily accessible by my iPhone, plus I have shared folders with other users that sync across all my computers plus all the computers of my friends. That is value-added over simply buying an external hard drive.
NAG
Apr 25, 09:51 AM
Scary, and seems to be US only.
And remarkably inaccurate when I looked myself up. It has a bit of correct information on my parents. I'm actually surprised at how wrong they were since I have a fairly large internet footprint (of course, these guys probably don't have Google's database since they're just skimming).
And remarkably inaccurate when I looked myself up. It has a bit of correct information on my parents. I'm actually surprised at how wrong they were since I have a fairly large internet footprint (of course, these guys probably don't have Google's database since they're just skimming).