Don't panic
May 3, 01:16 PM
still more questions:
is it possible for a fight to end with both monsters and heroes in the room? (this will depend on how you organize the HP/AP)
what happens next? another battle the next turn/round? can the heroes run? can the monster be re-located by the villain?
can the healing treasure bring HP to be higher than the level (e.g, if i am level 3, with 1HP left, I am alone and I find the healing treasure, do i go to 3HP, to 6HP or is it like a flask that i can use in part and in part save/share later)?
can the villain put traps in already explored rooms?
would 'explore' also find secret doors if any?
is it possible for a fight to end with both monsters and heroes in the room? (this will depend on how you organize the HP/AP)
what happens next? another battle the next turn/round? can the heroes run? can the monster be re-located by the villain?
can the healing treasure bring HP to be higher than the level (e.g, if i am level 3, with 1HP left, I am alone and I find the healing treasure, do i go to 3HP, to 6HP or is it like a flask that i can use in part and in part save/share later)?
can the villain put traps in already explored rooms?
would 'explore' also find secret doors if any?
3N16MA
Apr 26, 03:44 PM
I love that argument - who told Apple to only make 1 phone? Nobody it was their decision. This is PC vs Mac all over again - history repeating itself.
I can't wait to see how Steve Jobs spins this somehow at WWDC - my guess is he'll throw iPod Touches and iPads into their numbers so it doesn't look as horrible as the Nielsen chart shows.
At the end of the day, the truth hurts - Android is the new defacto platform for mobile and that means developers, developers, developers.
Next up...tablets :D
You do realize that Apple takes in healthy profit from selling Mac's right? They do not need 90% market share to turn a massive profit. They would love it but don't need it.
I can't wait to see how Steve Jobs spins this somehow at WWDC - my guess is he'll throw iPod Touches and iPads into their numbers so it doesn't look as horrible as the Nielsen chart shows.
At the end of the day, the truth hurts - Android is the new defacto platform for mobile and that means developers, developers, developers.
Next up...tablets :D
You do realize that Apple takes in healthy profit from selling Mac's right? They do not need 90% market share to turn a massive profit. They would love it but don't need it.
Amazing Iceman
Apr 25, 10:08 AM
Hilarious that the email sender said a DROID won't track him...hahahah so funny... as if a "GOOGLE" phone doesn't track their Android user's every move... This isn't really a iPhone matter, its a matter of all smartphones, with maybe a little exception for blackberry's. It's really nothing new... Google even has a stored database for random screen-caps it takes on all its Android users at any time.
Android, WinMo, Symbian, WebOS, etc. openness makes them the most vulnerable, easiest targets of all.
The iPhone is more secure in this sense, as it's locked. Not impossible to break, but at least difficult.
We would need to go back to the days of the old flip-phone with no application capabilities: no symbian, no java, nothing!
Android, WinMo, Symbian, WebOS, etc. openness makes them the most vulnerable, easiest targets of all.
The iPhone is more secure in this sense, as it's locked. Not impossible to break, but at least difficult.
We would need to go back to the days of the old flip-phone with no application capabilities: no symbian, no java, nothing!
Full of Win
Apr 20, 12:49 AM
I wonder if AT&T will bump up the upgrade window? Mine is in Jan 2012, which would be ~4 months shy of the release date for the phone.
Spiritgreywolf
Mar 27, 04:03 PM
Every time I hear about "mobile computing" and "cloud" in the same sentence, along with the security and privacy implications, I think more of the really immediate implications as soon as I put tunes or media out in the cloud...
...money...
Bandwidth costs money. If everyone starts streaming everything they own, they'll be paying for it again and again and.... well, you get the picture.
In an unlimited bandwidth plan, I can see the allure. When I pay for blocks of data splooged through the intertubes at a premium, the less "out in the cloud" I fetch from, the better...
...money...
Bandwidth costs money. If everyone starts streaming everything they own, they'll be paying for it again and again and.... well, you get the picture.
In an unlimited bandwidth plan, I can see the allure. When I pay for blocks of data splooged through the intertubes at a premium, the less "out in the cloud" I fetch from, the better...
DTphonehome
Jul 30, 09:30 AM
what are the odds that apple, in order to reinvent the mobile experience, has teamed with a voip chip maker etc. to provide mobile voice and video (ichat mobile) over IP?
this somehow makes more sense than co-branding a unit or "piggy backing" onto current carriers... then again, failure on this scale would be the biggest "jump the shark" moment in their history.
You'd have to have an open WiFi network anywhere you wanted to make a phone call. WiFi is not NEAR the coverage level of cell service. In my opinion, VOIP cell phones are way overhyped. When WiBro is widespred and ubiquitous, then maybe.
this somehow makes more sense than co-branding a unit or "piggy backing" onto current carriers... then again, failure on this scale would be the biggest "jump the shark" moment in their history.
You'd have to have an open WiFi network anywhere you wanted to make a phone call. WiFi is not NEAR the coverage level of cell service. In my opinion, VOIP cell phones are way overhyped. When WiBro is widespred and ubiquitous, then maybe.
balamw
Nov 27, 01:04 AM
The iBook is a close also ran IMHO. Given the comments here there is a desire for something the size of the 10" Sony sub-notebook that would give users the option of a touch screen and keyboard. In particular, if it were very near or under the $1000 price point.
Perhaps it helps to think of the tablet as an iPod video with optional KB & mouse? Or a mini iMac with a battery. Or maybe even iTV to go! :p
I think the market for a well-executed device like this is much larger than one might think, particularly after the last time I flew long distance in coach and saw lots of folks trying to watch DVDs on their 15" Windows notebooks and trying to balance them on their laps partially open to as to not interfere with the seatback in front of them.
B
Perhaps it helps to think of the tablet as an iPod video with optional KB & mouse? Or a mini iMac with a battery. Or maybe even iTV to go! :p
I think the market for a well-executed device like this is much larger than one might think, particularly after the last time I flew long distance in coach and saw lots of folks trying to watch DVDs on their 15" Windows notebooks and trying to balance them on their laps partially open to as to not interfere with the seatback in front of them.
B
ciTiger
Apr 23, 06:11 PM
Ok, I'll try this question, which is a fair question...............
Everyone says again and again, Apple does not aim for the high end.
If we put Mac Pro's to one side as they are the proper PC's of the Apple Mac world.
Let's speak about iMac's
They are Apple mass consumer, man/woman in the street computers.
They type of customers who just want to enjoy their computer and be able to get the jobs they want done in a nice and easy way.
I think that's a fair statement.
Also, as has been said, over and over and OVER again, these customers, that the iMac's are aimed at, are not Nerds, Not Tech Freaks, Not spec junkies.
They are just normal people who probably don't want to be worried about specs and to be honest as long as it looks nice and moves smoothy on screen, don't care what's inside the case.
Given this. If these "typical consumers, who don't care or really know about specs" are today, looking at their current 1920x1080 screens, or 1920x1200 screens, and they cannot see the individual pixels from their normal, let's say two feet away viewing distance, then what on earth would be the point in increasing costs, and slowing down an iMac by lumbering it with a higher resolution screen?
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
What was the point in bringing retina display to the iPhone? :)
Same thing I guess...
For one I want it, it is very kind on the eyes...
Everyone says again and again, Apple does not aim for the high end.
If we put Mac Pro's to one side as they are the proper PC's of the Apple Mac world.
Let's speak about iMac's
They are Apple mass consumer, man/woman in the street computers.
They type of customers who just want to enjoy their computer and be able to get the jobs they want done in a nice and easy way.
I think that's a fair statement.
Also, as has been said, over and over and OVER again, these customers, that the iMac's are aimed at, are not Nerds, Not Tech Freaks, Not spec junkies.
They are just normal people who probably don't want to be worried about specs and to be honest as long as it looks nice and moves smoothy on screen, don't care what's inside the case.
Given this. If these "typical consumers, who don't care or really know about specs" are today, looking at their current 1920x1080 screens, or 1920x1200 screens, and they cannot see the individual pixels from their normal, let's say two feet away viewing distance, then what on earth would be the point in increasing costs, and slowing down an iMac by lumbering it with a higher resolution screen?
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
What was the point in bringing retina display to the iPhone? :)
Same thing I guess...
For one I want it, it is very kind on the eyes...
dethmaShine
Apr 18, 03:08 PM
To be honest, Samsung off of all competitors, deserves that.
- iPhone design copy? check
- iPhone UI copy? check
- Apple keyboard copy? check
Everything is copied.
Samsung deserves that and I am sure Samsung will lose this.
- iPhone design copy? check
- iPhone UI copy? check
- Apple keyboard copy? check
Everything is copied.
Samsung deserves that and I am sure Samsung will lose this.
2ndPath
Aug 7, 06:16 PM
That brings up a question I was wondering about...since they only offer 1 model that can be customized by Apple...what will the Apple Stores and Authorized Resellers have in stock...Just the base model?
I was also wondering about that. The stores also have additional configurations of the MacBooks and MacBook Pros available. Probably Apple will have three standard configurations in the Stores. The stores could also just customize the machines for the customers. I don't know how easy it is to switch the CPUs, but all the other components, which can be customized, seem to be easily changable.
I was also wondering about that. The stores also have additional configurations of the MacBooks and MacBook Pros available. Probably Apple will have three standard configurations in the Stores. The stores could also just customize the machines for the customers. I don't know how easy it is to switch the CPUs, but all the other components, which can be customized, seem to be easily changable.
SuperMatt
Apr 25, 09:24 AM
If somebody steals your phone, this info would be the LEAST of your worries. Get over it. This is the panic of the week. Everybody will forget about it in no time.
CalBoy
May 3, 03:39 PM
I see no reason why 99, 99.5, and 100 are easier to track than 37.2, 37.5, and 37.7. As you said, we accept body temp to be 98.6 and 37.0 in Celsius. If decimals are difficult to remember, then clearly we should pick the scale that represents normal body temp as an integer, right? ;)
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.
Perhaps your set of measuring cups is the additional piece of equipment. Indeed you wouldn't need them. For a recipe in SI, the only items you would need are an electronic balance, graduating measuring "cup," and a graduated cylinder. No series of cups or spoons required (although, they do of course come in metric for those so inclined).
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).
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).
It might seem that way to you, but the majority of the world uses weight to measure dry ingredients. For them it's just as easy.
Sure when you have a commercial quantity (which is also how companies bake in bulk-by weight), but not when you're making a dozen muffins or cupcakes. The smaller the quantity, the worse off you are with weighing each ingredient in terms of efficiency.
Why would you need alternative names? A recipe would call for "30ml" of any given liquid. There's no need to call it anything else.
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?
Well, no one would ask for a 237ml vessel because that's an arbitrary number based on a different system of units. But if you wanted, yes, you could measure that amount in a graduated measuring cup (or weigh it on your balance).
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.
I suspect people would call it a "quarter liter," much like I would say "quarter gallon."
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?
And no, you wouldn't call 500ml a "pint" because, well, why would you? :confused:
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.
...But countries using SI do call 500ml a demi-liter ("demi" meaning "half").
Somehow I don't see that becoming popular pub lingo...
This is the case with Si units as well. 500, 250, 125, 75, etc. Though SI units can also be divided by any number you wish. Want to make 1/5 of the recipe? ...Just divide all the numbers by five.
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.
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.
Not that OS X Panthera Leo doesn't have a nice ring to it, of course. ;)
No, but it is onerous for kids to learn SI units, which is a mandatory skill in this global world. Like I said, why teach kids two units of measure if one will suffice?
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.
You could be right for international commerce where values have to be recalculated just for the US, but like I said, I think those things should be converted. I don't really care if I buy a 25 gram candy bar as opposed to a 1 ounce candy bar or a 350ml can of soda.
Perhaps true, but just because you switch to metric, doesn't mean you need to stop using tablespoons and teaspoons for measurements. It's all an approximation anyway, since there are far more than 2 different spoon sizes, and many of them look like they're pretty much equal in size to a tablespoon.
I'm sorry, but which tablespoons do you use that aren't tablespoons? The measuring spoons most people have at home for baking are very precise and have the fractions clearly marked on them.
Other than that, there's a teaspoon, tablespoon, and serving spoon (which you wouldn't use as a measurement). The sizes are very different for each of those and I don't think anyone who saw them side by side could confuse them.
So if you're cooking, do what everyone else does with their spoons; if you need a tablespoon, grab the big-ish one and estimate. If you needed more precision than that, why wouldn't you use ml? :confused:
Because it's a heck of a lot easier to think, "I need one xspoon of secret ingredient" than it is to think, "I need xml of secret ingredient." You think like a scientist (because you are one). Most people aren't. That's who the teaspoons and tablespoons are for.
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.
Perhaps your set of measuring cups is the additional piece of equipment. Indeed you wouldn't need them. For a recipe in SI, the only items you would need are an electronic balance, graduating measuring "cup," and a graduated cylinder. No series of cups or spoons required (although, they do of course come in metric for those so inclined).
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).
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).
It might seem that way to you, but the majority of the world uses weight to measure dry ingredients. For them it's just as easy.
Sure when you have a commercial quantity (which is also how companies bake in bulk-by weight), but not when you're making a dozen muffins or cupcakes. The smaller the quantity, the worse off you are with weighing each ingredient in terms of efficiency.
Why would you need alternative names? A recipe would call for "30ml" of any given liquid. There's no need to call it anything else.
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?
Well, no one would ask for a 237ml vessel because that's an arbitrary number based on a different system of units. But if you wanted, yes, you could measure that amount in a graduated measuring cup (or weigh it on your balance).
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.
I suspect people would call it a "quarter liter," much like I would say "quarter gallon."
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?
And no, you wouldn't call 500ml a "pint" because, well, why would you? :confused:
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.
...But countries using SI do call 500ml a demi-liter ("demi" meaning "half").
Somehow I don't see that becoming popular pub lingo...
This is the case with Si units as well. 500, 250, 125, 75, etc. Though SI units can also be divided by any number you wish. Want to make 1/5 of the recipe? ...Just divide all the numbers by five.
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.
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.
Not that OS X Panthera Leo doesn't have a nice ring to it, of course. ;)
No, but it is onerous for kids to learn SI units, which is a mandatory skill in this global world. Like I said, why teach kids two units of measure if one will suffice?
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.
You could be right for international commerce where values have to be recalculated just for the US, but like I said, I think those things should be converted. I don't really care if I buy a 25 gram candy bar as opposed to a 1 ounce candy bar or a 350ml can of soda.
Perhaps true, but just because you switch to metric, doesn't mean you need to stop using tablespoons and teaspoons for measurements. It's all an approximation anyway, since there are far more than 2 different spoon sizes, and many of them look like they're pretty much equal in size to a tablespoon.
I'm sorry, but which tablespoons do you use that aren't tablespoons? The measuring spoons most people have at home for baking are very precise and have the fractions clearly marked on them.
Other than that, there's a teaspoon, tablespoon, and serving spoon (which you wouldn't use as a measurement). The sizes are very different for each of those and I don't think anyone who saw them side by side could confuse them.
So if you're cooking, do what everyone else does with their spoons; if you need a tablespoon, grab the big-ish one and estimate. If you needed more precision than that, why wouldn't you use ml? :confused:
Because it's a heck of a lot easier to think, "I need one xspoon of secret ingredient" than it is to think, "I need xml of secret ingredient." You think like a scientist (because you are one). Most people aren't. That's who the teaspoons and tablespoons are for.
SuperBrown
May 3, 01:23 AM
SI is superior in conversions only
Imperial is superior as I actually have a feel for the numbers
Yes, let's not change it because YOU actually have a feel for the numbers.
Imperial is superior as I actually have a feel for the numbers
Yes, let's not change it because YOU actually have a feel for the numbers.
lilo777
Mar 29, 10:48 AM
not really true. it depends on what kind of storage options they are currently running, there are many devices and programs out there that eliminate this kind of redundancy and odds are amazon is using them right now.
The fact that they offer free space for MP3 files purchased from Amazon clearly indicates that those files be stored in a single copy.
The fact that they offer free space for MP3 files purchased from Amazon clearly indicates that those files be stored in a single copy.
dXTC
Mar 29, 01:47 PM
In 5-10 years the iPod will become extinct. By then the touch will be hanging on a thin wire.
Lemme guess... it'll all be in the cloud, right?
Lemme guess... it'll all be in the cloud, right?
Rdclark
Mar 31, 02:28 PM
You get 20 gigs if you buy an album on Amazon. Here's an album for a dollar:
http://www.amazon.com/Neroli/dp/B001LK0HVU/ref=pd_ecc_rvi_cart_3
You do the math.
Only for a year. Fill up that 20 Gigs and a year later you can either empty it down to the free 5, or pony up.
http://www.amazon.com/Neroli/dp/B001LK0HVU/ref=pd_ecc_rvi_cart_3
You do the math.
Only for a year. Fill up that 20 Gigs and a year later you can either empty it down to the free 5, or pony up.
CalBoy
Apr 15, 11:20 AM
To answer your question, any country that genuinely wants to improve their economy, as well as the lives of its citizens, would have 0% taxes on capital gains, income, and corporations. Most countries don't do this, not because it isn't true, but because it isn't human nature. Politicians seek power, approval, legacy, etc., all of which require taking money and spending it.
No they do it to manage the negative externalities of capitalism. There is no perfect world where business ventures generate absolute gains for everyone. We have governments (and pay for them) so that life isn't nasty, brutish, and short.
Now, I finally get to use the phrase "beg the question" in its correct meaning (a pet peeve of mine; Jon Stewart and Conan O'Brien always use it incorrectly). Saying that investors are investing in Asia because of growth and nothing to do with taxes, is merely begging the question. Didn't I mention in my previous post that taxes hamper growth? China was a communist country, in effect, a 100% tax. Call me crazy, but I think the change in that tax rate has contributed significantly to China's growth. Hong Kong was one of the first regions in Asia to grow. Let me give you one guess why Hong Kong has been an economic powerhouse for several decades now.
Hong Kong has been wealthy for a long time, and a lot of it is due to the fact that it was a Royal Colony during the Second Industrial Revolution and a major port for the Royal Navy. At the peak of the British Empire, Hong Kong was one of the colonies that received a large boost from the opium trade in China. Modern Hong Kong wasn't dependent on low taxes; it was dependent on aggressive government spending.
As for mainland China, it hasn't been "communist" for a very long time. Moreover, no one is advocating a 100% tax on all goods and services. Anytime you go from one extreme to a moderate position, you'll see improvements.
In the US, we are flirting with the other extreme at this time. Taxes are at historic lows and we have a terrible economy to show for it. Clearly the 0% mantra does not work because as the marginal rate drops further and further, more people find themselves in poverty, unemployed, and with a smaller share of the pie.
No they do it to manage the negative externalities of capitalism. There is no perfect world where business ventures generate absolute gains for everyone. We have governments (and pay for them) so that life isn't nasty, brutish, and short.
Now, I finally get to use the phrase "beg the question" in its correct meaning (a pet peeve of mine; Jon Stewart and Conan O'Brien always use it incorrectly). Saying that investors are investing in Asia because of growth and nothing to do with taxes, is merely begging the question. Didn't I mention in my previous post that taxes hamper growth? China was a communist country, in effect, a 100% tax. Call me crazy, but I think the change in that tax rate has contributed significantly to China's growth. Hong Kong was one of the first regions in Asia to grow. Let me give you one guess why Hong Kong has been an economic powerhouse for several decades now.
Hong Kong has been wealthy for a long time, and a lot of it is due to the fact that it was a Royal Colony during the Second Industrial Revolution and a major port for the Royal Navy. At the peak of the British Empire, Hong Kong was one of the colonies that received a large boost from the opium trade in China. Modern Hong Kong wasn't dependent on low taxes; it was dependent on aggressive government spending.
As for mainland China, it hasn't been "communist" for a very long time. Moreover, no one is advocating a 100% tax on all goods and services. Anytime you go from one extreme to a moderate position, you'll see improvements.
In the US, we are flirting with the other extreme at this time. Taxes are at historic lows and we have a terrible economy to show for it. Clearly the 0% mantra does not work because as the marginal rate drops further and further, more people find themselves in poverty, unemployed, and with a smaller share of the pie.
aldejesus
Mar 30, 10:56 PM
That's the graphic core onboard the Core i7 die. It doesn't change to ATi graphics when you use something graphically intensive?
I don't have ATI graphics, just the Intel integrated.
I don't have ATI graphics, just the Intel integrated.
ptaylor874
Nov 3, 09:31 AM
I just wish the way it was mounted was better, not just glue.
Ummm... It's not just glue. It uses the same suction mount as their other units. I think there is an adhesive disk you can use as well. (Not sure if you stick that to where you want to me able to mount it with suction or exactly how that works.)
I've used a similar type of suction mount with Griffin's Window Seat. It's not just a simple suction cup. You place it where you want to put it, then turn another part to increase the suction. It sticks great to glass, be it the windshield, a side window, or the sunroof (for kids to watch in the back seat), for days at a time. The Window Seat isn't the best implementation of it - I understand that TomTom's is better (easier to attach and detach).
Ummm... It's not just glue. It uses the same suction mount as their other units. I think there is an adhesive disk you can use as well. (Not sure if you stick that to where you want to me able to mount it with suction or exactly how that works.)
I've used a similar type of suction mount with Griffin's Window Seat. It's not just a simple suction cup. You place it where you want to put it, then turn another part to increase the suction. It sticks great to glass, be it the windshield, a side window, or the sunroof (for kids to watch in the back seat), for days at a time. The Window Seat isn't the best implementation of it - I understand that TomTom's is better (easier to attach and detach).
GregA
Nov 27, 01:28 AM
Too big! <snip> I probably want some functional capabilties (e.g. iPhoto red eye and retouch, or simple text/excel type input) but I DO NOT NEED TO RUN PHOTOSHOP ON MY TABLET! I will transfer my data/photos/video onto my main computer to do that kind of work."
Agreed. Not a computer... but connecting to it.
I always thought the direction Apple would go with a tablet was as a consumer device extension to iPhoto, almost how iPod extends iTunes.
Interesting idea. I guess if you could make it a little thicker than an iPod nano but 7x4" (or 9x5"?) it could be a neat picture frame. It could also do eBooks.
Then again if you use the screen casting in iChat then each tablet in the house could run it's own low power apps, say dashcode apps, front row, iChat, then hook into a more powerful machine to run fullblow applications.
Gives Apple a nice little ecosystem of complimentry products.
Yes... complimentary products. A very simple device that ALSO can connect and get extra functions.
Agreed. Not a computer... but connecting to it.
I always thought the direction Apple would go with a tablet was as a consumer device extension to iPhoto, almost how iPod extends iTunes.
Interesting idea. I guess if you could make it a little thicker than an iPod nano but 7x4" (or 9x5"?) it could be a neat picture frame. It could also do eBooks.
Then again if you use the screen casting in iChat then each tablet in the house could run it's own low power apps, say dashcode apps, front row, iChat, then hook into a more powerful machine to run fullblow applications.
Gives Apple a nice little ecosystem of complimentry products.
Yes... complimentary products. A very simple device that ALSO can connect and get extra functions.
Mac-Rumours
May 4, 03:30 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
Here's my problem with this distribution method for an OS:
I have 4 Macs in my house. Previously, I'd buy a Family License DVD and go from machine to machine installing it.
If I have to DL it from the App Store, I've got to download it 4 times! I don't care about paying for multiple licenses... I do care about blowing out my internet bandwidth downloading the same multi-gigabyte file 4 times. :mad:
There had better be a physical-media option!
Copy it to a USB drive or disc. Why would you keep downloading it?
Here's my problem with this distribution method for an OS:
I have 4 Macs in my house. Previously, I'd buy a Family License DVD and go from machine to machine installing it.
If I have to DL it from the App Store, I've got to download it 4 times! I don't care about paying for multiple licenses... I do care about blowing out my internet bandwidth downloading the same multi-gigabyte file 4 times. :mad:
There had better be a physical-media option!
Copy it to a USB drive or disc. Why would you keep downloading it?
hyperpasta
Jul 30, 08:22 AM
Really, guys. How many times have we been through this?
Benjy91
Mar 28, 10:55 AM
My 2-year contract finishes next month and my 3G is almost inoperative. No way I want to buy into the antenna problems with a 4. Glad you're happy though.
The Antenna issue goes away if you use a case, or you hold the phone so that the bottom left black line isnt covered by skin.
The Antenna issue goes away if you use a case, or you hold the phone so that the bottom left black line isnt covered by skin.
Brometheus
Apr 25, 10:26 AM
yes there is a problem. because it's unencrypted and everyone with access to your phone can read the information. the software tool they published showed my travel of the last 6 month quite accurately.
I don't want someone picking up my phone from my desk at work and find out what trips to what company I did. (it works internationally btw)
also I don't think the IRS or other tax collection agencies need to know when I was where.:D
Fair enough, but hardly the same as Apple acting as big brother (not that you made that claim).
I don't want someone picking up my phone from my desk at work and find out what trips to what company I did. (it works internationally btw)
also I don't think the IRS or other tax collection agencies need to know when I was where.:D
Fair enough, but hardly the same as Apple acting as big brother (not that you made that claim).