BillyBobBongo
May 3, 07:43 AM
It doesn't even get above the fold on Apple's homepage.
The fold is an old concept...you sound like my boss! :p
The fold is an old concept...you sound like my boss! :p
ssk2
Apr 22, 09:29 AM
Interesting:
Apple sues on 'look and feel', whereas Samsung sues on core technological patents. I always assume it'd be the other way around...
No-one wins here either way, its just crap for us consumers.
Apple sues on 'look and feel', whereas Samsung sues on core technological patents. I always assume it'd be the other way around...
No-one wins here either way, its just crap for us consumers.
MrSmith
Apr 12, 10:23 AM
I'll take iPhoto non-crap again first, then a new iPhone.
DCJ001
Apr 15, 01:52 PM
With the update notice officially stating When Lion ships this summer What are the chances the iMac refresh will happen at the same time? or will it be in the Fall instead?
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#iMac
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#iMac
more...
Schtumple
Jun 6, 06:16 AM
Exactly!
"Don't worry Mom, it says here we can sue the pants off them!"
If this were a really shamelessly bad daytime sitcom, that would be his catch phrase :p
"Don't worry Mom, it says here we can sue the pants off them!"
If this were a really shamelessly bad daytime sitcom, that would be his catch phrase :p
syhr
Apr 15, 02:48 AM
I echo the people who aren't happy with the size of these updates. Some of us can't get very decent internet where we live and it ties up our connection for an hour or more trying to update. Fingers crossed this changes with IOS 5 :)
more...
iJohnHenry
Apr 23, 07:10 PM
and the crew member who made the video is no longer employed by this organization.
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/thatsnice_cat-1.jpg
Shoot the messenger.
What of the laughing staff??
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/thatsnice_cat-1.jpg
Shoot the messenger.
What of the laughing staff??
Macaroony
Mar 9, 01:38 AM
I would like to see them pull off a change of actor for once, without changing the character. I think it's an insult to the audience's intelligence that networks think we can't accept someone else in the role. They always go for the knee-jerk reaction, which is to kill off the character. Give us some credit, and a chance for another actor to make the role his own. It's not like it's unheard of. How many James Bonds have there been??
I'm sorry, but this never works. At some point, in every show that did the that it becomes some kind of inside joke on and off camera. I'm reminded of the 200th episode of Stargate: SG-1, where upon a ridiculous parody of the show one of the characters says:
"Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment."
This on a sci-fi show with enough technobabble to keep you busy arguing with other viewers about the authenticity of the in-show's reality.
For movies it's different because each one is a narrative of it's own. You can't can't compare Sean Connery with Pierce Brosnan as you can't compare Never Say Never with Tomorrow Never Dies because both movies are done in their individual way.
On a television series, you have a continuous narrative that can change its direction, but as soon as you change major plot points or dare switch the main actors with new ones, that's a plain insult to the audience who watched from the start.
I'm sorry, but this never works. At some point, in every show that did the that it becomes some kind of inside joke on and off camera. I'm reminded of the 200th episode of Stargate: SG-1, where upon a ridiculous parody of the show one of the characters says:
"Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment."
This on a sci-fi show with enough technobabble to keep you busy arguing with other viewers about the authenticity of the in-show's reality.
For movies it's different because each one is a narrative of it's own. You can't can't compare Sean Connery with Pierce Brosnan as you can't compare Never Say Never with Tomorrow Never Dies because both movies are done in their individual way.
On a television series, you have a continuous narrative that can change its direction, but as soon as you change major plot points or dare switch the main actors with new ones, that's a plain insult to the audience who watched from the start.
more...
admyrick
Sep 12, 08:55 PM
Got this shirt this morning...
http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=251394&stc=1&d=1284340699
Where did you get this from?
http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=251394&stc=1&d=1284340699
Where did you get this from?
840quadra
Dec 2, 02:15 PM
Perhaps you missed me saying "Now, certainly, these issues should be looked at with all due diligence"? Again, I agree that Apple needs to keep on top of these vulnerabilities. With a little luck, we'll see a new security update within the next week or two that will patch most, if not all, of these. My objection was not to wanting Apple to fix these vulnerabilities. My objection was to the tone that suggested that if we didn't mount a public outcry, Apple would ignore these altogether, and by January 1st there'd be as many viruses on OS X as on Windows. It's the alarmist nature of so many of the posts here that I found objectionable. Give Apple the credit it's due, and trust that they are working on patching all of these vulnerabilities right now. How hard it is to patch them will determine how long we'll have to wait for the security updates.
I now understand what you are saying and agree.
more...
roy jones jr 2009.
Frank Sinatra Jr Wife
more...
Terminator song roy jones
roy jones jr wallpaper.
more...
about Roy Jones Jr(USA)
Seattle Seahawks NFC Championship Season to Roy Jones Jr. - Can#39;t Be Touched. Seattle Seahawks NFC Championship Season to Roy Jones Jr. - Can#39;t Be Touched
more...
Roy Jones Jr.
Jr. Wife middot; Roy Jones
Roy has been married to his
I now understand what you are saying and agree.
more...
solvs
Jul 11, 11:56 PM
I'm all for competition, but this is just a bad idea. MS is only going to be competing with other WMA players like they do with their oh so successful Music Store. The business world is one thing, even gaming I could see them being somewhat successful with one of these years as that's what PCs seem to be best at. The xBox is just a little computer anyway. But this is a different kind of entertainment. It's about cool. It's about style. It's about stuff that people want to just work. MS doesn't have any of that. This will be a me too product that few will care about.
It's not like Apple's resting on it laurels either. I'm sure they've got something cool planned that'll blow us all away, or at least stave off the "competition" for a little while. I just hope it has better battery life. :p
It's not like Apple's resting on it laurels either. I'm sure they've got something cool planned that'll blow us all away, or at least stave off the "competition" for a little while. I just hope it has better battery life. :p
KnightWRX
Dec 30, 10:43 PM
Under normal circumstances, you're more or less right.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
more...
dgreening
Apr 14, 02:07 PM
I don't have an option on my iPad.
kvizzel
Apr 23, 09:30 PM
iPhone 4G on T-Mobile????
4G SPEEDS DATTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA :cool:
4G SPEEDS DATTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA :cool:
more...
ptysell
May 4, 12:41 AM
Probably trying to sync up AT&T and VZN.
MacYale
Apr 22, 06:59 PM
The iphone 4 has an amazing design. the metal band is epic. the consistent thickness from top to bottom is ideal. it's incredible. the only thing i want improved is a larger screen�i was hoping for 4", but i'll take 3.7. i really don't see why they would do a design after 1 gen, especially one that seems to step backward into the ipod touch again. in fact, i would believe it more likely tha the next ipod touch would look more like the iphone 4.
more...
Thex1138
Apr 14, 08:47 AM
Jones do you realize what the iPhone is? It's a radio for speaking to Steve Jobs and it's within my reach!
Shut your eyes Marion don't look at it no matter what happens...
Don't look marrion keep your eyes shut! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HC3cWTo9ADk)
:rolleyes:
Shut your eyes Marion don't look at it no matter what happens...
Don't look marrion keep your eyes shut! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HC3cWTo9ADk)
:rolleyes:
mikeschmeee
Apr 12, 07:41 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5027/5614415395_b4488929f1.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeschmeee/5614415395/)
skunk
Apr 27, 12:50 PM
Obviously taking everything out of context, when we are dealing with the bleeding obvious there is no reason not to suggest it. I watched the video before reading the comments, so your point has no substance.You must have seen a lot of people having fits to be able to make such a confident judgement. Personally, having only lived with a severe epileptic in the household for nine years, I would unhesitatingly defer to you expertise. What do I know?
timinbovey
Apr 26, 07:17 PM
Let's just assume it's half music and half movies. That's roughly 142,000 songs and over 3000 movies. At .99 cents per song and $10 per movie, that's $170,000 if he paid for it. And he's complaining about $20 year. Hmmm....
Well, I don't know about this guy specifically. But I own over 20,000 vinyl records. Average 10 tracks each, that's 200,000 songs right there. Not to count at least that many 45's. A collection I've gathered over 50 years. Not to mention 78's, cylinders, etc.
Ever shopped a used music store? Movie store? Goodwill? I have thousands of movies myself, many of which I only paid a dollar or even less for.
I download hundreds of songs from emusic for about half the iTunes price.
It's pretty easy to amass a large collectiion without ever paying retail, and being completely legal.
I can't even begin to count the LP's that have been GIVEN to me over the years by people who went to CD and didn't want them anymore, taking up room. Literally station wagons full -- back when station wagons were HUGE. Cost? How about 0 cents per track, except the time spent playing them into the computer. And I'll be damned if I rebuy all the vinyl I bought through the 60's, 70's and 80's.
Ever have someone GIVE you a few hundred CD's because they're all now in their computer and ipod, and they don't want them taking up the room anymore? Sure, thats probably not legal, however, they made a copy and gave the originals away! It certainly wasn't a legal violation on my part! Are they supposed to put them in the trash? I suppose so.
Any idea how many CD's you can buy out there at 50 cents a pop at second hand stores and garage sales? Somehow, that's still legal!
I know I'm not the only one like me out here! Just saying... you're not considering the possibilities. And there's no way I would EVEr pay to stream my stuff from the internet (there is no "cloud")
Well, I don't know about this guy specifically. But I own over 20,000 vinyl records. Average 10 tracks each, that's 200,000 songs right there. Not to count at least that many 45's. A collection I've gathered over 50 years. Not to mention 78's, cylinders, etc.
Ever shopped a used music store? Movie store? Goodwill? I have thousands of movies myself, many of which I only paid a dollar or even less for.
I download hundreds of songs from emusic for about half the iTunes price.
It's pretty easy to amass a large collectiion without ever paying retail, and being completely legal.
I can't even begin to count the LP's that have been GIVEN to me over the years by people who went to CD and didn't want them anymore, taking up room. Literally station wagons full -- back when station wagons were HUGE. Cost? How about 0 cents per track, except the time spent playing them into the computer. And I'll be damned if I rebuy all the vinyl I bought through the 60's, 70's and 80's.
Ever have someone GIVE you a few hundred CD's because they're all now in their computer and ipod, and they don't want them taking up the room anymore? Sure, thats probably not legal, however, they made a copy and gave the originals away! It certainly wasn't a legal violation on my part! Are they supposed to put them in the trash? I suppose so.
Any idea how many CD's you can buy out there at 50 cents a pop at second hand stores and garage sales? Somehow, that's still legal!
I know I'm not the only one like me out here! Just saying... you're not considering the possibilities. And there's no way I would EVEr pay to stream my stuff from the internet (there is no "cloud")
French iPod
Jan 26, 08:45 PM
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/5308/sonyhtss37001.jpg (http://img163.imageshack.us/i/sonyhtss37001.jpg/)
i bought it on friday and man the sound is amazing=D!!! the only thing missing is that i have to buy a HDMI Switcher for my PS3:) so i can enjoy my blu-ray movies/concert on my 32" TV and it all fitted in my room hehe:P
i bought it on friday and man the sound is amazing=D!!! the only thing missing is that i have to buy a HDMI Switcher for my PS3:) so i can enjoy my blu-ray movies/concert on my 32" TV and it all fitted in my room hehe:P
nagromme
Jul 24, 10:22 PM
Some Apple patents are just "out there" and don't sound useful in practice. I never expect to see them in a product.
But THIS sounds actually very useful--the problem of whether a keyboard hogs the screen or not is solved, etc. etc.
Apple's hiring says they're serious about touch computing. For an iPod? For a Mac? And when? I can't wait to find out!
But THIS sounds actually very useful--the problem of whether a keyboard hogs the screen or not is solved, etc. etc.
Apple's hiring says they're serious about touch computing. For an iPod? For a Mac? And when? I can't wait to find out!
iWonderwhy
Jun 6, 10:46 AM
$1000 worth of a beating he'd get if i were his parent. Luckily for kids, i hate them and would never have one. Ever.
Ah, sterile?
Ah, sterile?
jessica.
Sep 14, 09:43 PM
Finally settled.
http://wp.appadvice.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/IMG_0022-642x481.jpg
http://wp.appadvice.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/IMG_0022-642x481.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment