bigjohn
Aug 4, 12:58 AM
Who voted negative????? You want it slower, eh? Give the man a G3! No, a 601!
he can have one my old 68k's
he can have one my old 68k's
Coolerking
Sep 11, 09:05 AM
I think its fair to assume at this stage no macbook/pro updates will be shown tomorrow. All they do is distract from the media/ipod announcements. best you can hope for is a quiet refresh towards the end of this week.
M.
Or later today. Although with 9/11 being at the forefront of the news I doubt it.
Early tomorrow would be best.
M.
Or later today. Although with 9/11 being at the forefront of the news I doubt it.
Early tomorrow would be best.
andiwm2003
Jul 21, 02:07 PM
i thought the merom chips have the same pricing as the yonah 5 or 6 month ago. that would mean apple could switch to all merom (MB, mini, MBP). especially since they are compared to dell & co. in the windows world you are almost forced to use the better chip (merom) because the competition is fierce.
AaronEdwards
Apr 26, 03:55 PM
Just a sample size of one, but I'm a good example of a customer that Apple might not get:
Sprint user for years. Good discounts, etc. and the service has worked fine for me over the years. For me to switch carriers for an iPhone I'd spend $40-$50 a month more. As much as I want an iphone (I own a 3gs I use internationally and really like it), unless Apple and Sprint make a deal I'm probably gonna end up with an Android phone to replace my barely functional Palm Pre. I'm heading out of the country for a couple months, hopefully Sprint has the iPhone when I return, haha...
Another name for a sample size of one. An anecdote... ;)
Sprint user for years. Good discounts, etc. and the service has worked fine for me over the years. For me to switch carriers for an iPhone I'd spend $40-$50 a month more. As much as I want an iphone (I own a 3gs I use internationally and really like it), unless Apple and Sprint make a deal I'm probably gonna end up with an Android phone to replace my barely functional Palm Pre. I'm heading out of the country for a couple months, hopefully Sprint has the iPhone when I return, haha...
Another name for a sample size of one. An anecdote... ;)
RollTide
Apr 21, 04:43 PM
What is this "Mac" they speak of. :p
ghostlyorb
Mar 29, 07:50 PM
Even though it's sad to everyone who wants to buy an iPod.. I'll refuse to complain about it. Japan was crippled by the earthquake. Japan is in our prayers!
tipdrill407
Aug 7, 10:03 PM
Uh, that's the point: you shouldn't have to 'pay more' - it should be standard, and shouldn't raise the price-point, if other manufacturers can do it.
I don't get the apologists who defend every questionable component from Apple by saying 'well, I don't want to pay extra in the base price' (for a reasonable amount of RAM or for a decent videocard) - demand more from Apple.
Ask why you can't have a $2500 flagship desktop with a graphics card that didn't cost Apple $40, why Apple can't eat the extra $45 to offer their consumer items with a usable amount of RAM standard.
The base model offers more than enough features for a pro to work blazingly fast. The graphics card is adequate for A LOT of things, except maybe hardcore gaming. But again Apple never intended the Mac Pro to be used for shooting ppl.
I don't get the apologists who defend every questionable component from Apple by saying 'well, I don't want to pay extra in the base price' (for a reasonable amount of RAM or for a decent videocard) - demand more from Apple.
Ask why you can't have a $2500 flagship desktop with a graphics card that didn't cost Apple $40, why Apple can't eat the extra $45 to offer their consumer items with a usable amount of RAM standard.
The base model offers more than enough features for a pro to work blazingly fast. The graphics card is adequate for A LOT of things, except maybe hardcore gaming. But again Apple never intended the Mac Pro to be used for shooting ppl.
vigilant
Mar 30, 07:45 PM
iCal has been visually overhauled to look like the iPad version
pancakedrawer
May 4, 08:52 PM
I'm outraged.
OK, not really, just wary of not having an OS disk in case of problems. It'd have to be followed by the merest physical back-up device in the mail, just in case. The current packaging of OSX is ridiculous; it might be good for the noobs, but I throw away everything but the disk the moment the box opens. I'd rather get a tiny USB key in a plain, brown rapper.
Intended? Probably not. Funny? Hilarious.
OK, not really, just wary of not having an OS disk in case of problems. It'd have to be followed by the merest physical back-up device in the mail, just in case. The current packaging of OSX is ridiculous; it might be good for the noobs, but I throw away everything but the disk the moment the box opens. I'd rather get a tiny USB key in a plain, brown rapper.
Intended? Probably not. Funny? Hilarious.
fivetoadsloth
Apr 10, 07:25 PM
Mathematica 8. As far as I am concerned the most powerful math software available. People don't shell out thousands of dollars for a product that can't do basic math.
288.
288.
goMac
May 6, 12:25 AM
to be fair, the rumor puts this out 2 years, and ARM does have higher-end chips planned.
arn
And Intel will have way better chips than ARM will have 2 years from now.
Not to mention the additional software transition this would require.
This rumor makes no sense at all. Absolutely no sense.
arn
And Intel will have way better chips than ARM will have 2 years from now.
Not to mention the additional software transition this would require.
This rumor makes no sense at all. Absolutely no sense.
shadowx
Aug 6, 02:53 PM
Whats the normal run of events?
3 split up segments and then one more thing
Here is what i reckon
1) Intel transition
blah blah blah, it has been quick, painless developers, developers developers. Everyone has been receptive except $#%#@@! Adobe
Intel keep giving us the chips
today we update MBP and iMac to core 2 duo
2)Talking about tranistion there are 2 products which haven't yet been transistioned
PowerMac > Mac Pro
Xserve > Xserve? Mac Serve?
Mac Pro has 3 configs
Best - Dual Xeon, 1GB 500GB 256X1800 $3299
Better - Core 2 Duo 2.93ghz 1GB 500gb 256mb X1600 $2499
Good - Core 2 Duo 2.6 1GB 250gb 256mb X1600 $1999
Xserves - All Xeons, dah
3) Leopard talk
4) One more thing
Candidates: iPhone, iPod, New Screens (may be intro'd with Mac Pro's) what ever else there could be
Mostly agree with you... except I'm thinking x1900GT/XT for the high end... possibly even a FIREGL V5200 (V7200 option?) - after all, these are pro WORKSTATIONS, not desktops. One year ago I would have completely agreed with you (Apple's usual "conservative" GPU choices) - I think times have changed...we'll see:)
Oh, and just because these products don't exist for the MAC market today doesn't mean they won't starting tomorrow... I also wouldn't discount seeing the nVidia 7600GT and 7900 GT (or even a quadro fx 1500 option w/ OSX drivers) make an appearance in place of the ATI cards...
3 split up segments and then one more thing
Here is what i reckon
1) Intel transition
blah blah blah, it has been quick, painless developers, developers developers. Everyone has been receptive except $#%#@@! Adobe
Intel keep giving us the chips
today we update MBP and iMac to core 2 duo
2)Talking about tranistion there are 2 products which haven't yet been transistioned
PowerMac > Mac Pro
Xserve > Xserve? Mac Serve?
Mac Pro has 3 configs
Best - Dual Xeon, 1GB 500GB 256X1800 $3299
Better - Core 2 Duo 2.93ghz 1GB 500gb 256mb X1600 $2499
Good - Core 2 Duo 2.6 1GB 250gb 256mb X1600 $1999
Xserves - All Xeons, dah
3) Leopard talk
4) One more thing
Candidates: iPhone, iPod, New Screens (may be intro'd with Mac Pro's) what ever else there could be
Mostly agree with you... except I'm thinking x1900GT/XT for the high end... possibly even a FIREGL V5200 (V7200 option?) - after all, these are pro WORKSTATIONS, not desktops. One year ago I would have completely agreed with you (Apple's usual "conservative" GPU choices) - I think times have changed...we'll see:)
Oh, and just because these products don't exist for the MAC market today doesn't mean they won't starting tomorrow... I also wouldn't discount seeing the nVidia 7600GT and 7900 GT (or even a quadro fx 1500 option w/ OSX drivers) make an appearance in place of the ATI cards...
NAG
Apr 25, 10:07 AM
It's inaccurate because it doesn't track YOUR location, just the location of your nearest Cell Tower.
Your context is incorrect. I was referring to the website that supposedly has a lot of information about you, not the location database.
Thank you for the demonstration as to how almost everyone here is acting irrationally, though.
Your context is incorrect. I was referring to the website that supposedly has a lot of information about you, not the location database.
Thank you for the demonstration as to how almost everyone here is acting irrationally, though.
Bonte
Apr 18, 04:01 PM
Looking at the TouchWiz UI, I see your point.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be standardized
(e.g. copied) for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
We had smartphones, tablets and organisers years before the iPhone, if the layout and form-factor was so intuitive it should have been used before. Apple also uses the the start-screen a lot in promotions, it has become a logo for the device. Samsung also copy's the advertising to make it look like an Apple device, more than once i have to look more closely to a billboard to confirm it's not an iPhone. Samsung is the biggest copycat of them all.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be standardized
(e.g. copied) for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
We had smartphones, tablets and organisers years before the iPhone, if the layout and form-factor was so intuitive it should have been used before. Apple also uses the the start-screen a lot in promotions, it has become a logo for the device. Samsung also copy's the advertising to make it look like an Apple device, more than once i have to look more closely to a billboard to confirm it's not an iPhone. Samsung is the biggest copycat of them all.
bedifferent
Mar 30, 08:12 PM
Given that Apple sold over 4 million Macs last quarter, that must equate to around $7 billion in revenue. Macs still make up around a quarter of Apples revenue, so while iPhones might be where the most money is coming in, Apple can't ignore $7 billion per quarter...
Very true but those Macs are portables, not iMacs and certainly not the overpriced and overpowered Xeon server driven Mac Pro's that replaced the affordable and (at the time) upgradeable G4's and G5's we all used for our work. What happened to the dedicated 20/23/30" LCD CCFL Apple Cinema Display line, or even the Apple Studio Display line before them? Replaced with ONE 27" LED LCD based off the 27" iMac (basically an iMac without a computer). Times change, I get it, but why do they have to leave us power users who supported them before the iPod and need Apple systems for work behind? It's costing us thousands to switch to Windows systems and applications such as Avid and Premiere Pro/Adobe Suites.
IDevices are amazing, but please, don't make the already dwindling prosumers systems become iOS systems for the average Joe. There are a lot of people on here that are new comers from Apple's iPod/iPhone influx that don't know/understand what this is doing to those who really need OS X and affordable mid-towers and top notch displays again… and once built in California, now "designed" in California. Man, sad times for us and the states on that change...
Very true but those Macs are portables, not iMacs and certainly not the overpriced and overpowered Xeon server driven Mac Pro's that replaced the affordable and (at the time) upgradeable G4's and G5's we all used for our work. What happened to the dedicated 20/23/30" LCD CCFL Apple Cinema Display line, or even the Apple Studio Display line before them? Replaced with ONE 27" LED LCD based off the 27" iMac (basically an iMac without a computer). Times change, I get it, but why do they have to leave us power users who supported them before the iPod and need Apple systems for work behind? It's costing us thousands to switch to Windows systems and applications such as Avid and Premiere Pro/Adobe Suites.
IDevices are amazing, but please, don't make the already dwindling prosumers systems become iOS systems for the average Joe. There are a lot of people on here that are new comers from Apple's iPod/iPhone influx that don't know/understand what this is doing to those who really need OS X and affordable mid-towers and top notch displays again… and once built in California, now "designed" in California. Man, sad times for us and the states on that change...
gonnabuyamacbsh
Apr 18, 04:40 PM
touchwiz I can understand. should've stuck with simple vanilla android.
as for hardware, how else are you supposed to maximize screen space on a rectangle tablet or phone. it's way too simplistic and although they look similar, apple shouldn't really have a case there.
lame
edit: maybe apple feels threatened by the upcoming galaxy s2. looks sexy
http://androidos.in/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/galaxy2_seine.jpg
apple makes great products and they will always sell well. they shouldn't worry
as for hardware, how else are you supposed to maximize screen space on a rectangle tablet or phone. it's way too simplistic and although they look similar, apple shouldn't really have a case there.
lame
edit: maybe apple feels threatened by the upcoming galaxy s2. looks sexy
http://androidos.in/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/galaxy2_seine.jpg
apple makes great products and they will always sell well. they shouldn't worry
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.
noservice2001
Jul 29, 09:43 PM
what will become of the rockr?
Stevamundo
Nov 29, 05:30 PM
i never had any problems with the Boot Camp Partition until this
mac ran fine and i need to use Windows for certain programs
Did you even bother to read this link that someone posted for you cav23j? http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Slow-down-when-scanning-Work-around-now-available/td-p/295
mac ran fine and i need to use Windows for certain programs
Did you even bother to read this link that someone posted for you cav23j? http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Slow-down-when-scanning-Work-around-now-available/td-p/295
Splen
Mar 29, 01:40 PM
Meteorologist??? I guess you mean the Geologists.
I hope that Japan recover fast from this terrible catastrophe.
seismologist?
I hope that Japan recover fast from this terrible catastrophe.
seismologist?
appleguy123
May 3, 06:36 PM
There's a few mis-stated rules in Don't panic's rules that I will address shortly.
But one is that a trap activates as soon as you attempt to leave the room. The only way to avoid a trap is to explore the room, which will discover, and disarm, the trap.
With that said, there are currently nothing placed on the map by the villain. He will make his first move after you slow-pokes are done ;)
I'm confused. Are you saying that the villain gets to listen to our conversations and then place the traps? Can he place a trap in the room we're in right now? If so, should this planning be done via PM?
But one is that a trap activates as soon as you attempt to leave the room. The only way to avoid a trap is to explore the room, which will discover, and disarm, the trap.
With that said, there are currently nothing placed on the map by the villain. He will make his first move after you slow-pokes are done ;)
I'm confused. Are you saying that the villain gets to listen to our conversations and then place the traps? Can he place a trap in the room we're in right now? If so, should this planning be done via PM?
tny
Nov 26, 11:54 AM
i don't think it would appeal to that many people, to have an Apple tablet. I mean, the PC/Win versions aren't great sellers...
I don't think it would appeal to that many people, to have an Apple MP3 player. I mean, the existing ones aren't great sellers.
See the problem here? The reason the iPod took off was because it wasn't like the existing MP3 players.
Take a look at a group of current products:
1. The UMPC. Seems like a good idea, but not successful so far. Why not? Here's Gartner:
But while the UMPC concept has promise, today�s hardware cannot deliver on it. In Gartner's view, success will require:
* Technology advances that are at least two years away (including an eight-hour battery and a sub-$400 price)
* Low-cost, compelling content bundles (Intel and Microsoft are working on partnerships in this area)
* A better Microsoft shell/interface running on top of Vista
* Text entry options beyond �thumb-typing�
* "Dock and go" synchronization, requiring minimal user interaction
* Sustained market momentum from Microsoft and Intel
Today, we believe it isn't possible to produce compelling UMPC products � just "proofs of concept." The low battery life, high price and non-Vista operating system will likely hurt the UMPC's market acceptance in this first go-round, and the negative backlash could damage its future chances.
An Apple tablet would beat content bundles problem, the shell/interface problem, and the synchronization problem. Inkwell and a bluetooth keyboard option would help; and built-in WiFi will certainly help. If Apple can do something about the battery problem . . . I also think the form factor needs work.
2. The PDA. Right now the PDA market is growing, not shrinking - mostly thanks to the Blackberry and the PocketPC and at the expense of Palm. The magic combination seems to be email + cell wireless: if you can get your email anywhere you can use your cellphone, a PDA becomes a more compelling device. This ties in closely with
3. The cell phone. Everyone is in agreement that the cell phone is a target area for Apple; the question is who Apple's carrier will be. A GSM-based device that does EDGE could be used with many different networks.
4. The eBook reader, like the Sony Reader. The good side of the Sony Reader is low battery consumption and a very readable screen. The bad side is that it has to have a pretty low-consumption, low-use processor, no color, and the screen update speed is abysmal. The underlying tech of eInk isn't going to help with an Apple tablet, but the form factor might be a very good choice for a UMPC/Blackberry killer.
5. The tablet computer. The reason the tablet computer has been a failure is because the writing interface isn't very good yet, and because the damned things are the same size and weight as a notebook, so there's little point in dumping the notebook for a tablet. A smaller form factor with the same power, but one that it a little more usable and compelling than the UMPC might be very successful.
6. Video device, like the iPod with video or its competitors. A lot of folks complain that it's too small a screen, and the battery power isn't so hot. If you could have a larger screen that is not much heavier, and just a little more battery power . . .
7. Web pad / web appliance (Nokia 770, Audrey, Pepper Pad, etc.) The problems with these so far have been form factor and OS quality. Most web appliances have run either PocketPC/Windows CE or customized Linux distributions. The Linux distributions that have been used haven't had a good enough UI for a general computing, general audience environment - the needs of a web appliance are too complex to be handled the same way embedded interfaces (like TiVo's) have been handled. Windows CE isn't designed for a general computing environment, either, and makes too many compromises. I also think the Nokia 770 is too small, the PepperPad is overwhelmed by its case, and the Audrey isn't flexible enough.
A successor to the Newton that was a true OS X device, in a form factor similar to the Sony Reader, with .Mac synchronization, Airport Extreme and Bluetooth, a FireWire 400 and two USB 2 connectors, a mini-HMDI socket (with HDMI and DVI converters), a dock connector, an iSight, and an optical-capable audio plug, with some of the on-screen navigation tech we've seen in Apple patents, would be fantastic.
But I'd be surprised if the tech is there yet: the processors aren't small enough and cool enough, the flash memory (you'd want flash and not a hard disk drive) doesn't have enough capacity yet, and the batteries don't have a long enough life. I'll bet there is a prototype device like this in the Apple labs, but it might have mediocre stats: say
700 MHz processor equivalent
16 GB storage
256 MB ram
3 hours of battery life (1.5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $999.
I think a successful device would need
1.2 GHz processor equivalent
80 GB storage
1 GB RAM
8 hours of battery life (5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $699.
I don't think it would appeal to that many people, to have an Apple MP3 player. I mean, the existing ones aren't great sellers.
See the problem here? The reason the iPod took off was because it wasn't like the existing MP3 players.
Take a look at a group of current products:
1. The UMPC. Seems like a good idea, but not successful so far. Why not? Here's Gartner:
But while the UMPC concept has promise, today�s hardware cannot deliver on it. In Gartner's view, success will require:
* Technology advances that are at least two years away (including an eight-hour battery and a sub-$400 price)
* Low-cost, compelling content bundles (Intel and Microsoft are working on partnerships in this area)
* A better Microsoft shell/interface running on top of Vista
* Text entry options beyond �thumb-typing�
* "Dock and go" synchronization, requiring minimal user interaction
* Sustained market momentum from Microsoft and Intel
Today, we believe it isn't possible to produce compelling UMPC products � just "proofs of concept." The low battery life, high price and non-Vista operating system will likely hurt the UMPC's market acceptance in this first go-round, and the negative backlash could damage its future chances.
An Apple tablet would beat content bundles problem, the shell/interface problem, and the synchronization problem. Inkwell and a bluetooth keyboard option would help; and built-in WiFi will certainly help. If Apple can do something about the battery problem . . . I also think the form factor needs work.
2. The PDA. Right now the PDA market is growing, not shrinking - mostly thanks to the Blackberry and the PocketPC and at the expense of Palm. The magic combination seems to be email + cell wireless: if you can get your email anywhere you can use your cellphone, a PDA becomes a more compelling device. This ties in closely with
3. The cell phone. Everyone is in agreement that the cell phone is a target area for Apple; the question is who Apple's carrier will be. A GSM-based device that does EDGE could be used with many different networks.
4. The eBook reader, like the Sony Reader. The good side of the Sony Reader is low battery consumption and a very readable screen. The bad side is that it has to have a pretty low-consumption, low-use processor, no color, and the screen update speed is abysmal. The underlying tech of eInk isn't going to help with an Apple tablet, but the form factor might be a very good choice for a UMPC/Blackberry killer.
5. The tablet computer. The reason the tablet computer has been a failure is because the writing interface isn't very good yet, and because the damned things are the same size and weight as a notebook, so there's little point in dumping the notebook for a tablet. A smaller form factor with the same power, but one that it a little more usable and compelling than the UMPC might be very successful.
6. Video device, like the iPod with video or its competitors. A lot of folks complain that it's too small a screen, and the battery power isn't so hot. If you could have a larger screen that is not much heavier, and just a little more battery power . . .
7. Web pad / web appliance (Nokia 770, Audrey, Pepper Pad, etc.) The problems with these so far have been form factor and OS quality. Most web appliances have run either PocketPC/Windows CE or customized Linux distributions. The Linux distributions that have been used haven't had a good enough UI for a general computing, general audience environment - the needs of a web appliance are too complex to be handled the same way embedded interfaces (like TiVo's) have been handled. Windows CE isn't designed for a general computing environment, either, and makes too many compromises. I also think the Nokia 770 is too small, the PepperPad is overwhelmed by its case, and the Audrey isn't flexible enough.
A successor to the Newton that was a true OS X device, in a form factor similar to the Sony Reader, with .Mac synchronization, Airport Extreme and Bluetooth, a FireWire 400 and two USB 2 connectors, a mini-HMDI socket (with HDMI and DVI converters), a dock connector, an iSight, and an optical-capable audio plug, with some of the on-screen navigation tech we've seen in Apple patents, would be fantastic.
But I'd be surprised if the tech is there yet: the processors aren't small enough and cool enough, the flash memory (you'd want flash and not a hard disk drive) doesn't have enough capacity yet, and the batteries don't have a long enough life. I'll bet there is a prototype device like this in the Apple labs, but it might have mediocre stats: say
700 MHz processor equivalent
16 GB storage
256 MB ram
3 hours of battery life (1.5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $999.
I think a successful device would need
1.2 GHz processor equivalent
80 GB storage
1 GB RAM
8 hours of battery life (5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $699.
philbeeney
Apr 9, 07:39 PM
My Scientific calculator says 2.
maccompaq
Jan 5, 09:08 AM
I don't use AV software on my Windows computers nor will I use it on my Macs.
And believe it or not, I have not had an infection in all the years (many) that I have been on the net.
And believe it or not, I have not had an infection in all the years (many) that I have been on the net.