Zonz
Jan 1, 04:04 PM
Let me conclude with this.
I suppose I've dug myself into a little hole with my argument, and let me just clarify in saying that I DO understand the personal and social implications of obesity. And I agree with what is being said.
What I'm arguing is that none of you know this person. Therefore you cannot judge her condition. The examples I'm coming up with are far fetched yet, and I know statistically speaking she could have a mental condition, negative self image... etc... as is common with obesity. But all the toilet jokes and people who were simply outraged at how she could be so selfish were simply making me sick.
So even though I don't have the right to be the moral police, I felt like I had to intervene. If anything I'm glad that the tone of this forum has shifted towards one of consideration and thought about the implications of obesity and not just, "What a horrible person!" and "her poor toilet!". I've met many great obese people and I'm finding that there is a growing stereotype about fat people that is growing out of control. It's becoming less of a "condition" and more of a "moral deficiency."
So I concede. You guys are right, and I am wrong.
(Btw, the God vs religion thing is irrelevant to the topic, but I simply meant that when speaking about God you aren't necessarily speaking about religion. My post was sarcastic anyway, so I was just clarifying the point.)
I suppose I've dug myself into a little hole with my argument, and let me just clarify in saying that I DO understand the personal and social implications of obesity. And I agree with what is being said.
What I'm arguing is that none of you know this person. Therefore you cannot judge her condition. The examples I'm coming up with are far fetched yet, and I know statistically speaking she could have a mental condition, negative self image... etc... as is common with obesity. But all the toilet jokes and people who were simply outraged at how she could be so selfish were simply making me sick.
So even though I don't have the right to be the moral police, I felt like I had to intervene. If anything I'm glad that the tone of this forum has shifted towards one of consideration and thought about the implications of obesity and not just, "What a horrible person!" and "her poor toilet!". I've met many great obese people and I'm finding that there is a growing stereotype about fat people that is growing out of control. It's becoming less of a "condition" and more of a "moral deficiency."
So I concede. You guys are right, and I am wrong.
(Btw, the God vs religion thing is irrelevant to the topic, but I simply meant that when speaking about God you aren't necessarily speaking about religion. My post was sarcastic anyway, so I was just clarifying the point.)
jmor
Sep 12, 07:50 PM
Those look really slick, how do you like them so far?
KingCrimson
Apr 30, 04:47 PM
Can you name a few more? I have only seen Sony support AAC on their PMP devices.
Samsung has supported AAC for 4 years now.
Samsung has supported AAC for 4 years now.
MattInOz
Jul 12, 12:30 AM
Precisely.
If Apple dumped FireWire IEEE1394 for the sake of slimness, it is highly doubtful that they'd re-clutter and fatten it up with Bluetooth (which, after trying for many years (with other devices) I have now considered to be worthless crap). Really - unless one can charge with built-in solar panels (as Citizen (http://www.citizenwatch.com/COA/English/intro1.asp)does with their watches), wireless is a non-issue.
The current iPod has panache. It is "sessy". Neither word describes MS at all...and it is because of this that the Argo will have a tough time of it.
As others have said earlier in this issue, the good that will come out of all of this is that Apple will provide us with a better iPod.
Don't Intel have that new low power low range network chip that does Wi-fi, wireless firewire, wireless usb but only about 10m range they are pushing for home entertainment equipment. Get that build into the iPods (full size to start) and you have wireless that might be worth considering.
Then replace the dock connector with a magsafe power connector. to make charging a snap. sure you still need to get the battery life up a bit on current. It's starting to look like an interesting revision.
Yep MS have cash and exposure in other products to be a big threat to Apples iPod cashflow. Although Apple have the momentum, the options and range to keep themselves as first choice.
Hey I always wonder why Apple don't release iTunes for Playstation, or Nintendo.
If Apple dumped FireWire IEEE1394 for the sake of slimness, it is highly doubtful that they'd re-clutter and fatten it up with Bluetooth (which, after trying for many years (with other devices) I have now considered to be worthless crap). Really - unless one can charge with built-in solar panels (as Citizen (http://www.citizenwatch.com/COA/English/intro1.asp)does with their watches), wireless is a non-issue.
The current iPod has panache. It is "sessy". Neither word describes MS at all...and it is because of this that the Argo will have a tough time of it.
As others have said earlier in this issue, the good that will come out of all of this is that Apple will provide us with a better iPod.
Don't Intel have that new low power low range network chip that does Wi-fi, wireless firewire, wireless usb but only about 10m range they are pushing for home entertainment equipment. Get that build into the iPods (full size to start) and you have wireless that might be worth considering.
Then replace the dock connector with a magsafe power connector. to make charging a snap. sure you still need to get the battery life up a bit on current. It's starting to look like an interesting revision.
Yep MS have cash and exposure in other products to be a big threat to Apples iPod cashflow. Although Apple have the momentum, the options and range to keep themselves as first choice.
Hey I always wonder why Apple don't release iTunes for Playstation, or Nintendo.
more...
roadbloc
Jan 2, 06:14 AM
If you want to argue that most "Chefs" that love food and make great foods full of flavors and preparation are fat, look really closely at chefs. Most are not fat at all, I'd say the proportion is the same as in the normal population.
I concur 100%. I work as a chef and I was slightly underweight last time I checked. In the two kitchens I work in, no-one is overweight. One girl looks a bit plump, but I doubt very much she is overweight as she is a tall girl. Then again... I don't really love food. Being a chef is just a job for me.
One thing I'm surprised we haven't gone into is the fact that there are starving kids in Africa, and this gluttonous woman is unnecessary gorging food that could really be going to someone else who needs it more. It isn't as if she needs 30k calories to survive.
I concur 100%. I work as a chef and I was slightly underweight last time I checked. In the two kitchens I work in, no-one is overweight. One girl looks a bit plump, but I doubt very much she is overweight as she is a tall girl. Then again... I don't really love food. Being a chef is just a job for me.
One thing I'm surprised we haven't gone into is the fact that there are starving kids in Africa, and this gluttonous woman is unnecessary gorging food that could really be going to someone else who needs it more. It isn't as if she needs 30k calories to survive.
mccldwll
Apr 29, 06:41 AM
Ok, that works if you are thinking of getting a cellphone vs. not getting a cellphone.
But when you are thinking of getting what type of cellphone, no, it doesn't count. Cause by deciding you are getting a cellphone but trying to decide which type, you already committed to buying the plan,what type of cellphone does not affect the cost of the plan, you are going to pay it regardless. So the cost of the plan really doesn't count for the cost of the cellphone when you are comparing cellphones together.
...........
The point is when we are comparing different cellphones to each other, the service doesn't matter cause if you are getting the cellphone, you are going to pay the service regardless and which cellphone you get isn't going to affect the service's price. Therefore it is irrelevant when talking cost of one cellphone vs. another to bring in the cost o the contract.
Carriers love consumers who think like you do. It's how they are able to lock people into contracts and get rid of crappy phones--make them believe that getting a POS andrrhoid for free is such a wonderful deal compared to paying $200 for an iPhone 4 (forget the fact that that they'll be stuck with a piece of junk for a long time, suffering with poor support and function, and stuck with something completely worthless at the end, all because advertisers dangle bright, shiny objects in front of their eyes and let them believe they're saving so much in the beginning).
But when you are thinking of getting what type of cellphone, no, it doesn't count. Cause by deciding you are getting a cellphone but trying to decide which type, you already committed to buying the plan,what type of cellphone does not affect the cost of the plan, you are going to pay it regardless. So the cost of the plan really doesn't count for the cost of the cellphone when you are comparing cellphones together.
...........
The point is when we are comparing different cellphones to each other, the service doesn't matter cause if you are getting the cellphone, you are going to pay the service regardless and which cellphone you get isn't going to affect the service's price. Therefore it is irrelevant when talking cost of one cellphone vs. another to bring in the cost o the contract.
Carriers love consumers who think like you do. It's how they are able to lock people into contracts and get rid of crappy phones--make them believe that getting a POS andrrhoid for free is such a wonderful deal compared to paying $200 for an iPhone 4 (forget the fact that that they'll be stuck with a piece of junk for a long time, suffering with poor support and function, and stuck with something completely worthless at the end, all because advertisers dangle bright, shiny objects in front of their eyes and let them believe they're saving so much in the beginning).
more...
kevink2
Apr 13, 06:09 PM
I guess I just don't see the benefit of an Apple TV. Unless they come up with an easy to perform hardware upgrade path.
People generally buy TVs for longer terms. I know I would be upset if my TV can't make it 10 years.
People generally buy TVs for longer terms. I know I would be upset if my TV can't make it 10 years.
Stella
Jul 28, 07:35 AM
Don't discount microsoft - they have money to lose for years in trying to get #1 for MP3 - slowly they creep up and overturn Apple - apple doesn't ahve the same stamina.
A long term commitment, not a short term thing.
Awesome! I can't wait for Vista! And now Zune! Who needs those silly Macs?
Uh, why is this on page 1? We already have enough iPod news, now we're going to be following an MS product that doesn't exist yet? C'mon! More grainy photos of elevators! Chop, Chop!
:D
B
A long term commitment, not a short term thing.
Awesome! I can't wait for Vista! And now Zune! Who needs those silly Macs?
Uh, why is this on page 1? We already have enough iPod news, now we're going to be following an MS product that doesn't exist yet? C'mon! More grainy photos of elevators! Chop, Chop!
:D
B
more...
PBF
Apr 14, 08:30 AM
Someone at iPhone Dev Forums said that iOS Simulator in Lion will gain ability to download/run apps.
That pretty much means that another "groundbreaking" feature in Lion is ability to run iOS apps (besides iOS Simulator).
That pretty much means that another "groundbreaking" feature in Lion is ability to run iOS apps (besides iOS Simulator).
belovedmonster
Jul 11, 03:49 AM
For all of those people who are saying "Once it adds X I can finally remove MS from my computer..." have you not considered Open Office? I find its actually better than MS Word in many respects and being open source its totaly free.
A year ago I would of said Apple would never package iWork free with Macs, but the more I see that iWork is hardly setting the world alight the more I think it probably would be a better business model to package it with systems. Im sure they will offset the cost with selling more Macs in the first place but more importantly getting people hooked into buying the update each year ala iLife.
A year ago I would of said Apple would never package iWork free with Macs, but the more I see that iWork is hardly setting the world alight the more I think it probably would be a better business model to package it with systems. Im sure they will offset the cost with selling more Macs in the first place but more importantly getting people hooked into buying the update each year ala iLife.
more...
fenixx
Jul 24, 04:53 PM
hmmmm, tomorrow's Tuesday...
toughboy
Oct 24, 07:33 PM
Ok its good to know this.. I'll download the Ultimate version of Vista then, not the Home Sweet Home version :D:D:D
F. U. Microsoft.. never gonna take any penny of mine again.. You suck and you always will..
F. U. Microsoft.. never gonna take any penny of mine again.. You suck and you always will..
more...
dethmaShine
Apr 13, 02:14 PM
Not this year but soon.
Airplay enabled TV has always been Apple's dream and this is going to be very big for Apple.
The perfect entertainment solution. It's coming soon.
Airplay enabled TV has always been Apple's dream and this is going to be very big for Apple.
The perfect entertainment solution. It's coming soon.
grigby1
Sep 30, 11:30 AM
Three to four bars of 3G at my house in suburban Detroit and I'm lucky if I can make a call and if I can, half the time it's dropped. And nobody can hear me anyway. I rarely receive calls and the missed call and voice-mails notifications don't show up till I leave home. Had Verizon for years and I can't remember ever dropping a call anywhere. But I love my iPhone and never did like Verizon.
more...
Orme
May 2, 10:45 AM
I don't know if this is relevant but the shipping on the basic models say 24 hours but when I select the quad i7 option the shipping extends to 3 days.. When I selected the quad i7 option last night it said shipping only 2 days.. so it has changed by + 1 day :confused::rolleyes:
firestarter
Apr 24, 08:29 PM
You mean as the perpetrators did, right? Just checking.
I don't understand your point. Yes, the perpetrators were violent and committed assault. :confused:
I don't understand your point. Yes, the perpetrators were violent and committed assault. :confused:
more...
Chundles
Oct 24, 08:42 AM
The last round of iMacs are supposed to have new airport extremes that can be firmware upgraded to 802.11N. This is based upon a finding whilst using bootcamp and windowsXP/Vista(?). With Apples special TV thingy coming out next year (Steve Jobs announced at WWDC) all Macs really need wireless faster than G so it makes sense to upgrade them all to "n". So I strongly suspect the latest macbok pros have it - and it will be enabled next year.
Well, they don't really need wireless faster than G as G has enough raw throughput to handle media streaming. What they need is a G network protocol that would be robust enough to avoid interference and prioritise media streaming. This can be added in a firmware update to ALL Airport Extreme enabled Macs - much better than limiting iTV to only the newest of the new.
Well, they don't really need wireless faster than G as G has enough raw throughput to handle media streaming. What they need is a G network protocol that would be robust enough to avoid interference and prioritise media streaming. This can be added in a firmware update to ALL Airport Extreme enabled Macs - much better than limiting iTV to only the newest of the new.
Stella
Jul 24, 03:59 PM
come on, Apple! what we're all really waiting for is a mouse with force-feedback. for all these games.
Logitech did that years ago with two range of mice.
Now, they are no where to be seen. They were a gimmic.
Logitech did that years ago with two range of mice.
Now, they are no where to be seen. They were a gimmic.
iekozz
Apr 25, 11:43 AM
While I realize that this is the wrong place for it, that iMac I just bought is awesome although I was returning it either way for a larger hard drive so the update is best now.
Direct from DVD, it took Handbrake about 20 minutes to convert a movie to iTunes format. So sweet. And that's the lowest end 21 incher.
My Sony laptop does that in 10 minutes #justsaying
Direct from DVD, it took Handbrake about 20 minutes to convert a movie to iTunes format. So sweet. And that's the lowest end 21 incher.
My Sony laptop does that in 10 minutes #justsaying
ohaithar
Sep 14, 09:21 PM
.
I see what you did there! :D
I see what you did there! :D
lawrencewinkler
Oct 23, 06:40 PM
Regardless if you believe that you can install Vista Home under VMWare or Parallels, the real legal problem is MS has put VMWare and Parallels under legal notice that they may not write their software to allow the operation of Vista Home under their products, else they will be sued for contributory infringement.
So, technical theory aside, if MS has the legal right to restrict such behavior, there will be no way VMWare or Parallels will produce such software, otherwise MS will sue them out of existence.
So, technical theory aside, if MS has the legal right to restrict such behavior, there will be no way VMWare or Parallels will produce such software, otherwise MS will sue them out of existence.
Zephyr240
Mar 11, 01:47 PM
Does anyone know how many you can buy?
WeegieMac
Apr 14, 03:52 PM
Seriously. People should go pick up another phone (Android) or a BB and then come back to cry about how laggy their phone is. No matter what apple does will make those people happy.
I'd rather take sandpaper to my arse than use an Android phone.
There, get the point? I didn't say I wanted another phone, I just don't want the OS experience I'm using to degrading, but then look what Apple done to the iPhone 3G.
I'd rather take sandpaper to my arse than use an Android phone.
There, get the point? I didn't say I wanted another phone, I just don't want the OS experience I'm using to degrading, but then look what Apple done to the iPhone 3G.
KnightWRX
Apr 22, 11:55 AM
By the way - openstep is an evolution of nextstep when next went "open source". it may of been put of the GNU license,
Stop it please, you're hurting me... OpenStep is a specification of which GNUStep is a GPL licensed implementation released by the GNU project. Foundation and Cocoa are the NeXTSTEP acquired implementations that Apple is using.
OpenSTEP is not licensed under a GNU project license at all...
Lastly, the Minix kernel came from Posix. So the path Posix->Minix->Linux is valid.
POSIX is not a kernel. It's a standard programming interface that UNIX systems used to make sure that one program written for a UNIX system would compile another as long as the standard was followed.
Minix, while being a POSIX compliant OS, was a complete implementation done by Andrew Tannenbaum for a book he was writing.
Your grasp of all of this history is quite muddied. Seriously, who are you trying to convince here ? You've gotten about every fact wrong about this whole thing. The plain fact remains, I was right all along, your correction was quite wrong when you said :
Bash is under the GPL license - not GNU. Never has been GNU see source link -> http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-106/
BTW - No part of MacOSX is distributed under GNU licensing...
You completely misunderstood my post when I said Bash was part of the GNU project. Bash has always been GNU, always will be. The GPL is very much "GNU licensing".
Enjoy easter yourself and use the days off to work on your grasp of the whole UNIX and open source histories.
GNU evolved into a foundation
From GNU.org (http://www.gnu.org/) :
The GNU Project was launched in 1984 to develop the GNU operating system, a complete Unix-like operating system which is free software—software which respects your freedom.
Again, the Foundation is called the FSF, from their site, FSF.org (http://www.fsf.org/) :
What we do :
...
We drive development of the GNU operating system and maintain a list of high-priority free software projects to promote replacements for common proprietary applications.
Stop getting it wrong, we're on the Internet, the sites are there to correct you.
Stop it please, you're hurting me... OpenStep is a specification of which GNUStep is a GPL licensed implementation released by the GNU project. Foundation and Cocoa are the NeXTSTEP acquired implementations that Apple is using.
OpenSTEP is not licensed under a GNU project license at all...
Lastly, the Minix kernel came from Posix. So the path Posix->Minix->Linux is valid.
POSIX is not a kernel. It's a standard programming interface that UNIX systems used to make sure that one program written for a UNIX system would compile another as long as the standard was followed.
Minix, while being a POSIX compliant OS, was a complete implementation done by Andrew Tannenbaum for a book he was writing.
Your grasp of all of this history is quite muddied. Seriously, who are you trying to convince here ? You've gotten about every fact wrong about this whole thing. The plain fact remains, I was right all along, your correction was quite wrong when you said :
Bash is under the GPL license - not GNU. Never has been GNU see source link -> http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-106/
BTW - No part of MacOSX is distributed under GNU licensing...
You completely misunderstood my post when I said Bash was part of the GNU project. Bash has always been GNU, always will be. The GPL is very much "GNU licensing".
Enjoy easter yourself and use the days off to work on your grasp of the whole UNIX and open source histories.
GNU evolved into a foundation
From GNU.org (http://www.gnu.org/) :
The GNU Project was launched in 1984 to develop the GNU operating system, a complete Unix-like operating system which is free software—software which respects your freedom.
Again, the Foundation is called the FSF, from their site, FSF.org (http://www.fsf.org/) :
What we do :
...
We drive development of the GNU operating system and maintain a list of high-priority free software projects to promote replacements for common proprietary applications.
Stop getting it wrong, we're on the Internet, the sites are there to correct you.
No comments:
Post a Comment