CalBoy
Jan 28, 12:34 AM
I like this investment adage:
"Buy high, sell even higher."
So that's what I've been doing wrong! :p
Perhaps another old adage needs to be thrown around here: diversify, diversify, diversify, diversify!
"Buy high, sell even higher."
So that's what I've been doing wrong! :p
Perhaps another old adage needs to be thrown around here: diversify, diversify, diversify, diversify!
meepm00pmeep
Oct 24, 08:25 AM
Nice update. Some really nice to have features, but I'm not totally depressed about buying my 2.16ghz MBP 3 months ago (not that I could have waited, really).
be satsisfied with what you have when you needed it... i got my 17" MBP only 3 weeks ago with no regrets and i love this thing, i don't need all that's there in the update, what i have now will suffice until the next time i need a new computer :D :D :D
be satsisfied with what you have when you needed it... i got my 17" MBP only 3 weeks ago with no regrets and i love this thing, i don't need all that's there in the update, what i have now will suffice until the next time i need a new computer :D :D :D
blow45
Mar 31, 03:04 PM
butt ugly (at the very, very list leave the option of reverting as in the mail.app)
gkarris
Apr 13, 03:43 PM
Great. A 4K magical TV.
Actually...
http://themacswitch.net/2011/03/25/will-people-start-lining-up-for-macs/
http://themacswitch.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/iPad_line.jpg
Actually...
http://themacswitch.net/2011/03/25/will-people-start-lining-up-for-macs/
http://themacswitch.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/iPad_line.jpg
more...
Chundles
Oct 24, 07:47 AM
FW800 on both sizes.
200GB HDD (at 4200rpm) available.
Good initial RAM 1GB on lower models, 2GB on high end ones.
Everything else seems pretty much the same.
200GB HDD (at 4200rpm) available.
Good initial RAM 1GB on lower models, 2GB on high end ones.
Everything else seems pretty much the same.
Balin64
Mar 31, 01:33 PM
That wood look needs to go. iBooks in iOS is hideous. I am disappointed that it's making it in to OS X.
more...
Jony Mac
Mar 31, 10:38 AM
wow..that looks ugly
TwoSocEmBoppers
Mar 16, 07:46 AM
Woo first...In line at Brea. 6 people here total.
more...
lifeofart
Jul 12, 06:02 PM
You know, that's a good idea.
Here I was so caught up in the idea of getting it to be a final version, I didn't even think of that. Let the machines that are designed to do this do the work....
(I'm not even going to dignify the other snide poster with a response :rolleyes: )
I'm sorry if my comment came off as being snide.
But it really bothers me when people post how wonderful an app is and how useful it is and how it completely replaces a much more expensive app. When in reality it is only a simple consumer level product.
Others read this forum and buy Pages thinking that they can eliminate the use of Word. Then they find out that it really isn't that compatible with Word files. If you email a windows user a .doc file exported from pages, 7 times out of 10 they have problems with it.
Most pro printshops, publishers, law firms etc. only except word .doc files. Almost all law firms require a revision history. Collaboration tools are useally also required. Word handles this expertly. Plus it has table of contents tools, book publishing tools, bibliography tools, direct faxing,multitudes of custom templates, VB programing hooks, etc. etc. None of this has an equivalent in Pages.
I'm glad you found a solution to your problem and I am glad that Pages satisfies your needs for word processing. Maybe someday it will move out of the "consumer" ranks and into the "Pro" ranks when more functionality is added. Apple seems to know the niche that they are addressing very well.
Here I was so caught up in the idea of getting it to be a final version, I didn't even think of that. Let the machines that are designed to do this do the work....
(I'm not even going to dignify the other snide poster with a response :rolleyes: )
I'm sorry if my comment came off as being snide.
But it really bothers me when people post how wonderful an app is and how useful it is and how it completely replaces a much more expensive app. When in reality it is only a simple consumer level product.
Others read this forum and buy Pages thinking that they can eliminate the use of Word. Then they find out that it really isn't that compatible with Word files. If you email a windows user a .doc file exported from pages, 7 times out of 10 they have problems with it.
Most pro printshops, publishers, law firms etc. only except word .doc files. Almost all law firms require a revision history. Collaboration tools are useally also required. Word handles this expertly. Plus it has table of contents tools, book publishing tools, bibliography tools, direct faxing,multitudes of custom templates, VB programing hooks, etc. etc. None of this has an equivalent in Pages.
I'm glad you found a solution to your problem and I am glad that Pages satisfies your needs for word processing. Maybe someday it will move out of the "consumer" ranks and into the "Pro" ranks when more functionality is added. Apple seems to know the niche that they are addressing very well.
Danindub
Jun 6, 11:01 AM
I don't get what is the fuss about - many times I wasn't happy with purchased app, album, or downloaded something by mistake - and never had problems getting refunds from apple...
more...
HasanDaddy
Mar 15, 10:28 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
And I think they said they might get more in today, but I don't remember exactly?
And I think they said they might get more in today, but I don't remember exactly?
crackpip
Jul 24, 08:54 PM
i wonder how you click, or make a selection. it would be pointless if you could scroll wothout touching the screen, but had to touch it in order to click on the scroll wheel.
Yeah, that is a good question. It would seem to be a very touchy thing to differentiate scrolling from clicking the buttons. Maybe they'll move back to the 3G interface with the separate buttons. It seems that it might feel a bit awkward to me to not receive any tactile feed back.
I'm excited to see what Apple comes up with.
crack "Bad Puns" pip
Yeah, that is a good question. It would seem to be a very touchy thing to differentiate scrolling from clicking the buttons. Maybe they'll move back to the 3G interface with the separate buttons. It seems that it might feel a bit awkward to me to not receive any tactile feed back.
I'm excited to see what Apple comes up with.
crack "Bad Puns" pip
more...
sparkomatic
Mar 11, 04:03 PM
Irvine Spectrum:
Line is going to the Sur la Table store.
They've come by twice already with water and umbrellas for shade!
Line is going to the Sur la Table store.
They've come by twice already with water and umbrellas for shade!
einmusiker
Dec 31, 12:25 AM
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
ok, I'm sorry but how the hell do you know what I do or don't understand about nutrition?? your presumptions are offensive
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.
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 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.
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.
ok, I'm sorry but how the hell do you know what I do or don't understand about nutrition?? your presumptions are offensive
more...
G4DP
Mar 31, 03:26 PM
Team? OS X is actually developed by one guy in the boiler room who was actually fired years ago but still shows up to work... :rolleyes:
Sad thing is by the way this seems to be an accurate description of OS X development.
Sad thing is by the way this seems to be an accurate description of OS X development.
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 18, 12:47 AM
I love the Macbook Air but I would hate it if they released a new one. Especially since this was only out in 10/2010.
it's going to be a spec upgrade. this happens every year with hardware
it's going to be a spec upgrade. this happens every year with hardware
more...
rnelan7
Dec 6, 06:30 AM
Ugh that sucks! I worked in a desert so no snowboarding seasons for me either : /
I go to Blue Knob and Seven Springs. Both are in Pennsylvania but I plan on taking a trip out to Winter Park Colorado this winter :D Where do you go?
I go to Camelback in the Poconos. It's the best thing that is closet to me in Jersey.
I go to Blue Knob and Seven Springs. Both are in Pennsylvania but I plan on taking a trip out to Winter Park Colorado this winter :D Where do you go?
I go to Camelback in the Poconos. It's the best thing that is closet to me in Jersey.
-aggie-
Apr 27, 08:34 PM
Anyone else find it odd the way jav has been acting?
Pot meet kettle.
im gonna follow with ucfgrad and throw -aggie- out there
Wow, maybe there�s something to Appleguy�s theory about you.
Anyway, I�m going into the hospital tomorrow morning and I�m not sure when I�ll be posting again. So, I�ll just leave it at:
The village would be making a HUGE mistake to vote me off, if it comes to that. One of these two, Eldiablowjoe or nies without the bun is probably a WW.
Pot meet kettle.
im gonna follow with ucfgrad and throw -aggie- out there
Wow, maybe there�s something to Appleguy�s theory about you.
Anyway, I�m going into the hospital tomorrow morning and I�m not sure when I�ll be posting again. So, I�ll just leave it at:
The village would be making a HUGE mistake to vote me off, if it comes to that. One of these two, Eldiablowjoe or nies without the bun is probably a WW.
jellomizer
Oct 23, 12:28 PM
If Vista can run soley in a virtuallized environment without breaking the EULA, but not be installed on a machine that also is using it in a virtualized way. How does this affect anyone-(Mac or PC)?
If I own a PC and I want to run Vista, why would I want to also run Vista, on the same machine, in a virtual environment?
For Mac users, why would we want to install Vista-(via BootCamp) and then also use it under virtualization?
What situation is there that you would want to run the same OS on the same box, one natively installed and one in virtualization?:confused:
Very confused about how this affects anyone?
Well it is an issue on who you want incharge. For example If I am doing some web development I may want to virtualize Vista to insture the page renders correctly in IE 7. Then switch back to my Mac Enviroment. But there are other times say I want to play a windows game I would want Windows to have full control. So I want to run it nativly.
I think Microsoft wants to make sure you are not putting the same copy of windows on different virtual devices so you can have 10 Versions of windows from the same license. (ALthough it is on the same box)
If I own a PC and I want to run Vista, why would I want to also run Vista, on the same machine, in a virtual environment?
For Mac users, why would we want to install Vista-(via BootCamp) and then also use it under virtualization?
What situation is there that you would want to run the same OS on the same box, one natively installed and one in virtualization?:confused:
Very confused about how this affects anyone?
Well it is an issue on who you want incharge. For example If I am doing some web development I may want to virtualize Vista to insture the page renders correctly in IE 7. Then switch back to my Mac Enviroment. But there are other times say I want to play a windows game I would want Windows to have full control. So I want to run it nativly.
I think Microsoft wants to make sure you are not putting the same copy of windows on different virtual devices so you can have 10 Versions of windows from the same license. (ALthough it is on the same box)
Aetherhole
Mar 16, 08:10 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
In line at Fashion Island. #6 in line. Here we go again!
In line at Fashion Island. #6 in line. Here we go again!
NT1440
May 1, 11:41 PM
What, so he wasn't important? What about the president?
Disregarding the missed point...
Was important. The past tense matters. Other than giving those who look at the world with a revenge-at-all-costs is a good thing point of view something to chant loudly for, what has this changed?
If anything this will just escalate our wars, from both sides.
Disregarding the missed point...
Was important. The past tense matters. Other than giving those who look at the world with a revenge-at-all-costs is a good thing point of view something to chant loudly for, what has this changed?
If anything this will just escalate our wars, from both sides.
TheMacBookPro
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.
You do realize that you too were once a kid as well? :rolleyes:
My brother has a android phone (:mad:) and if he buys an app from the android market and doesn't like it he can get a refund and it is deleted. I think it is in a 15 minute time gap.
However this would be a nice feature to the apple app store.
What's wrong with Android? My N1 does far more than what a 3GS can do... whatever floats your boat I guess.
You do realize that you too were once a kid as well? :rolleyes:
My brother has a android phone (:mad:) and if he buys an app from the android market and doesn't like it he can get a refund and it is deleted. I think it is in a 15 minute time gap.
However this would be a nice feature to the apple app store.
What's wrong with Android? My N1 does far more than what a 3GS can do... whatever floats your boat I guess.
LagunaSol
Apr 28, 12:23 PM
No in bogo they BOTH make money. Verizon, Att, Tmobile and Sprint have already paid retail for the phone before customers recieve the contract price. Apple, Samsung, HTC etc have already made their money. Telcos now have to make their money over time with the contract. Telcos now have to make their money over time with the contract.
One must assume the carrier would prefer to sell an iPhone, where they don't have to make up the cost of a "free" Android phone over time. Carriers thus would want to sink more advertising dollars and apply more sales pressure for the more profitable iPhone.
Again, let's get the iPhone on Sprint and T-Mobile and see how it all plays out.
One must assume the carrier would prefer to sell an iPhone, where they don't have to make up the cost of a "free" Android phone over time. Carriers thus would want to sink more advertising dollars and apply more sales pressure for the more profitable iPhone.
Again, let's get the iPhone on Sprint and T-Mobile and see how it all plays out.
balamw
Oct 23, 09:46 PM
I guess that means you can't legally run XP on a Core Duo or Core2 Duo system...
Even for XP Home multi-core processors are considered one processor. It's the number of chips that counts. All started when Intel started Hyperthreading P4 CPUs (i.e. presenting them as 2 CPUs).
B
Even for XP Home multi-core processors are considered one processor. It's the number of chips that counts. All started when Intel started Hyperthreading P4 CPUs (i.e. presenting them as 2 CPUs).
B
No comments:
Post a Comment