MattSepeta
Apr 14, 04:33 PM
I think we can all agree that there is a lot of waste in government. The fact is, a lot of it is hard to find. At this point in our financial situation, I agree with across the board cuts. After that, then you continue to cut, where it makes sense, surgically.
Yep. If you are 600lbs overweight, you can afford to (and certainly should) cut fat from your head to your toes. Don'[t cut your head OFF, simply trim it.
Not hard to understand.
Yep. If you are 600lbs overweight, you can afford to (and certainly should) cut fat from your head to your toes. Don'[t cut your head OFF, simply trim it.
Not hard to understand.
JAT
Apr 20, 12:02 PM
You're just screwing with me, right? Because this has nothing to do with what I actually wrote.
Yes, the US is literally the entire world. There are no other countries, let alone other countries with 12-month contracts. Why, Sir, that would be inconceivable!
I think it does. Obviously, so did others.
Yes, the US is literally the entire world. There are no other countries, let alone other countries with 12-month contracts. Why, Sir, that would be inconceivable!
I think it does. Obviously, so did others.
ravenvii
May 4, 10:28 PM
I'm surprised. :)
Why would the villain ever move out of the lair?
Are we to assume there are unlimited traps and monsters? Are these of all types, that is, 1 point type, 2 point type, etc.?
As to the first question, f I answer that, I risk revealing too much. :)
As to the second, yes the villain has unlimited traps and monsters. And yes, there are different types that costs different amounts of points. The more points, the bigger and badder the monster or trap is, obviously.
Why would the villain ever move out of the lair?
Are we to assume there are unlimited traps and monsters? Are these of all types, that is, 1 point type, 2 point type, etc.?
As to the first question, f I answer that, I risk revealing too much. :)
As to the second, yes the villain has unlimited traps and monsters. And yes, there are different types that costs different amounts of points. The more points, the bigger and badder the monster or trap is, obviously.
-aggie-
May 3, 05:32 PM
I would rather that you started leading us since you seem to be much more versed in the rules guiding us :).
We�re doomed.:D
We�re doomed.:D
citizenzen
Apr 14, 04:24 PM
We should also cut spending across the board. Cut spending on EVERYTHING.
Repeating myself ...
I find this approach highly irrational. If you're overweight, it's important to lose fat. It does no good whatsoever to treat brain the same as fat ... to treat vital organs the same as fat ... to treat limbs and digits the same as fat.
Repeating myself ...
I find this approach highly irrational. If you're overweight, it's important to lose fat. It does no good whatsoever to treat brain the same as fat ... to treat vital organs the same as fat ... to treat limbs and digits the same as fat.
citizenzen
Apr 18, 07:52 PM
I'm not against tax increases as long as the country is using it as a last resort.
What constitutes being a "last resort"?
It makes more sense to me to put in clauses that reverse tax increases once a goal has been reached.
Use all the tools in the tool chest to solve the problem.
What constitutes being a "last resort"?
It makes more sense to me to put in clauses that reverse tax increases once a goal has been reached.
Use all the tools in the tool chest to solve the problem.
callmemike20
Apr 18, 08:18 PM
What constitutes being a "last resort"?
It makes more sense to me to put in clauses that reverse tax increases once a goal has been reached.
Use all the tools in the tool chest to solve the problem.
You clause is a great idea, but we all know that taxes never go away. Wasn't the income tax supposed to be temporary also? Once the government gets their hands on more money, they become less worried about adjusting their spending because the problem is basically fixed (in their minds) due to the additional income.
You are right about using all the tools available to solve the problem. So let me recommend something. It's basically a reversal of your clause. The clause would allow a taxation adjustment (which would be predetermined) once 20% of spending has been cut (or some other amount).
An example (with simplified numbers):
Government Income: $1 billion
Government Spending: $1.50 billion
Total government debt: $5 billion
Defense Spending: $ 300 million (20%)
Social Security: $300 million (20%)
Police/Fire Spending: $200 million (about 13%)
Medical: $250 million (about 17%)
Other: $450 million (30%)
Now, let's say an agreement was made that would increase tax income to $1.2 billion, but in order for those taxes to be effective, the spending must be cut to $1.1 billion ( $0.1 billion difference for miscalculations and to pay off debt). So, each of those departments should still obtain the same amount of funding as % of government income, so 20% of $1.1 billion would be $220 million, which is a reduction of 80 million for defense.
Go down the line and do this for every department. If it doesn't work, then cut other programs to provide adequate funding the the extremely necessary departments that need it.
It makes more sense to me to put in clauses that reverse tax increases once a goal has been reached.
Use all the tools in the tool chest to solve the problem.
You clause is a great idea, but we all know that taxes never go away. Wasn't the income tax supposed to be temporary also? Once the government gets their hands on more money, they become less worried about adjusting their spending because the problem is basically fixed (in their minds) due to the additional income.
You are right about using all the tools available to solve the problem. So let me recommend something. It's basically a reversal of your clause. The clause would allow a taxation adjustment (which would be predetermined) once 20% of spending has been cut (or some other amount).
An example (with simplified numbers):
Government Income: $1 billion
Government Spending: $1.50 billion
Total government debt: $5 billion
Defense Spending: $ 300 million (20%)
Social Security: $300 million (20%)
Police/Fire Spending: $200 million (about 13%)
Medical: $250 million (about 17%)
Other: $450 million (30%)
Now, let's say an agreement was made that would increase tax income to $1.2 billion, but in order for those taxes to be effective, the spending must be cut to $1.1 billion ( $0.1 billion difference for miscalculations and to pay off debt). So, each of those departments should still obtain the same amount of funding as % of government income, so 20% of $1.1 billion would be $220 million, which is a reduction of 80 million for defense.
Go down the line and do this for every department. If it doesn't work, then cut other programs to provide adequate funding the the extremely necessary departments that need it.
Spoony
Apr 18, 03:25 PM
One more thing. I'm not sure you guys know how Samsung works or really know how Big Samsung is.
It is the world's largest private conglomerage by Revenue. Annual Revenue of over 170Billion.
Apple Inc. (2nd largest market cap, pretty massive company) Over 65B of sales.
Samsung is almost 3X bigger in terms of Sales.
My point being that Samung phones and Samsung component makers are pretty much two separate companies that consolidate together. I'd bet that Samung Components treats Samsung phones just like any other vendor.
Apple suing the phone arm of samsung probably has zero impact on the component piece. Different entities almost with different relationships etc.. Samsung definitely values the apple relationship. It's the phone arm that ripped off apple's design and funtionality.
It is the world's largest private conglomerage by Revenue. Annual Revenue of over 170Billion.
Apple Inc. (2nd largest market cap, pretty massive company) Over 65B of sales.
Samsung is almost 3X bigger in terms of Sales.
My point being that Samung phones and Samsung component makers are pretty much two separate companies that consolidate together. I'd bet that Samung Components treats Samsung phones just like any other vendor.
Apple suing the phone arm of samsung probably has zero impact on the component piece. Different entities almost with different relationships etc.. Samsung definitely values the apple relationship. It's the phone arm that ripped off apple's design and funtionality.
nuckinfutz
May 7, 10:00 AM
Mobileme is certainly worth more than free. Apple doesn't scrape your emails and other data to target adds at you a la Google.
I could see Apple making some features of Mobileme free. I don't think they're just going kill a revenue stream but they could offer a basic free Mobileme account which gives you.
A me.com email address with 5 aliases.
Sync features
"Find my damn iDevice"
Calendar, Contacts, Bookmark sync
Web page
Gallery
iWork.com
Then roll out Mobileme Pro
Make iDisk more like Drop Box.
Enhance the sync
Online Backup
Cloud Music (Lala style)
iWork.com Pro (adds collaborative editing)
Whatever other cool stuff they can deliver
I could see Apple making some features of Mobileme free. I don't think they're just going kill a revenue stream but they could offer a basic free Mobileme account which gives you.
A me.com email address with 5 aliases.
Sync features
"Find my damn iDevice"
Calendar, Contacts, Bookmark sync
Web page
Gallery
iWork.com
Then roll out Mobileme Pro
Make iDisk more like Drop Box.
Enhance the sync
Online Backup
Cloud Music (Lala style)
iWork.com Pro (adds collaborative editing)
Whatever other cool stuff they can deliver
darrens
Aug 4, 07:42 AM
I did not think that Intel has released
the general availablity for the merom and woodcrest chips yet??
Woodcrest was announced at least two weeks before Conroe. Woodcrest is supposedly available now - Apple's just waiting for WWDC...
Xeon (Woodcrest) chips are not generally used by PC manufacturers for desktops, so Apple doesn't have the same level of pressure to release a Mac Pro based on it. At least in my opinion.
the general availablity for the merom and woodcrest chips yet??
Woodcrest was announced at least two weeks before Conroe. Woodcrest is supposedly available now - Apple's just waiting for WWDC...
Xeon (Woodcrest) chips are not generally used by PC manufacturers for desktops, so Apple doesn't have the same level of pressure to release a Mac Pro based on it. At least in my opinion.
SandynJosh
Nov 23, 12:57 PM
In looking over all the ideas generated in this thread and all the trends going on in the world, I'm lead to wonder if a consumer iPhone makes as much sense as it would seem to at first blush. Sure, the numbers can be great, but the profit potential is nearly nil.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
adomanico18
Mar 30, 06:24 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
So I guess that Gold Master rumor was wrong.
Read the update. Tech crunch reports this is the internal gm1 build
So I guess that Gold Master rumor was wrong.
Read the update. Tech crunch reports this is the internal gm1 build
Peel
Aug 7, 04:32 PM
ITS A DEVELOPERS CONFERENCE !!!!!!!!!! NOT A GIVE-THE-WHINY-CONSUMERS-EVERYTHING-THEY-WANT-MACWORLD-CONFERENCE!!!!!!!!
Give it a rest!!!!
Ahh! I share your sentiments completely. Developer's tools at the developers conference. Simple isn't it?
The next comsumer show is Paris in September. That's where we're likely to see the ipods and other goodies.
Give it a rest!!!!
Ahh! I share your sentiments completely. Developer's tools at the developers conference. Simple isn't it?
The next comsumer show is Paris in September. That's where we're likely to see the ipods and other goodies.
zephonic
Apr 25, 10:09 AM
Am I the only one who thinks it's not a big deal? Your carrier tracks your phone all the ff-ing time. Google has the SSL beta now, but until recently they tracked your every move.
So the issue is that someone may possibly access this data? They'd have to get hold off your phone first. :rolleyes:
This is something that needs to be addressed and I reckon Apple will do so in the next iOS update, but to me it just looks as if two guys really went all out for some publicity.
So the issue is that someone may possibly access this data? They'd have to get hold off your phone first. :rolleyes:
This is something that needs to be addressed and I reckon Apple will do so in the next iOS update, but to me it just looks as if two guys really went all out for some publicity.
pdpardue
Apr 23, 04:34 PM
anyone remember when screens were 1024x768? who would have imagined that now icons are 1024x1024... that icon is bigger than the total resolution of my first computer's display
rxse7en
Aug 4, 07:10 AM
*fingers crossed*
Please, let the new MBP be socketed!
*fingers crossed*
Please, let the new MBP be socketed!
*fingers crossed*
h1r0ll3r
Apr 5, 01:56 PM
The few hours they paid someone to make this theme has netted Toyota many news articles/discussion of "free advertising" that has come of offering the irrelevant skin and now the followup stories of them being asked to remove the theme.
+1 for Toyota for succeeding in this marketing campaign.
^This. Regardless of the if/ands/buts, Toyota comes out with tons of free publicity over this and their brand. Whether good or bad, Toyota will definitely reap something out of all this. From my POV, kudos to Toyota/Scion for the crafty marketing campaign here.
+1 for Toyota for succeeding in this marketing campaign.
^This. Regardless of the if/ands/buts, Toyota comes out with tons of free publicity over this and their brand. Whether good or bad, Toyota will definitely reap something out of all this. From my POV, kudos to Toyota/Scion for the crafty marketing campaign here.
Aleco
Nov 4, 12:35 AM
It installs various components into your system, so no, not until Apple modifies their guidelines.
Seeing how many things it does install and the size of the download, I wouldn't install this on any computer. Looks like FUDware to me.
As soon as I saw your post I thought this file was like 1GB. If 60MB DMG is a lot, I'm guessing you don't have iWorks or Office installed.
Seeing how many things it does install and the size of the download, I wouldn't install this on any computer. Looks like FUDware to me.
As soon as I saw your post I thought this file was like 1GB. If 60MB DMG is a lot, I'm guessing you don't have iWorks or Office installed.
Thex1138
Mar 26, 10:40 PM
iOS is centric to iPhone and I can't really see why the sudden shift from the status quo.
The scorching success of iPhone 4 hand set is really setting the pace.
The Lion revision of OSX will probably see much more inheritance of features and the ap-verse of iOS.
In my view the real buzz for iOS 5 might be the appearance of the whole swag of new touch gestures that Apple have been working on and previewed in the recent beta.
That along with the cloud, NFC and maybe 4G.
I think that the only thing that might trigger iPad 3 to market could be the success rate of OLED screen manufacture process. Currently I take it that for larger screens the death rate of OLED pixels seems too high.... Either that or a retina level of screen res might trigger iPad 3 to market by years end.
:)
The scorching success of iPhone 4 hand set is really setting the pace.
The Lion revision of OSX will probably see much more inheritance of features and the ap-verse of iOS.
In my view the real buzz for iOS 5 might be the appearance of the whole swag of new touch gestures that Apple have been working on and previewed in the recent beta.
That along with the cloud, NFC and maybe 4G.
I think that the only thing that might trigger iPad 3 to market could be the success rate of OLED screen manufacture process. Currently I take it that for larger screens the death rate of OLED pixels seems too high.... Either that or a retina level of screen res might trigger iPad 3 to market by years end.
:)
milozauckerman
Aug 7, 10:00 PM
I don't see a heatsink on that Crucial RAM.
ccroo
Sep 11, 12:21 AM
If there is no new case design (maybe SR will bring one) it might be easy for Apple to just slip Merom's into the MBP line beneath the iPod/streaming/video fanfare. Without a new look, how big a deal is a 10% speedbump and 64 bit chips that IMACS for Chrissakes have already had for a week?
batchtaster
Apr 21, 03:51 PM
This would be an excellent move for enterprise. I've already been told I'm not getting Mac Pros into our data center. At best I can hope for a couple of Mac minis, but that's a pretty big compromise on both my end and our data center manager's.
It would also be a great move for desktop users, especially if it eliminates the laser-cut, hand-slicing "carry" handles. Ever tried to move one of those things between rooms, floors or buildings? I can't help wondering what TV forensics would make of the resulting lacerations.
It would also be a great move for desktop users, especially if it eliminates the laser-cut, hand-slicing "carry" handles. Ever tried to move one of those things between rooms, floors or buildings? I can't help wondering what TV forensics would make of the resulting lacerations.
jonharris200
Aug 7, 03:30 PM
on the Macrumors live feed Steve said new announcements coming in the week or next week. Any comments?
Yeah, at 10.24am on the MRL feed, though it was slightly ambiguous. Engadget also picked up on this but gave more detail - it's new universal applications that are being announced this week:
10:24AM - "We had a sixth major release that we don't get much credit for. Tiger on Intel. Porting an OS is is no easy task. And our software team did a great job. They made it look really easy which has enabled this amazing transition. 86 million lines of source code that was ported to run on an entirely new architecture with zero hiccups. Along the way, we created a way to run universal applications that run on PowerPC and Intel. I'm pleased to report that there are more than 3,000 universal applications and we at Apple would like to say, thank you, thank you guys. "You guys have done a phenomenal job and there are a lot more being announced at the developer conference this week."
Yeah, at 10.24am on the MRL feed, though it was slightly ambiguous. Engadget also picked up on this but gave more detail - it's new universal applications that are being announced this week:
10:24AM - "We had a sixth major release that we don't get much credit for. Tiger on Intel. Porting an OS is is no easy task. And our software team did a great job. They made it look really easy which has enabled this amazing transition. 86 million lines of source code that was ported to run on an entirely new architecture with zero hiccups. Along the way, we created a way to run universal applications that run on PowerPC and Intel. I'm pleased to report that there are more than 3,000 universal applications and we at Apple would like to say, thank you, thank you guys. "You guys have done a phenomenal job and there are a lot more being announced at the developer conference this week."
cincoaranas
May 6, 08:12 AM
Moving away from Intel in their notebooks and desktops would be a HUGE mistake in my opinion. Intel is the big dog and they have the resources to keep innovating. I guess if they plan on making everything iOS then it makes a little more sense, but for true blue OSX machines Intel has the muscle.
I think they can pull it off. I watched as they went from Motorola 680X0, to PowerPC (which was huge) and then to Intel (hell froze over!) So this happening would not be the least bit surprising or concerning.
I think they can pull it off. I watched as they went from Motorola 680X0, to PowerPC (which was huge) and then to Intel (hell froze over!) So this happening would not be the least bit surprising or concerning.