Rodimus Prime
Apr 8, 04:32 PM
It's infuriating watching cable news about this. CNN and MSNBC report on it, get a Dem and a Rep to spew all their BS and never call them out or delve into the facts.
The fact is, the Republicans want a shutdown otherwise they would never have crafted a budget that repeals Obamacare, guts the EPA and Clean Water Act and defunds PP. THey know they'll get away with it in the end because they handle the media and public message way better than the inept Democrats.
As for PP, give me a ****ing break.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/plannedparenthood.jpg?uuid=QJyyvGIBEeCV6ZMHpLzxXw
depends. This shut down I blame 70% on GOP an 30% on the dems.
Reason Dem hold 30% is they screwed up by not getting a budget passed in 2010 when they controlled everything.
And to think in 3-4 months we will see yet a new budget fight happen for 2012 budget.
The fact is, the Republicans want a shutdown otherwise they would never have crafted a budget that repeals Obamacare, guts the EPA and Clean Water Act and defunds PP. THey know they'll get away with it in the end because they handle the media and public message way better than the inept Democrats.
As for PP, give me a ****ing break.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/plannedparenthood.jpg?uuid=QJyyvGIBEeCV6ZMHpLzxXw
depends. This shut down I blame 70% on GOP an 30% on the dems.
Reason Dem hold 30% is they screwed up by not getting a budget passed in 2010 when they controlled everything.
And to think in 3-4 months we will see yet a new budget fight happen for 2012 budget.
MikeTheC
Nov 3, 01:19 AM
I'd like to tackle a few points in the discussion here.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
SkippyThorson
Mar 13, 10:36 AM
Every time... The biggest problem I've ever had with the iPhone is the face that it has a hard time with, well, time.
Without fail, my Calendar app is bonked, and when I have work until 11, the green colored event actually goes down to midnight. Tapping on it to bring up the info, it does still say 11.
Calendar glitch happens every single time, back or forward. No issues actually getting to the correct time, though.
No 's'
Grammatically, yes. Commonly, no. That's like trying to correct people that say Bologna with an 'ie' instead of the 'ah' sound on the end. No one does it, and there's no reason to nitpick.
Without fail, my Calendar app is bonked, and when I have work until 11, the green colored event actually goes down to midnight. Tapping on it to bring up the info, it does still say 11.
Calendar glitch happens every single time, back or forward. No issues actually getting to the correct time, though.
No 's'
Grammatically, yes. Commonly, no. That's like trying to correct people that say Bologna with an 'ie' instead of the 'ah' sound on the end. No one does it, and there's no reason to nitpick.
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 12, 03:50 PM
WTF? Why does the MS Office updater force me to quit chrome ????
Silverlight probably.
Silverlight probably.
more...
leekohler
Mar 11, 07:01 PM
Then you may want to buy a Toyota Camry. Ironic, I know. :rolleyes:
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/06/23/cars-com-american-made-index-ranks-toyota-camry-1-again/
Ok now- let's just make one thing clear. :D
I'm single. I need a sexy car, not a four door. :)
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/06/23/cars-com-american-made-index-ranks-toyota-camry-1-again/
Ok now- let's just make one thing clear. :D
I'm single. I need a sexy car, not a four door. :)
itcheroni
Apr 3, 07:37 PM
The article states that tax cuts have not worked. They seem to be basing that claim on the fact that the states have not seen improvement in their economies after the tax cuts. That is not the correct metric with which to judge the effectiveness of any policy. The question should be whether the economy would have been even worse without the tax cuts. The article does not address this.
I've lived virtually my whole life in California and have no clue what you're talking about.
Perhaps you can source that.
As for balance, I'm a big believer in it. In my opinion an "balanced" solution includes tax increases as well as government cuts. Unfortunately, the republicans have fought tooth and nail against tax increases and have tried to balance a 26 billion dollar deficit with cuts. If only they embraced the notion of "balance". :rolleyes:
I believe California has one of the highest income tax rates at over 9% for people making over mid-40k. And California has one of the highest sales tax, at 9.75% where I am. And despite this, California has one of the worst budget deficits and some of the most regulations.
Coincidentally, I've been toying with moving to either Washington or Texas and I've finally decided that it's time. For the cost of taxes in California, I could pay my rent in Washington or Texas for the entire year. And I can't think of one thing the California state government provides that the Washington state government doesn't that I would really miss.
I've lived virtually my whole life in California and have no clue what you're talking about.
Perhaps you can source that.
As for balance, I'm a big believer in it. In my opinion an "balanced" solution includes tax increases as well as government cuts. Unfortunately, the republicans have fought tooth and nail against tax increases and have tried to balance a 26 billion dollar deficit with cuts. If only they embraced the notion of "balance". :rolleyes:
I believe California has one of the highest income tax rates at over 9% for people making over mid-40k. And California has one of the highest sales tax, at 9.75% where I am. And despite this, California has one of the worst budget deficits and some of the most regulations.
Coincidentally, I've been toying with moving to either Washington or Texas and I've finally decided that it's time. For the cost of taxes in California, I could pay my rent in Washington or Texas for the entire year. And I can't think of one thing the California state government provides that the Washington state government doesn't that I would really miss.
more...
Zeos
Mar 11, 03:40 PM
My brother was at Willowbend and texted me "No chance." Looks like he is going to try Best Buy at 121/423.
AdamBOh3
Mar 24, 01:04 PM
Are you people seriously applauding this? What a waste of our tax dollars!! I do contracts with the Navy every single day and I know that the technology that they have will not be benefited by the use of iPad/iPod/iPhone. The military does not offer wi-fi to their staff on base. Everything is hard wired and the conduit is sealed with a tamper proof silicon. The Government is very very particular about their SIPRnet (as they call it). Without wi-fi, what use is the iPad for the military other than to give them a little treat and waste our tax dollars? They already have mobile equipment in the vehicles that is far superior to Apple's products.
NONSENSE! As a recent active duty infantry Marine and now employed by the USMC I completely disagree! Do you work for SPAWAR or NMCI? You do contracts with the Navy everyday, eh? My father-in-law is a retired Naval Flight Officer, an electrical engineer, and works for SPAWAR in San Diego. He does not like Apple, he likes to do things the hardway and is stuck with windows, even though he concedes things like the iPhone have better technology than his Blackberry (The Blackberry's touch screen pushes down and triggers a touch vs. on an iPhone you just touch it, similar to putting a folder over your keyboard and calling it a touchkeyboard - keys are still being stroked).
And gov't tax dollars!!! Get out of town. My father-in-law has also submitted proposals to deliver millions in savings to the gov't by utilizing off-the-shelf components for USN,USCG, and USMC systems. He has been consistently squashed by higher-ups, some of them who are younger and maybe even Apple users, and they have virtually shut him up in favor of proprietary systems that utilize government contracts to make new systems that are COSTING THE TAXPAYERS MILLIONS. The simplified version is called waste, fraud, and abuse.
The Army is smart for working with Apple and I'm sure that DARPA does already (if not they should be). It sounds like you would rather sit back and see the good 'ol boy government system drown us in stagnation. It seems that BIG ARMY is maybe waking up. Then again, the equipment or chips will most likely be built in China where electronic spyware and backdoors could be put into play. And, do you think the Chinese military and foreign militaries around the world aren't reverse engingeering Apple products and modeling themselves after Apple's management and innovation processes? Welcome to the 21st century of warfare and espionage. You apparently abhor competetion, modernization, and warfighting superiority and would rather return to pre 1984.
Today, I work for the Marine Corps in remote CA. Wi-Fi is coming, as in it's not just a thought but a reality in the works. We have mobile equipment in Iraq/Afghanistan and all over the world and guess what... it's up to military standards but not particularly great and DEFINITELY NOT SUPERIOR TO APPLE PRODUCTS. I can go to amazon or a bix box store and by a better GPS unit than the military will provide and the same thing can be said about off-the-shelf Apple products and HOPEFULLY the Army believes this can be translated into military specific applications. Privates to Generals use Macs during war and they can be used on SIPRnet/NIPRnet. I know, I have done it. Tamper Proof silicon... you must be joking.
Still not sure if you are a Mac fan or a Mac hater. I do know that you don't know it all and I know that I too do not know it all. Yet, I do speak from operational experience.
NONSENSE! As a recent active duty infantry Marine and now employed by the USMC I completely disagree! Do you work for SPAWAR or NMCI? You do contracts with the Navy everyday, eh? My father-in-law is a retired Naval Flight Officer, an electrical engineer, and works for SPAWAR in San Diego. He does not like Apple, he likes to do things the hardway and is stuck with windows, even though he concedes things like the iPhone have better technology than his Blackberry (The Blackberry's touch screen pushes down and triggers a touch vs. on an iPhone you just touch it, similar to putting a folder over your keyboard and calling it a touchkeyboard - keys are still being stroked).
And gov't tax dollars!!! Get out of town. My father-in-law has also submitted proposals to deliver millions in savings to the gov't by utilizing off-the-shelf components for USN,USCG, and USMC systems. He has been consistently squashed by higher-ups, some of them who are younger and maybe even Apple users, and they have virtually shut him up in favor of proprietary systems that utilize government contracts to make new systems that are COSTING THE TAXPAYERS MILLIONS. The simplified version is called waste, fraud, and abuse.
The Army is smart for working with Apple and I'm sure that DARPA does already (if not they should be). It sounds like you would rather sit back and see the good 'ol boy government system drown us in stagnation. It seems that BIG ARMY is maybe waking up. Then again, the equipment or chips will most likely be built in China where electronic spyware and backdoors could be put into play. And, do you think the Chinese military and foreign militaries around the world aren't reverse engingeering Apple products and modeling themselves after Apple's management and innovation processes? Welcome to the 21st century of warfare and espionage. You apparently abhor competetion, modernization, and warfighting superiority and would rather return to pre 1984.
Today, I work for the Marine Corps in remote CA. Wi-Fi is coming, as in it's not just a thought but a reality in the works. We have mobile equipment in Iraq/Afghanistan and all over the world and guess what... it's up to military standards but not particularly great and DEFINITELY NOT SUPERIOR TO APPLE PRODUCTS. I can go to amazon or a bix box store and by a better GPS unit than the military will provide and the same thing can be said about off-the-shelf Apple products and HOPEFULLY the Army believes this can be translated into military specific applications. Privates to Generals use Macs during war and they can be used on SIPRnet/NIPRnet. I know, I have done it. Tamper Proof silicon... you must be joking.
Still not sure if you are a Mac fan or a Mac hater. I do know that you don't know it all and I know that I too do not know it all. Yet, I do speak from operational experience.
more...
BrianKonarsMac
Mar 23, 04:14 PM
Major General Nick Justice. Awesome.
Ommid
Apr 25, 06:01 AM
Now that is something to lol at :p
I bet it will come in the next 2 years ;)
I bet it will come in the next 2 years ;)
more...
MattSepeta
Apr 12, 03:06 PM
Surely it would be unfair to judge somebody by their intelligence because so much of it is down to parental intelligence and wealth; how much they can teach you and how much they can pay for the best educations. (D's A)
In theory I suppose we should only judge people for things which are entirely their own doing; things which are neither a product of their genes or upbringing. But then, taking those away, what remains?
Not much really. In practice, I fear people are at least in some part judged for merits in which their efforts play a smaller part. Like natural intelligence, or sporting ability. Is this wrong? Perhaps on some abstract moral level, but I think it's probably permissible unless someone wants to call me a senseless bigot.
You bring a fresh perspective to these boards. Actually discussing an issue rather than getting worked up in a tizzy and shouting platitudes. ;)
In theory I suppose we should only judge people for things which are entirely their own doing; things which are neither a product of their genes or upbringing. But then, taking those away, what remains?
Not much really. In practice, I fear people are at least in some part judged for merits in which their efforts play a smaller part. Like natural intelligence, or sporting ability. Is this wrong? Perhaps on some abstract moral level, but I think it's probably permissible unless someone wants to call me a senseless bigot.
You bring a fresh perspective to these boards. Actually discussing an issue rather than getting worked up in a tizzy and shouting platitudes. ;)
Durendal
Oct 9, 03:08 PM
This is a load. Downloads will barely make a dent in DVD sales, especially when you can take the DVD home and rip it yourself. Most people don't have massive broadband pipes and they want a physical copy they can pop into the DVD player at home. Joe Noob may not know how to rip the disc, but I doubt he'll buy a movie online if he can't watch it on his DVD player. He might buy a movie to watch on his iPod that he already has in his DVD collection, though. Target and Hole-in-the-Wal-Mart are whining about nothing. Downloads may one day start chipping away at hardcopy sales, but it's going to be years before it starts to make a difference.
more...
MorphingDragon
Apr 15, 04:35 PM
zimbra, pop/imap
Yes, it also supports other standards.
what a joke. firewall guys, we want email on our phones. we need to open the firewall on a few more ports
exchange is database based which makes it easier and cheaper to manage it
That makes little sense whatsoever.
the base product is free but once you start buying add ons like archiving it's a lot more expensive than exchange. and other features that require MS outlook, contacts sync and iphone/mobile are not free. major fail and will cost just as much if not more than MS exchange once you compare apple's to apples
VMWare don't sell addons or a base product. They have an OSE edition to meet the GPL requirements and paid versions. Zimlets are created by the community.
Even with the full VMWAre Appliance or Collaboration edition its still cheaper than exchange.
Yes, it also supports other standards.
what a joke. firewall guys, we want email on our phones. we need to open the firewall on a few more ports
exchange is database based which makes it easier and cheaper to manage it
That makes little sense whatsoever.
the base product is free but once you start buying add ons like archiving it's a lot more expensive than exchange. and other features that require MS outlook, contacts sync and iphone/mobile are not free. major fail and will cost just as much if not more than MS exchange once you compare apple's to apples
VMWare don't sell addons or a base product. They have an OSE edition to meet the GPL requirements and paid versions. Zimlets are created by the community.
Even with the full VMWAre Appliance or Collaboration edition its still cheaper than exchange.
MattInOz
Oct 6, 06:50 PM
In anyevent please stop the whinning about developers, if they followed Apples guide lines their apps would work fine on the new model. In fact many people in these forums really should just shut up until they read the developer documentation.
Dave
Yep if you read even just the human interface guidelines Apple's message to developers is 'think of the user's or don't bother being here'. Then there is a remarkable number of cases where the app will have it window sized clipped to suit something else happening on the device already, so it's not like any developer can claim ignorance.
I think Apples next move would be to make the screen longer.
What with screens like PixelQi getting up to a good high veiwing angles and the iPhone being a device you don't tend to turn off. A screen that looks great backlight on or off, albeit with very different moods, would really suit. If the screen can always show something for little or no power cost then you don't need a button to activate the screen. If your only going to turn on the screen backlight for special programmed events, then they don't need to be worried about pocket touches as much either.
Take the home button away stretch the screen down to fill the space. The extra space in common usage is the multitasking dock and the status bar up the top. That way all apps would just work as they do now at the same res except less space pinching from the OS. In Portrait mode the keyboard would use the dock space giving more viewing space. Same with standard video views they would know to how to use the full screen and apps would get that with minimal work to.
And that is only one Option of how they could go, I'm sure there are many more they just haven't made it out in to nerd space news.
I could see them doing two models one a we bit smaller with same screen resolution and button but sneak say 5mm off the width and length, and one with longer screen in the same case size. If they do two models they'll release them both at the same time and run a yearly cycle.
Dave
Yep if you read even just the human interface guidelines Apple's message to developers is 'think of the user's or don't bother being here'. Then there is a remarkable number of cases where the app will have it window sized clipped to suit something else happening on the device already, so it's not like any developer can claim ignorance.
I think Apples next move would be to make the screen longer.
What with screens like PixelQi getting up to a good high veiwing angles and the iPhone being a device you don't tend to turn off. A screen that looks great backlight on or off, albeit with very different moods, would really suit. If the screen can always show something for little or no power cost then you don't need a button to activate the screen. If your only going to turn on the screen backlight for special programmed events, then they don't need to be worried about pocket touches as much either.
Take the home button away stretch the screen down to fill the space. The extra space in common usage is the multitasking dock and the status bar up the top. That way all apps would just work as they do now at the same res except less space pinching from the OS. In Portrait mode the keyboard would use the dock space giving more viewing space. Same with standard video views they would know to how to use the full screen and apps would get that with minimal work to.
And that is only one Option of how they could go, I'm sure there are many more they just haven't made it out in to nerd space news.
I could see them doing two models one a we bit smaller with same screen resolution and button but sneak say 5mm off the width and length, and one with longer screen in the same case size. If they do two models they'll release them both at the same time and run a yearly cycle.
more...
wrldwzrd89
Apr 2, 02:04 PM
I don't think Pages is horrible. It's not great, but it isn't quite as bad for me as everyone else finds it. I don't use it all that much (Keynote gets used far more than Pages does).
quagmire
Apr 7, 06:33 PM
If the US Government shuts down, it'll be the last time I ever vote for a Republican Congressional candidate. I've only ever voted for one, current Senator Richard Burr, but I won't do it again.
This mess is absolutely pathetic. IMO, the Republicans will shoot themselves in the foot if the government shuts down. They can kiss the White House in 2012 and 2016 good bye.
Both parties are pathetic. Republicans unwilling to compromise and the Democrats only wanting to cut a pathetic $6 billion.
This mess is absolutely pathetic. IMO, the Republicans will shoot themselves in the foot if the government shuts down. They can kiss the White House in 2012 and 2016 good bye.
Both parties are pathetic. Republicans unwilling to compromise and the Democrats only wanting to cut a pathetic $6 billion.
more...
nw_mike
Sep 27, 09:26 AM
Apple has periods in which they allow people to apply for AppleSeed accounts. The purpose is to help them test their OS updates and releases in environments they are not able to replicate themselves. To this end I am not sure how your friend can 'get' you a seed account, legitimately. if you go the AppleSeed page you are generally greeted with the message
"We are not seeking new participants. You must have an invitation in order to log in."
That being said, anything relating to the seeds you would download are covered by NDA (non-disclosure agreement) and are legally binding. So your answer would be you cannot, legally, talk about those issues in any other forum then the one they provide.
"We are not seeking new participants. You must have an invitation in order to log in."
That being said, anything relating to the seeds you would download are covered by NDA (non-disclosure agreement) and are legally binding. So your answer would be you cannot, legally, talk about those issues in any other forum then the one they provide.
tbobmccoy
Mar 23, 01:15 PM
I don't buy it; Apple offers the Apple TV for $99 which provides AirPlay. I don't think they'll license out the software; Apple has too many negative experiences with licensing out software... :cool:
chrispenn1
Mar 24, 03:46 PM
Well windows for killing is one thing, Microsoft are well known to be evil but mac for killing? Either way I don't care what the end use is if the US army take apple on i'll be put of buying Apple stuff. It's purely political!
Icculus
Mar 11, 08:00 AM
There is a line already (7 people) at Stonebriar in Frisco. 7:25am
Follow my twitter @dpedini for pictures and updates so far everyone in line is a 64gb 3G black
DP
Thank you so much for tweeting updates for stonebriar! You are AWESOME!
Follow my twitter @dpedini for pictures and updates so far everyone in line is a 64gb 3G black
DP
Thank you so much for tweeting updates for stonebriar! You are AWESOME!
scaredpoet
Dec 27, 11:06 PM
There are more iPhones, Macs, etc. sold here than anywhere in the world.
Where are your figures to back this up?
I don't care. I'm an iPhone owner. I don't have to prove affection for Apple products to anyone.
I didn't ask you to prove your affection, nor do I care what your affections are. I'm pointing out that your argument has no validity, irrespective of where your "affections" may lie.
Again you are not getting it. Maybe you never been around thieves but they will after anything they can sell. It is not like if they can't get the iPhone they will pick up their ball and go home.
Of course not, but it deters thieves from using the online system for easy pickins to commit fraud. So it's not as easy to steal an iPhone online anymore, and other smartphones aren't hot sellers, so they'll go find some other scam that affects someone else.
Yes they are linking to the same site. Have you got proof that The Consumerist is an unreliable website?
The burden of proof lies with you, who is to trying to make a point with thin, if any, actual evidence. I'm not using nor relying on the Consumerist to make my point, so I don't have to prove its validity or lack thereof.
On the other hand, you are using ONLY the Consumerist (and a couple blogs that are blindly parroting the Consumerist without doing any research of their own), and just telling me I HAVE to beleive the consumerist because YOU say it's "well-respected." Well, *I* never really respected the Consumerist, because it has a history of blindly following sensationalist leads and has a marked anti-corporate leaning. I'm more inclined to respect sources that are objective and don't have a mission that blatantly compromises that objectivity. So sorry, you'll have to find additional evidence. And I'm not going to do your homework for you.
What in the hell does this have to do with zip codes. They are blocking NYC. Period.
They are blocking sales online, by zip code. that makes it the cornerstone of this issue, and has everything to do with it.
Now you're getting me pissed.
Why, because you can't effectively prove your case because it relies on a single, un-corroborated source? Then you're taking this too personally. Why you have so much invested in convincing people that AT&T is blocking iPhone sales - and only online - for network resource control, is beyond me. Especially when such a tactic would have no effect on the problem this alleged conspiracy would supposedly solve. And the fact that you need to sell it so hard that it "pisses [you] off" that someone would challenge your thin and faulty argument kinda confirms you don't really have a leg to stand on.
Where are your figures to back this up?
I don't care. I'm an iPhone owner. I don't have to prove affection for Apple products to anyone.
I didn't ask you to prove your affection, nor do I care what your affections are. I'm pointing out that your argument has no validity, irrespective of where your "affections" may lie.
Again you are not getting it. Maybe you never been around thieves but they will after anything they can sell. It is not like if they can't get the iPhone they will pick up their ball and go home.
Of course not, but it deters thieves from using the online system for easy pickins to commit fraud. So it's not as easy to steal an iPhone online anymore, and other smartphones aren't hot sellers, so they'll go find some other scam that affects someone else.
Yes they are linking to the same site. Have you got proof that The Consumerist is an unreliable website?
The burden of proof lies with you, who is to trying to make a point with thin, if any, actual evidence. I'm not using nor relying on the Consumerist to make my point, so I don't have to prove its validity or lack thereof.
On the other hand, you are using ONLY the Consumerist (and a couple blogs that are blindly parroting the Consumerist without doing any research of their own), and just telling me I HAVE to beleive the consumerist because YOU say it's "well-respected." Well, *I* never really respected the Consumerist, because it has a history of blindly following sensationalist leads and has a marked anti-corporate leaning. I'm more inclined to respect sources that are objective and don't have a mission that blatantly compromises that objectivity. So sorry, you'll have to find additional evidence. And I'm not going to do your homework for you.
What in the hell does this have to do with zip codes. They are blocking NYC. Period.
They are blocking sales online, by zip code. that makes it the cornerstone of this issue, and has everything to do with it.
Now you're getting me pissed.
Why, because you can't effectively prove your case because it relies on a single, un-corroborated source? Then you're taking this too personally. Why you have so much invested in convincing people that AT&T is blocking iPhone sales - and only online - for network resource control, is beyond me. Especially when such a tactic would have no effect on the problem this alleged conspiracy would supposedly solve. And the fact that you need to sell it so hard that it "pisses [you] off" that someone would challenge your thin and faulty argument kinda confirms you don't really have a leg to stand on.
Thomas Harte
Nov 11, 09:57 AM
Wow, just like in America!
That's what you get for voting the Democrats in!
That's what you get for voting the Democrats in!
erck24
Apr 25, 11:40 PM
It's a Mid 2009 15" Macbook pro. I think it's the version of bootcamp, 3.0.4 but i can't find 3.1 or later on the apple site for some reason and all the other ones download in code; driving me drazy. I think the version of windows is either the original or 7.1. Any thoughts?
EJBasile
Sep 14, 08:48 PM
EJBasile: for the record, do you know what happens when you ask for extra anesthesia before surgery? :) ;)
it's a rare moment that someone is awake through surgery. usually, i understand, it's a result of a specific patient's reaction to anesthesia, not the administration of it.
of course, that didn't stop me from expressing my fears, the last time I was under :) the anesthesiologist was very thorough, he has clearly answered that question a lot.
You can't ask for extra anesthesia. Unless you want a better chance of killing yourself. Anesthesiology is actually not exactly entirely a science, it has quite a bit of technique to it. You can awake from surgery if you have a reaction to it, but if you don't get enough, that can also make you awake. You aren't fully awake. Your conscious, but your movement is inhibited. Just like if you take 1mg of Alegra it won't do anything, but if you take 180mg of Alegra, it will work (unless it just doesn't work for you).
There have been few reports of people remembering what happens though. For instance a lady getting her appendix out, another one getting her eye removed (thats gotta hurt), and another lady having some kind of tooth surgery.
it's a rare moment that someone is awake through surgery. usually, i understand, it's a result of a specific patient's reaction to anesthesia, not the administration of it.
of course, that didn't stop me from expressing my fears, the last time I was under :) the anesthesiologist was very thorough, he has clearly answered that question a lot.
You can't ask for extra anesthesia. Unless you want a better chance of killing yourself. Anesthesiology is actually not exactly entirely a science, it has quite a bit of technique to it. You can awake from surgery if you have a reaction to it, but if you don't get enough, that can also make you awake. You aren't fully awake. Your conscious, but your movement is inhibited. Just like if you take 1mg of Alegra it won't do anything, but if you take 180mg of Alegra, it will work (unless it just doesn't work for you).
There have been few reports of people remembering what happens though. For instance a lady getting her appendix out, another one getting her eye removed (thats gotta hurt), and another lady having some kind of tooth surgery.
No comments:
Post a Comment