kevin.rivers
Jul 28, 09:59 AM
360's main advantage is that it's the only console of the three to release the next generation version. They have a year's head start on the other two.
They're still losing money on the 360, but component costs will drop until they are making a profit on boxes. Don't forget, ALL consoles lose money when they first ship. With the original xbox, they never really caught up, but it looks like they will this time around. And with the PS3 shipping at an even higher price, there's less pressure for them to drop prices. As much money as MS has been losing, Sony stands to lose much more. If Sony doesn't get their act together, I could see MS and Nintendo driving Sony out of the video game business.
That's the goal, but so far they have yet to get out of the red on xbox and 360. And "ish"? You seriously just said that?
It does play GAMES at HD resolutions, right? The original post never said it plays HD dvd's.
Then it is an HD CONSOLE not an HD PLAYER. Player implies HD media.
They're still losing money on the 360, but component costs will drop until they are making a profit on boxes. Don't forget, ALL consoles lose money when they first ship. With the original xbox, they never really caught up, but it looks like they will this time around. And with the PS3 shipping at an even higher price, there's less pressure for them to drop prices. As much money as MS has been losing, Sony stands to lose much more. If Sony doesn't get their act together, I could see MS and Nintendo driving Sony out of the video game business.
That's the goal, but so far they have yet to get out of the red on xbox and 360. And "ish"? You seriously just said that?
It does play GAMES at HD resolutions, right? The original post never said it plays HD dvd's.
Then it is an HD CONSOLE not an HD PLAYER. Player implies HD media.
PlipPlop
Apr 12, 09:13 AM
HTC sensation > iphone 5
That is all
That is all
gkarris
May 2, 12:35 AM
One of the biggest moments in the World's history, not only America. Osama Bin Laden, the number 1 most wanted terrorist is finally dead.
I guess this proves everyone who doubted America and might have lost faith, that yes America can. Looks like Obama will be getting a 2nd term now.
I always knew it would be Obama vs Osama once he was elected. Very proud day for everyone who believes in peace.
Now, it's the Pakistan government which is in question, looks like Osama was chilling at a Pakistan Military hub for 6 years under the protection of Pakistan. And they said Osama wasn't in Pakistan lol.. he was living it large in a mansion and people thought he was in a cave.
Short-term wise, i'm worried about the retaliation of the terrorists. Looks like everyone will be on edge for the next few months. Also, i'm afraid more and more people might decide to take up Osama's old position as leader.
The war on terror isn't over, but this has definitely struck a very significant blow.
Some bird tweeted to me that his death was like a "BOOM HEADSHOT!"
Gee, thanks - this will make my friends who are loosing their homes to foreclosure feel a whole lot better... :eek:
:rolleyes:
I guess this proves everyone who doubted America and might have lost faith, that yes America can. Looks like Obama will be getting a 2nd term now.
I always knew it would be Obama vs Osama once he was elected. Very proud day for everyone who believes in peace.
Now, it's the Pakistan government which is in question, looks like Osama was chilling at a Pakistan Military hub for 6 years under the protection of Pakistan. And they said Osama wasn't in Pakistan lol.. he was living it large in a mansion and people thought he was in a cave.
Short-term wise, i'm worried about the retaliation of the terrorists. Looks like everyone will be on edge for the next few months. Also, i'm afraid more and more people might decide to take up Osama's old position as leader.
The war on terror isn't over, but this has definitely struck a very significant blow.
Some bird tweeted to me that his death was like a "BOOM HEADSHOT!"
Gee, thanks - this will make my friends who are loosing their homes to foreclosure feel a whole lot better... :eek:
:rolleyes:
infidel69
Apr 13, 11:52 PM
It's beautiful
more...
Chundles
Oct 24, 08:28 AM
aswitcher, could you explain a bit more to me what you mean by
"802.11n pending firmware upgrade..." since you're the first to mention this at all? Does anyone know if this new MBP will have 802.11n at all (for the iTV)?
802.11n isn't due for ratification until 2008. There is a "Draft N v 2.0" due out next year that is supposedly close to what 802.11n will be but there's no guarantee anything will work until the final spec is released in 2008.
"802.11n pending firmware upgrade..." since you're the first to mention this at all? Does anyone know if this new MBP will have 802.11n at all (for the iTV)?
802.11n isn't due for ratification until 2008. There is a "Draft N v 2.0" due out next year that is supposedly close to what 802.11n will be but there's no guarantee anything will work until the final spec is released in 2008.
AppleScruff1
May 4, 03:05 AM
While it may be true that the new iPhone won't be out until Sept, I doubt the cs rep has any official information or notification.
more...
KnightWRX
Dec 30, 10:43 PM
Under normal circumstances, you're more or less right.
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.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
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.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
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 going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
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.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
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.
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.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
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.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
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 going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
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.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
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.
torbjoern
May 2, 12:47 AM
Right about now Bin Laden is sitting next to the furnace in hell
Nah - probably in Heaven with his 70 virgins on the magic mother-of-pearl bed where not even the angels can see what he's doing...
Nah - probably in Heaven with his 70 virgins on the magic mother-of-pearl bed where not even the angels can see what he's doing...
more...
KnightWRX
Apr 13, 12:45 PM
Then it has no meaning.
Honestly, that's a very stupid thing you said.
Wait, for something to have meaning it must have emotions attached to it ? Whatever happened to cold objective debate ?
Meaning is derived from the content, not from the emotions behind the statements. We're in a debate of facts, not in a subjective discussion. Emotionality has no place in the text.
Or am I not understanding what you mean here ? My post was objective in that I was not refusing to view the evidence, I just found his evidence to be contradictory and self-refuting and thus not applicable. I stated it as such and further explained when told I was "refusing to see" something that just wasn't there to begin with.
There was nothing to "cool down".
He did provide citation for the same; the engadget article.
But due to its inception being an Engadget based article, I wouldn't base any conclusions on that.
But yes, he did cite the argument.
His statement was not an argument. It was as a fact. And the Engadget article is not a citation to support the fact since it has been refuted by CNET, according to the very source AppleCorps used initially, TechCrunch.
Honestly, that's a very stupid thing you said.
Wait, for something to have meaning it must have emotions attached to it ? Whatever happened to cold objective debate ?
Meaning is derived from the content, not from the emotions behind the statements. We're in a debate of facts, not in a subjective discussion. Emotionality has no place in the text.
Or am I not understanding what you mean here ? My post was objective in that I was not refusing to view the evidence, I just found his evidence to be contradictory and self-refuting and thus not applicable. I stated it as such and further explained when told I was "refusing to see" something that just wasn't there to begin with.
There was nothing to "cool down".
He did provide citation for the same; the engadget article.
But due to its inception being an Engadget based article, I wouldn't base any conclusions on that.
But yes, he did cite the argument.
His statement was not an argument. It was as a fact. And the Engadget article is not a citation to support the fact since it has been refuted by CNET, according to the very source AppleCorps used initially, TechCrunch.
kernkraft
Jun 6, 01:10 PM
$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.
Luckily for you, your parents didn't share your sentiment.
Luckily for you, your parents didn't share your sentiment.
more...
iMeowbot
Jul 25, 12:09 PM
Anyone considered how this (technically) will work? How will the iPod detect where your hands are?
This seems to be a refinement of what the iPod and touch pads have been doing all along. Right now those can detect your finger through an insulated plastic layer, and even through clothes on top of that.
The main difference here would seem to be in smarter software that can do something useful with smaller changes in the electrical fields.
This seems to be a refinement of what the iPod and touch pads have been doing all along. Right now those can detect your finger through an insulated plastic layer, and even through clothes on top of that.
The main difference here would seem to be in smarter software that can do something useful with smaller changes in the electrical fields.
NickZac
Feb 1, 08:57 AM
Nope. Certainly not mine…
Are you the same NickZac who posts in PRSI? :confused:
I don't know what a PRSI is. Grr
You know, it's almost like you meant "idol" in jest, and people are taking you seriously... :D
I shouldn't complain too much...least people here take me crazy :(
Are you the same NickZac who posts in PRSI? :confused:
I don't know what a PRSI is. Grr
You know, it's almost like you meant "idol" in jest, and people are taking you seriously... :D
I shouldn't complain too much...least people here take me crazy :(
more...
mikerr
May 3, 08:11 AM
Is it easy for us to install an SSD by ourselves? (I'm not a geek)
Previous iMac HD upgrades have involved removing the screen - yes, really.
Hope these are better in that respect.
UK prices start at �999 for the 21.5" with 2.5GHz quad-core i5, vs $1,199
that's a really poor exchange rate dollar to pound !
Previous iMac HD upgrades have involved removing the screen - yes, really.
Hope these are better in that respect.
UK prices start at �999 for the 21.5" with 2.5GHz quad-core i5, vs $1,199
that's a really poor exchange rate dollar to pound !
Eldiablojoe
Apr 29, 04:03 PM
What a sad post.
Nice deflection. You've been on the offensive out of the gate in this game. I don't know what your h*rd-on is for me this game, but apparently I appear a good victim in your eyes. You've played these games a long time, and are a very good player, you know exactly how to tweak things to your advantage and this unusual hardball manner you're playing this game is telling.
Game play aside, I hope you're okay- in the offline world.
Nice deflection. You've been on the offensive out of the gate in this game. I don't know what your h*rd-on is for me this game, but apparently I appear a good victim in your eyes. You've played these games a long time, and are a very good player, you know exactly how to tweak things to your advantage and this unusual hardball manner you're playing this game is telling.
Game play aside, I hope you're okay- in the offline world.
more...
Jason Beck
Apr 15, 12:56 AM
Can I have that dog???
She's a good little mutt we bought for 10$ outside walmart haha. Chiuahua / Blue Heeler mix. It's a cute thing, pretty strong and playful. Thats my fave pic yet of her. She's like 3-5 months old now.
She's a good little mutt we bought for 10$ outside walmart haha. Chiuahua / Blue Heeler mix. It's a cute thing, pretty strong and playful. Thats my fave pic yet of her. She's like 3-5 months old now.
alecapple
Sep 30, 02:38 PM
In my opinion, I think that at&t should focus on spreading their 3g network to cities like the one that I live in, where there are at least 100,000 people residing in, rather than putting towers up on every street corner in NYC. It pisses me off that we pay the same price for phone service, yet we cant even take advantage of the 3g speeds. NYC has had 3g service for 5 years, yet we don't even have reliable EDGE service.
more...
cebritt
Jan 27, 03:31 PM
The old stock adage is, "Buy on rumor, sell on news."
organerito
Apr 1, 06:52 AM
My baby boy just pooped and it it is just about the same color of it.:eek:
Jetson
Jul 11, 09:30 PM
I read some of the reader comments at the end of that article. This "Argo" is just vaporware, yet people are saying they'd rush out and buy it.
Other commenters got upset because someone pointed out how the "Argo" is an iPod ripoff. It IS a ripoff - you'd have to be as blind as a mole to not realize that Microsoft wouldn't have a clue of how to build this thing without copying the iPod. That's what Microsoft does - copy.
Another thing Microsoft does well is to market a product as a loss leader - for years if necessary. Remember how they started giving away their IE browser and just buried poor Netscape. Microsoft has money to burn.
Microsoft doesn't mind putting a piece of crap on the market. They know that the lemmings will buy anything with the MS logo on it. Then they will take years to iron out the bugs and end up with a fairly serviceable product. Not a great product, but one that works well enough for a world that follows the crowd.
And why is Microsoft supposedly launching their "iPod killer"? Because they just can't stand the thought of Apple dominating the market that Apple built. Ballmer says they are going after this market because it's there. He says they want 90% of the market or nothing.
Other commenters got upset because someone pointed out how the "Argo" is an iPod ripoff. It IS a ripoff - you'd have to be as blind as a mole to not realize that Microsoft wouldn't have a clue of how to build this thing without copying the iPod. That's what Microsoft does - copy.
Another thing Microsoft does well is to market a product as a loss leader - for years if necessary. Remember how they started giving away their IE browser and just buried poor Netscape. Microsoft has money to burn.
Microsoft doesn't mind putting a piece of crap on the market. They know that the lemmings will buy anything with the MS logo on it. Then they will take years to iron out the bugs and end up with a fairly serviceable product. Not a great product, but one that works well enough for a world that follows the crowd.
And why is Microsoft supposedly launching their "iPod killer"? Because they just can't stand the thought of Apple dominating the market that Apple built. Ballmer says they are going after this market because it's there. He says they want 90% of the market or nothing.
lmalave
Dec 1, 02:21 PM
I don't know but is the Adware related to this:
Sometimes when I download videos from LimeWire, and run then it will bring up a browser window and open a site. Essentially an ad. Do this supposed hole cause this?
Apple definitely needs to get more serious about security. As more people start to buy Macs, more people will start to tinker and find holes. I hope Apple will rise to the challenge.
No, that is not Adware. Adware is a program that is installed *on your computer*, so it can launch windows whenever it wants. In the case of Web pages that pop up when you are viewing a video, that's just because it's a "feature" of the particular video technology (e.g. in Real Media or Windows Media streams you can embed code to open a browser window). It's no more Adware than when you go to CNN.com and it launches a pop-up ad.
Sometimes when I download videos from LimeWire, and run then it will bring up a browser window and open a site. Essentially an ad. Do this supposed hole cause this?
Apple definitely needs to get more serious about security. As more people start to buy Macs, more people will start to tinker and find holes. I hope Apple will rise to the challenge.
No, that is not Adware. Adware is a program that is installed *on your computer*, so it can launch windows whenever it wants. In the case of Web pages that pop up when you are viewing a video, that's just because it's a "feature" of the particular video technology (e.g. in Real Media or Windows Media streams you can embed code to open a browser window). It's no more Adware than when you go to CNN.com and it launches a pop-up ad.
MacRumors
Nov 10, 02:22 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2010/11/10/skyfire-rakes-in-nearly-1-million-in-first-weekend/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/11/10/152110-skyfire_icon_125.jpg
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/11/10/152110-skyfire_icon_125.jpg
flopticalcube
Apr 13, 06:46 PM
I see no benefits here.
nxent
Jul 11, 04:07 PM
haha, here's what would have been had microsoft designed the ipod from the beginning...
now, this is only the packaging...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pXL5_RvGrs&search=microsoft%20ipod
now, this is only the packaging...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pXL5_RvGrs&search=microsoft%20ipod
Eduardo1971
May 3, 07:40 AM
Cool. After all this waiting...