itcheroni
Apr 16, 12:03 PM
Flat taxes are always very regressive, basically the reason why this is a bad idea, is that the people it effects are mostly the ones who can't afford it. and the rich will just sit on their money and not spend a lot and not benefit the economy.
And for the poorer people it would create more reliance on social security and medicare, because now what little money they used to have to save has been taken in the massive tax hike they would just get.
I'm not saying that we don't need reform of our tax system, but a flat tax isn't the way to do it.
How do you feel about inflation? To me, inflation is the most regressive tax.
There is also the incorrect notion that "spending" is what drives an economy, that if a rich person doesn't "spend" their money then he or she is not benefiting the economy. What our economy currently needs is less spending and more saving. Savings and investments create jobs, not consumption.
And for the poorer people it would create more reliance on social security and medicare, because now what little money they used to have to save has been taken in the massive tax hike they would just get.
I'm not saying that we don't need reform of our tax system, but a flat tax isn't the way to do it.
How do you feel about inflation? To me, inflation is the most regressive tax.
There is also the incorrect notion that "spending" is what drives an economy, that if a rich person doesn't "spend" their money then he or she is not benefiting the economy. What our economy currently needs is less spending and more saving. Savings and investments create jobs, not consumption.
norwaypianoman
Mar 31, 03:36 AM
Kill the Lion. I do not want it until 2012.
MonkeySee....
Nov 11, 09:23 AM
I work for an IT Security reseller and we sell and support some major companies in the UK.
IMO they haven't made this AV to help anyone out. Its all about cock waving and adding to their port folio.
IMO they haven't made this AV to help anyone out. Its all about cock waving and adding to their port folio.
!� V �!
Apr 24, 11:01 PM
And here we go again with the whole Retina Display argument. We are all witnesses to the iPad 2. It is simply not economically feasible at the time. All this is pointing to is a screen resolution that is larger than the 30" that was discontinued or a 30" with this resolution as the 27" had taken over that space. People here jumping up and down over Retina this and that, give it a rest, by the time its actually released your eyesight will be poor enough that it might actually make a minor difference if any. ;):D
prady16
Sep 15, 05:24 PM
I am hoping for a new case design to keep the heat down!
Lets keep our fingers crossed!
Lets keep our fingers crossed!
louis Fashion
Mar 29, 08:27 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
This is quite valuable, since there is currently no way to store music on your computer.
and the Verizons and ATT of the world will be happy to charge you if you bust your data cap.
This is quite valuable, since there is currently no way to store music on your computer.
and the Verizons and ATT of the world will be happy to charge you if you bust your data cap.
digitalbiker
Aug 4, 07:26 PM
Shouldn't be much code - the Adobe apps are already cross platform so there shouldn't be many endian issues to sort out. It's just a matter of changing development environments to use XCode and re-testing.
Not simple, but not something that should take almost 2 years either.
How many times does it have to be repeated? Adobe came out immediately after the Intel transition was announced that they would have an Apple UB version released simultaneously with the release of CS3.
They didn't want to slow development of CS3 for the Mac. CS2 was just released and a UB version would have taken significant effort for a very small market share. Since the only benefit would be to intel mac users which didn't even exist at the time.
Soon, probably first quarter a UB version of CS3 will appear about the sametime that the mac intel user base reaches a relavent market size.
The company that really deserves criticism is intuit. They recently released quicken 2007 and it was not UB. They were releasing a new product and they chose to ignore intel Mac users. Makes you wonder if they are going to stay in the mac market at all. Maybe in the future they will just recommend running parallel and windows, to use quicken on an intel mac.
Not simple, but not something that should take almost 2 years either.
How many times does it have to be repeated? Adobe came out immediately after the Intel transition was announced that they would have an Apple UB version released simultaneously with the release of CS3.
They didn't want to slow development of CS3 for the Mac. CS2 was just released and a UB version would have taken significant effort for a very small market share. Since the only benefit would be to intel mac users which didn't even exist at the time.
Soon, probably first quarter a UB version of CS3 will appear about the sametime that the mac intel user base reaches a relavent market size.
The company that really deserves criticism is intuit. They recently released quicken 2007 and it was not UB. They were releasing a new product and they chose to ignore intel Mac users. Makes you wonder if they are going to stay in the mac market at all. Maybe in the future they will just recommend running parallel and windows, to use quicken on an intel mac.
powerbooks
Mar 27, 07:39 AM
No problem. I kind of thought that you might be outside the US and not factoring in the Verizon models.
Think about it: it might be 24, with iPad1 still on the market......:)
Think about it: it might be 24, with iPad1 still on the market......:)
Mechcozmo
Nov 26, 01:21 PM
All of the components would be low-end and 1-2 generations old. Basically, this is a wireless thin-client, but with enough additional resources to act as a low-end laptop.
Like this? Linkety (http://www.oqo.com/)
A bit more expensive than you would like, but otherwise seems to fit pretty well.
Like this? Linkety (http://www.oqo.com/)
A bit more expensive than you would like, but otherwise seems to fit pretty well.
Multimedia
Aug 3, 12:49 AM
Jesus christ, did you even watch the video? They were not reporters they were Intel staffers. He even says that the CoreDuo lasted 3 hours, not your claimed 2. This isn't scientific AT ALL and I would much rather believe Intel engineers who presented the info at IDF than some random marketing drivel with absolutely no information provided on the hardware/software. :rolleyes:
Now stop claiming that dropping a Merom in a MB/MBP is going to result in two times the battery life. That is not true. And if you think it is I will make a bet with you right now.
I'm not anti Core2Duo, I'm anti disinformation.1.67 x 3 = 5
1.67 rounded UP = 2
Almost TWICE and I never wrote "two times".
Now stop claiming that dropping a Merom in a MB/MBP is going to result in two times the battery life. That is not true. And if you think it is I will make a bet with you right now.
I'm not anti Core2Duo, I'm anti disinformation.1.67 x 3 = 5
1.67 rounded UP = 2
Almost TWICE and I never wrote "two times".
Beaverman3001
Apr 23, 05:20 PM
I don't see how this will happen anytime soon with screen prices, but it would be sweet. Already in love with my 1440x900 13in screen, couldn't imagine the clarity with it being doubled.
0815
Apr 25, 10:06 AM
I still don't get the outrage of many people. From all the 'tracking issues' out there, this is the one to worry the least about since it is only on your device and is not send to anyone.
If you really worry about anyone knowing where you are or have been, there are better 'targets' to go after, some where information is really send and analyzed by people 'out of your control'.
If you really worry about anyone knowing where you are or have been, there are better 'targets' to go after, some where information is really send and analyzed by people 'out of your control'.
pavetheforest
Sep 15, 09:40 PM
I really hope they update the MBP with the C2D, a new enclosure would be great too, heres to hoping...
Finallyfamous
Apr 10, 12:06 PM
I must say i just found this sight through google and had to join because of this post. I am a math teacher and the correct answer is 2
48/2(9+3) is a different equation than 48/2 * (9+3)
using Pemdas or the correct order of operations in the first problem
we first add whats in the parentheses (9+3)= 12
second step we multiply 2(12) =24
final step 48/24 = 2
the people who are getting 288
are adding (9+3) =12
then they are skipping an order of operations and going straight to division 48/2 =24
24 * 12 = 288
48/2(9+3) is a different equation than 48/2 * (9+3)
using Pemdas or the correct order of operations in the first problem
we first add whats in the parentheses (9+3)= 12
second step we multiply 2(12) =24
final step 48/24 = 2
the people who are getting 288
are adding (9+3) =12
then they are skipping an order of operations and going straight to division 48/2 =24
24 * 12 = 288
espoir
May 6, 03:15 AM
So many negative opinions but you may not know that ARM architecture is much more advanced then x86. Why do you think Windows 8 will support it? Because it's a future of home computing. And I'm not suprised that Apple considering it too.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a macbook pro twice as slimmer then 2011 model and that runs as long as iPad no matter what tasks you do?
And after all - why end users even care about CPU architecture? Do you think of your existing computer "Good, that the CPU is x86 based" every day? :)
Wouldn't it be nice to have a macbook pro twice as slimmer then 2011 model and that runs as long as iPad no matter what tasks you do?
And after all - why end users even care about CPU architecture? Do you think of your existing computer "Good, that the CPU is x86 based" every day? :)
JAT
Mar 29, 04:13 PM
Secondly, the term "3rd world" and "1st world" is offensive. The proper term is developing and developed world.
Yawn. In 5 years, those terms will be "offensive". Then we'll have to call them "mature" and "growing". Then, 20 years later that will be offensive, and we'll have to call them "service oriented" and "industry oriented". Then, 20 years later that will be offensive, and we'll have to call them "1st world" and "3rd world" again. Get off your PC high horse and deal with life straight on instead of hiding behind semantics.
*note: PC does not always refer to computers.
Yawn. In 5 years, those terms will be "offensive". Then we'll have to call them "mature" and "growing". Then, 20 years later that will be offensive, and we'll have to call them "service oriented" and "industry oriented". Then, 20 years later that will be offensive, and we'll have to call them "1st world" and "3rd world" again. Get off your PC high horse and deal with life straight on instead of hiding behind semantics.
*note: PC does not always refer to computers.
doctor-don
May 7, 11:02 PM
What are the uses for this MobileMe? Why would I use / need it?
I have used Macs since they came into existence, and I have owned several of them the past 20 years. But I have not used either dotMac or MobileMe.
Only serious replies, please.
I have used Macs since they came into existence, and I have owned several of them the past 20 years. But I have not used either dotMac or MobileMe.
Only serious replies, please.
iansilv
May 7, 10:27 AM
Huh? If they aren't making any money for it now (with relatively few people paying for the service) how would it make sense to give it away for free (with many many more people not paying for it?)
Because it would be a good marketing move, as another benefit of using a mac. It would have a "halo effect" as another way to get people in to the apple store. Obviously, not as much as the iPhone's "halo," but another bit of sales pitch couldn't hurt.
Also- by not making money on it, I guess I don't mean not really making money. Although they could be losing money on it for all I know. My point was that it could not be significant, against say the revenue the iPhone provides, or their core computer sales. Having one more way for their sales staff to be able to explain how the iPhone syncs with a mac computer might be more beneficial to Apple then whatever money they make form people actually paying for mobile me, and drive more sales of the hardware for the Mac ecosystem.
I don't think people don't want to use it, I just don't see a lot of people seeing value in paying for it.
Because it would be a good marketing move, as another benefit of using a mac. It would have a "halo effect" as another way to get people in to the apple store. Obviously, not as much as the iPhone's "halo," but another bit of sales pitch couldn't hurt.
Also- by not making money on it, I guess I don't mean not really making money. Although they could be losing money on it for all I know. My point was that it could not be significant, against say the revenue the iPhone provides, or their core computer sales. Having one more way for their sales staff to be able to explain how the iPhone syncs with a mac computer might be more beneficial to Apple then whatever money they make form people actually paying for mobile me, and drive more sales of the hardware for the Mac ecosystem.
I don't think people don't want to use it, I just don't see a lot of people seeing value in paying for it.
shigzeo
Apr 24, 10:24 PM
I think Apple is simply futureproofing here, and we won't see Retina displays for 3+ years, when it would be more feasible.
I agree with you, though, it would be nice if Apple was more serious about their GPUs. Maybe the switch to retina will force them to be.
It makes no difference at all. If the video card can render the 2D graphics at native retina resolution, that is all that matters. Keeping the same ratio of X and Y pixels means that the game (as has always been the case) determines what resolution you play in. I doubt we'll see games go that high for at least a few years.
The high resolution is great for everything else: reading, editing photos, etc., but requires a graphics card that can output very high 2D resolution with no corollary retardation.
Games are completely different and shouldn't be a concern by any serious gamer, at all. They simply don't relate to the monitor's resolution as much as they do the ratio of x and y pixels in order to keep lower resolutions from distorting.
I agree with you, though, it would be nice if Apple was more serious about their GPUs. Maybe the switch to retina will force them to be.
It makes no difference at all. If the video card can render the 2D graphics at native retina resolution, that is all that matters. Keeping the same ratio of X and Y pixels means that the game (as has always been the case) determines what resolution you play in. I doubt we'll see games go that high for at least a few years.
The high resolution is great for everything else: reading, editing photos, etc., but requires a graphics card that can output very high 2D resolution with no corollary retardation.
Games are completely different and shouldn't be a concern by any serious gamer, at all. They simply don't relate to the monitor's resolution as much as they do the ratio of x and y pixels in order to keep lower resolutions from distorting.
Noodlefarmer
Apr 26, 02:47 PM
But if Apple had gotten on board with Verizon a year earlier, those numbers would probably be reversed.
That extra year that Apple sat on their ass with AT&T was the crucial year that allowed android to gain traction and mindshare.
Once the 'greatly anticipated' Verizon launch finally did come, it was met with a large chorus of "who cares?" from the crowd - the crowd that had gotten their droid phone 6 months earlier.
AT&T gave Apple what they wanted on the iPhone. Verizon wouldn't. And Apple couldn't sell to Verizon until contract expired. Would it have been better to have been on both? Of course. But I don't think even Apple knew how well the iPhone would do. And while many Verizon customers opted for an Android rather than wait, I think it may be interesting to see what happens when they are eligible for new phone. Things could change again.
That extra year that Apple sat on their ass with AT&T was the crucial year that allowed android to gain traction and mindshare.
Once the 'greatly anticipated' Verizon launch finally did come, it was met with a large chorus of "who cares?" from the crowd - the crowd that had gotten their droid phone 6 months earlier.
AT&T gave Apple what they wanted on the iPhone. Verizon wouldn't. And Apple couldn't sell to Verizon until contract expired. Would it have been better to have been on both? Of course. But I don't think even Apple knew how well the iPhone would do. And while many Verizon customers opted for an Android rather than wait, I think it may be interesting to see what happens when they are eligible for new phone. Things could change again.
wacky4alanis
Jan 7, 09:10 AM
I tested my replacement dock this morning with no issues. I actually love this thing when it is working properly. It makes the whole "iPhone in the car" experience so much cleaner. I hop in the car, pop the iPhone into the mount, and it's ready for both music and nav. I also like how the TomTom app pauses the music during its voice instructions. Some people had complained about it being too abrupt, but it doesn't bother me at all. To be honest, I don't talk on the phone very much while driving, so I've only had one phone call using the bluetooth. That call was fine, but I don't have enough experience with it for a proper review.
Glen Quagmire
Aug 5, 10:28 AM
My predictions:
* general update on how stuff is going.
* quick demo of some new development tools.
* preview of Leopard (with DVDs available to attendees).
* Mac Pro.
Possibly:
* XServe.
* New Cinema displays.
Unlikely:
* A new model Mac that slots between the iMac and Mac Pro.
* general update on how stuff is going.
* quick demo of some new development tools.
* preview of Leopard (with DVDs available to attendees).
* Mac Pro.
Possibly:
* XServe.
* New Cinema displays.
Unlikely:
* A new model Mac that slots between the iMac and Mac Pro.
iMacZealot
Jul 30, 07:37 PM
I have Verizon, my wife T-Mobile. T-Mobile works fine in New York City, and so does Verizon. Especially in the past year Verizon has spent literally a fortune improving their reception, so that dead spots are much fewer than they used to be. I believe this is why they ignore "cool" phones, they are going for reliability with companies who buy in bulk for their employees, not really for consumers - go to a Verizon store if you want to be convinced they don't really care about the common man -
but what I am trying to say is, that I disagree about reception of Verizon: it's very good, and especially so outside of the major business cities like NYC and Washington. My wife's T-Mobile often is out of range when we travel, and we have to use my Verizon phone.
That said, Verizon rarely, with the exception of the recent Treo 700p, gets the really cool phones, so will probably bypass Apple as well.
I do agree that Verizon does not care about the layman, but I never get very good service here in Denver or if I visit my sisters in the bay area. I don't know why, but I just never get three bars or above usually at my house. Whenever I go to NYC, I spend most, if not all my time in Times Square and it just seems to constantly go in and out. I think T-Mobile is actually the best choice when it comes to international travel. Sprint is $1.50/min. and didn't even work in Rome, T-Mobile is $.99/min., and let's not even think about VZW's plans. T-Mobile worked for me from Here to LAX to TPE to SIN to KUL to even REP. Besides, they have a better minutes/dollar ratio than any of the other three major carriers and the coverage checker I checked works in every city I visit normally which are NYC, the Lamorinda Area, Vail, Boston, Denver (my home), and of course, everywhere else in the world.
but what I am trying to say is, that I disagree about reception of Verizon: it's very good, and especially so outside of the major business cities like NYC and Washington. My wife's T-Mobile often is out of range when we travel, and we have to use my Verizon phone.
That said, Verizon rarely, with the exception of the recent Treo 700p, gets the really cool phones, so will probably bypass Apple as well.
I do agree that Verizon does not care about the layman, but I never get very good service here in Denver or if I visit my sisters in the bay area. I don't know why, but I just never get three bars or above usually at my house. Whenever I go to NYC, I spend most, if not all my time in Times Square and it just seems to constantly go in and out. I think T-Mobile is actually the best choice when it comes to international travel. Sprint is $1.50/min. and didn't even work in Rome, T-Mobile is $.99/min., and let's not even think about VZW's plans. T-Mobile worked for me from Here to LAX to TPE to SIN to KUL to even REP. Besides, they have a better minutes/dollar ratio than any of the other three major carriers and the coverage checker I checked works in every city I visit normally which are NYC, the Lamorinda Area, Vail, Boston, Denver (my home), and of course, everywhere else in the world.
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 04:24 AM
You guys do realize that a 27" iMac would have to be 4K to possess a PPI over 300 and therefore be a "Retina Display?"
You sit 12 inches away from your iMac screen ? :confused:
You sit 12 inches away from your iMac screen ? :confused: