Number 41
Apr 26, 02:40 PM
no, they need a free phone--
by the way how do you buy stock in Android's success? Certainly not Google...
A free phone or a BOGO phone would help Apple tremendously -- but, at the end of the day, they simply cannot compete with the number of providers running Android right now.
Each Android phone tries to outdo the competition on a monthly basis, and they pump millions of dollars into advertising it as the most amazing thing ever.
It's all about the average consumer -- the average consumer is bombarded by ads for **** like "The THUNDERBOLT!" or the new HTC Compassion/Inspire/GagInducingName. The average consumer walks into a Verizon store when his contract is up and is told he can get an Android phone for free if he signs up for 2 years, or that he can get a free Android phone for his wife/kid if he buys one for $99.
Apple is losing this battle on many fronts.
by the way how do you buy stock in Android's success? Certainly not Google...
A free phone or a BOGO phone would help Apple tremendously -- but, at the end of the day, they simply cannot compete with the number of providers running Android right now.
Each Android phone tries to outdo the competition on a monthly basis, and they pump millions of dollars into advertising it as the most amazing thing ever.
It's all about the average consumer -- the average consumer is bombarded by ads for **** like "The THUNDERBOLT!" or the new HTC Compassion/Inspire/GagInducingName. The average consumer walks into a Verizon store when his contract is up and is told he can get an Android phone for free if he signs up for 2 years, or that he can get a free Android phone for his wife/kid if he buys one for $99.
Apple is losing this battle on many fronts.
ingenious
Nov 27, 09:11 PM
Why would I want to waste my time learning shorthand (which makes the assumption that TPCs could handle various forms of shorthand) so I could do through writing what I can already do at 70+ WPM via typing. And with typing, it solves the whole problem of handwriting recognition, because there ISN'T ANY.
But most tablets just let you write normally... they're not like PDAs that need Graffiti or something like that...:confused:
But most tablets just let you write normally... they're not like PDAs that need Graffiti or something like that...:confused:
Don't panic
May 4, 08:20 AM
as other said, the leader mostly acts as the official speaker for the group, but he/she can also decide things of his/her own volition. This should ensure a bit more of pace to the game (since we don't have to majority vote every decision).
later in the game, it also allows people with their own agenda
if someone strongly disagree i think they can always unilaterally split out and go wherever they want, as long as it is before the official order in bold is given.
I updated my post #47 with ravenvii correction, which now i think contains a more exaustive (second) explanation of the rules.
ranvenvii, if you have time to to amend it where it is incorrect and add it as 'canon' to the original rule post, i think it would be helpful.
---
back to our immediate business, I can be the fearless inspiring leader (for now), as long as i don't have to drag your lazy arses away from any sparkling trinkets you find on the way.
and no, Wilmer, that mummified rat's leg does NOT constitute 'treasure' and you may NOT keep it as a pendant. geesh, i should send you for a month mining with my cousins in the old Moth O'Rol caves searching for them inexistent gggggems, and maybe you'd grow a spine.
we have a qualified majority of votes, so i will lead the first group into the room top right, explore and then we can come back here and explore this room. this of course means that the barking donkey that is trying to impress us with his parlor tricks has time to build up some strength and put more monsters/traps in our way.
if two-three want to split out now and explore this room while we move to the next, i think it is a good idea, especially you Rosius, since if we happen to meet a sea urchin or sommthing in there, you might get hurt, and as much as it pains me to admit, we might need your 'talents' later on.
i'll wait till later in the morn and then go
later in the game, it also allows people with their own agenda
if someone strongly disagree i think they can always unilaterally split out and go wherever they want, as long as it is before the official order in bold is given.
I updated my post #47 with ravenvii correction, which now i think contains a more exaustive (second) explanation of the rules.
ranvenvii, if you have time to to amend it where it is incorrect and add it as 'canon' to the original rule post, i think it would be helpful.
---
back to our immediate business, I can be the fearless inspiring leader (for now), as long as i don't have to drag your lazy arses away from any sparkling trinkets you find on the way.
and no, Wilmer, that mummified rat's leg does NOT constitute 'treasure' and you may NOT keep it as a pendant. geesh, i should send you for a month mining with my cousins in the old Moth O'Rol caves searching for them inexistent gggggems, and maybe you'd grow a spine.
we have a qualified majority of votes, so i will lead the first group into the room top right, explore and then we can come back here and explore this room. this of course means that the barking donkey that is trying to impress us with his parlor tricks has time to build up some strength and put more monsters/traps in our way.
if two-three want to split out now and explore this room while we move to the next, i think it is a good idea, especially you Rosius, since if we happen to meet a sea urchin or sommthing in there, you might get hurt, and as much as it pains me to admit, we might need your 'talents' later on.
i'll wait till later in the morn and then go
MacApple21
Apr 7, 10:20 AM
So, what is Apple doing with a bunch of 7" touch screens, since Jobs said "7 inch tablets are dead on arrival"?
I also don't recall RIM ever giving a date before April 19th.
Well, perhaps it's not 7" screens Apple is buying, but production capacity, which consequently hinders competitors from having their orders produced.
I also don't recall RIM ever giving a date before April 19th.
Well, perhaps it's not 7" screens Apple is buying, but production capacity, which consequently hinders competitors from having their orders produced.
ChazUK
Mar 28, 10:03 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRI40) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)
Hardware or no, I'll still eagerly await what's to come from Apple.
Hardware or no, I'll still eagerly await what's to come from Apple.
SandynJosh
Nov 23, 12:57 PM
In looking over all the ideas generated in this thread and all the trends going on in the world, I'm lead to wonder if a consumer iPhone makes as much sense as it would seem to at first blush. Sure, the numbers can be great, but the profit potential is nearly nil.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
Evangelion
Sep 11, 05:51 AM
Why watch it on a 2.5'' when you can watch it on a 42''?
Do you usually carry 42" screens with you? No? That's what I thought....
Do you usually carry 42" screens with you? No? That's what I thought....
cube
May 6, 06:39 AM
Intel is spending $9 billion to upgrade its fabs to 22nm. Building all of them from scratch would be much more expensive. ARM's current market cap is $7.5 billion.
ARM does not make chips. They license technology and core designs.
ARM does not make chips. They license technology and core designs.
gnasher729
Apr 9, 05:49 PM
Depends on how you solve it, your answer is either 288 or 2.
Nothing is missing in the equation - no math symbol is missing between 2 and (9+3), so solve it as is.
Now, cast your vote! :)
Vote for "Undecidable because of the rubbish typography".
Nothing is missing in the equation - no math symbol is missing between 2 and (9+3), so solve it as is.
Now, cast your vote! :)
Vote for "Undecidable because of the rubbish typography".
CalBoy
May 5, 02:27 PM
Sorry it took so long to respond to this; I assure you it took only a second to Google (this is just the first result I found):
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/pays-off.html
All of that is about the private sector switching to save money on their bottom line, something which I already mentioned should happen (and will without intervention).
The question is if the government mandated the metric system for EVERYTHING, from speed limits on the roads to the measurements on a box of Betty Crocker brownies. Many of these things won't actually lead to any increased economic efficiency because certain products can only be produced locally (say weather reports) and consumed locally. The cost of these industries switching would be quite expensive with no real economic gain because the products and services can't be exported or imported.
Is that wink a small admission of how silly your system really is? :) Sure, the math was simple, but how meaningful are all these crazy fractions? If I actually had to try and picture what these fractions represent, I'd want to convert the denominator into a multiple of 10 first in order to try and picture it. I might note that twice 48 is roughly 100, so I know we're dealing with a bit over 26%. Other fractions could prove more difficult. With the metric system, you never have to do this. You're always dealing with base-10, which is something we all understand and can picture, without having to memorise particular fractions and what they represent.
No the wink was just to say that 1) I would use a calculator, and 2) even if I couldn't, multiplying fractions is not hard at all.
Well, we could certainly argue that international communication would be a LOT simpler if there was only one language � and it would be! However, the reality is, we have a world with not only a diversity of language, but a diversity of culture, and the two are intricately linked. That makes the world a very interesting place, and being able to speak multiple languages would be a wonderful skill to have when travelling and engaging in other cultures. People are generally proud of their heritage, culture and language, and there aren't too many people suggesting the world should lose all of that richness in the interest of conformity. (Well, there are such people, but I think we can agree they're generally pretty scary.)
This is off topic, but language is but one part of culture. Customs, celebrations, and even measures, are all marks of a culture. In the process of colonization and free trade, we've actively destroyed many languages, customs, celebrations, and measures. I think we typically don't consider the loss of a measurement system to be too catastrophic because of the many conveniences that can be had from uniformity. But the same is true for language as well. I think the real reason we tend to gloss over measures is because they are typically easier to learn than a new language. Anthropologically speaking, however, they are very valuable in exploring a culture.
What is different about the US that it can't do likewise? I honestly find it perplexing. Be honest now� Is it because the French invented it?
Ultimately I think it comes down to the fact that the US is one of the few countries that had a great deal of popular sovereignty determine the outcome of whether or not we should switch to the metric system. Most other countries enacted policy through a quiet parliamentary action that was later carried out by agencies or at a time when most people weren't active in politics. Still others had theirs done at the point of a gun.
In the US there are a lot of veto points in the legislative process, making any significant change hard to do. Americans also tend not to have a great deal of respect for the sciences (scientific literacy is appallingly low) so it makes it a tougher pitch to the everyday person. Then there's also the issue that to most it's a solution for a problem that doesn't exist; why should they care about a measurement system when the one they are using right now is working for them?
You're not stepping out onto the moon this time. Just about every other country on the planet (and there are quite a few of them!) have gone before you, and it worked out just fine. Sure, it takes some time, but not as long as you might like to imagine. Let me come back to my own experience� I was born in the 70s, around the time Australia was just starting to transition to the metric system. The older folk may well have had a difficult time with it, but if so I was blissfully unaware of it. I came to learn what an inch was, since most rulers had inches on one side and mm/cm on the other, and people still, to this day, casually talk about their height in feet and the weight of newborn babies in pounds. (Yes, some old habits die hard.) But these sort of things are the exceptions. The transition to metric was so efficient, I, as a first generation growing up with it, didn't even notice there was a transition happening.
Seriously, you should be looking to Australia and other countries with successful transitions and learning from them, instead of just perpetuating all these fanciful stories of how terrible it's going to be to change.
The issue goes beyond just the prescribed time period to shift, however. As I mentioned above, there are a lot of infrastructure concerns. Not to mention that Australia in the 1970s was 13 million people, or about 24 times smaller than the current US population. The only other countries that were on this scale were India and China when they transitioned, and both had much less infrastructure and an already illiterate population that could be trained from the ground up.
Any realistic transition for the US would take decades.
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/pays-off.html
All of that is about the private sector switching to save money on their bottom line, something which I already mentioned should happen (and will without intervention).
The question is if the government mandated the metric system for EVERYTHING, from speed limits on the roads to the measurements on a box of Betty Crocker brownies. Many of these things won't actually lead to any increased economic efficiency because certain products can only be produced locally (say weather reports) and consumed locally. The cost of these industries switching would be quite expensive with no real economic gain because the products and services can't be exported or imported.
Is that wink a small admission of how silly your system really is? :) Sure, the math was simple, but how meaningful are all these crazy fractions? If I actually had to try and picture what these fractions represent, I'd want to convert the denominator into a multiple of 10 first in order to try and picture it. I might note that twice 48 is roughly 100, so I know we're dealing with a bit over 26%. Other fractions could prove more difficult. With the metric system, you never have to do this. You're always dealing with base-10, which is something we all understand and can picture, without having to memorise particular fractions and what they represent.
No the wink was just to say that 1) I would use a calculator, and 2) even if I couldn't, multiplying fractions is not hard at all.
Well, we could certainly argue that international communication would be a LOT simpler if there was only one language � and it would be! However, the reality is, we have a world with not only a diversity of language, but a diversity of culture, and the two are intricately linked. That makes the world a very interesting place, and being able to speak multiple languages would be a wonderful skill to have when travelling and engaging in other cultures. People are generally proud of their heritage, culture and language, and there aren't too many people suggesting the world should lose all of that richness in the interest of conformity. (Well, there are such people, but I think we can agree they're generally pretty scary.)
This is off topic, but language is but one part of culture. Customs, celebrations, and even measures, are all marks of a culture. In the process of colonization and free trade, we've actively destroyed many languages, customs, celebrations, and measures. I think we typically don't consider the loss of a measurement system to be too catastrophic because of the many conveniences that can be had from uniformity. But the same is true for language as well. I think the real reason we tend to gloss over measures is because they are typically easier to learn than a new language. Anthropologically speaking, however, they are very valuable in exploring a culture.
What is different about the US that it can't do likewise? I honestly find it perplexing. Be honest now� Is it because the French invented it?
Ultimately I think it comes down to the fact that the US is one of the few countries that had a great deal of popular sovereignty determine the outcome of whether or not we should switch to the metric system. Most other countries enacted policy through a quiet parliamentary action that was later carried out by agencies or at a time when most people weren't active in politics. Still others had theirs done at the point of a gun.
In the US there are a lot of veto points in the legislative process, making any significant change hard to do. Americans also tend not to have a great deal of respect for the sciences (scientific literacy is appallingly low) so it makes it a tougher pitch to the everyday person. Then there's also the issue that to most it's a solution for a problem that doesn't exist; why should they care about a measurement system when the one they are using right now is working for them?
You're not stepping out onto the moon this time. Just about every other country on the planet (and there are quite a few of them!) have gone before you, and it worked out just fine. Sure, it takes some time, but not as long as you might like to imagine. Let me come back to my own experience� I was born in the 70s, around the time Australia was just starting to transition to the metric system. The older folk may well have had a difficult time with it, but if so I was blissfully unaware of it. I came to learn what an inch was, since most rulers had inches on one side and mm/cm on the other, and people still, to this day, casually talk about their height in feet and the weight of newborn babies in pounds. (Yes, some old habits die hard.) But these sort of things are the exceptions. The transition to metric was so efficient, I, as a first generation growing up with it, didn't even notice there was a transition happening.
Seriously, you should be looking to Australia and other countries with successful transitions and learning from them, instead of just perpetuating all these fanciful stories of how terrible it's going to be to change.
The issue goes beyond just the prescribed time period to shift, however. As I mentioned above, there are a lot of infrastructure concerns. Not to mention that Australia in the 1970s was 13 million people, or about 24 times smaller than the current US population. The only other countries that were on this scale were India and China when they transitioned, and both had much less infrastructure and an already illiterate population that could be trained from the ground up.
Any realistic transition for the US would take decades.
suneohair
Sep 15, 04:20 PM
Sounds good. Hope it happens for those waiting for it.
I also hope the design is revamped i.e. magnetic latch etc.
Maybe an ACD update to boot?
I also hope the design is revamped i.e. magnetic latch etc.
Maybe an ACD update to boot?
GoodWatch
Apr 21, 03:44 PM
I know many professional situations where a Mac Pro would be ideal as a rack mountable unit.
Recording studio, on location video production (DIT), and studio based post-production rigs, basically places where other equipment is racked, may need to be secured, cooled, power conditioned, or in mobile racks. Rack mounting in not only for servers.
And how do you operate it? A server can be accessed from a workstation but a Mac Pro IS a workstation, it's not a server. It's not a logical step. I have a professional photographer in the family, with a Mac Pro. He needs to load his RAWs onto his Mac for post processing. How to do this if that Mac is in another room, in a rack :confused: Very inconvenient if you ask me.
Recording studio, on location video production (DIT), and studio based post-production rigs, basically places where other equipment is racked, may need to be secured, cooled, power conditioned, or in mobile racks. Rack mounting in not only for servers.
And how do you operate it? A server can be accessed from a workstation but a Mac Pro IS a workstation, it's not a server. It's not a logical step. I have a professional photographer in the family, with a Mac Pro. He needs to load his RAWs onto his Mac for post processing. How to do this if that Mac is in another room, in a rack :confused: Very inconvenient if you ask me.
Popeye206
Apr 20, 08:10 AM
Damn it. That means I'll always have to upgrade my iPhone every September. So, I'll buy the iPhone 5 this September, then I'll upgrade next September for the iPhone 6 with a 4inch screen and 4G :D; but, is there a limited time window in which you upgrade, because I don't want to lose out 2 months of texts / calls / internet (if I upgrade in July 2012).
Well... the iPhone 6 will probably be our last iPhone anyway. :eek:
The end of the world is coming in December 2012 remember? :p
Well... the iPhone 6 will probably be our last iPhone anyway. :eek:
The end of the world is coming in December 2012 remember? :p
xfiftyfour
Jul 29, 10:11 PM
http://www.devilducky.com/media/46492/
I haven't seen this before but I guess it's old news?
Looks pretty cool anyway..
i hadn't seen the link before, either, but wow! i know it's a fake, but that is an AMAZING looking phone!
"dear steve, please trash whatever progress you've made on your supposed iPhone and get working on this iTalk. thanks." :p
I haven't seen this before but I guess it's old news?
Looks pretty cool anyway..
i hadn't seen the link before, either, but wow! i know it's a fake, but that is an AMAZING looking phone!
"dear steve, please trash whatever progress you've made on your supposed iPhone and get working on this iTalk. thanks." :p
QuarterSwede
Apr 18, 02:51 PM
couldn't Samsung simply get back at Apple by NOT making Apple's stuff? I mean, come on.
And risk losing a crap load of business? Yeah right. No one is that spitefully stupid but Apple.
And risk losing a crap load of business? Yeah right. No one is that spitefully stupid but Apple.
RMMahoney
Mar 27, 12:08 PM
Release a new phone and make the people wait for months for the new OS? WTH?
I thought WebOS and H/Palm already had that market cornered.
I thought WebOS and H/Palm already had that market cornered.
ChickenSwartz
Aug 2, 12:39 PM
You got it wrong. If you can't have cameras.. you CAN'T HAVE CAMERAS even if they're NOT being used. I work at a place where you can't have cellphones with cameras on the premises (i.e., the parking lot) let alone inside. Many companies with such policies will not buy displays because of such.
I think this is an oversight (we can call it oSight) by Apple. If you want to gain market share, especially for people who want high powered equipment. I worked in a small research for a while, like the above poster, there were NO cameras allowed including camera phones. This was a blanket policy for the whole facillity even if you had no security clearence. In this case it was required becasue they did a lot DoD research.
So, right off these new computers (iMac, MB, MBP) are not options for a facility like this to use. Additionally, anyone who works there and ever wants to bring his/her personal laptop to work is sunk too.
If was still working there I probably would have to opt for a differnt laptop.
Compared to other computer brands Macs give their customers fewer add-on options. I don't know why. I guess it makes it easier for them. But, in this case I think not making the built in iSight an option (even if it is free, like the glossy screen in the MBP) is a mistake.
I think this is an oversight (we can call it oSight) by Apple. If you want to gain market share, especially for people who want high powered equipment. I worked in a small research for a while, like the above poster, there were NO cameras allowed including camera phones. This was a blanket policy for the whole facillity even if you had no security clearence. In this case it was required becasue they did a lot DoD research.
So, right off these new computers (iMac, MB, MBP) are not options for a facility like this to use. Additionally, anyone who works there and ever wants to bring his/her personal laptop to work is sunk too.
If was still working there I probably would have to opt for a differnt laptop.
Compared to other computer brands Macs give their customers fewer add-on options. I don't know why. I guess it makes it easier for them. But, in this case I think not making the built in iSight an option (even if it is free, like the glossy screen in the MBP) is a mistake.
xPismo
Jul 21, 10:25 PM
Regarding hot laptops:
Tell me about it!
Add a pro book that lasts ~5hours and I'd be one happy man. Lets hope Apple can crack the heat / battery / weight triangle of pain this time around.
Tell me about it!
Add a pro book that lasts ~5hours and I'd be one happy man. Lets hope Apple can crack the heat / battery / weight triangle of pain this time around.
Ja Di ksw
Apr 10, 08:12 AM
I had to click on this to see how the **** so many pages could be on a simple math problem. To those who got 288, kudos. To those who got 2, you're wrong. Sorry, no offense, but it's very simple math. Fivetoedsloth, dukebound85, others are right, with multiplication and division (or addition and subtraction) it goes from left to right.
Also, if you trust your Mac more than google, copy and paste the question into mac's Grapher program. It displays it correctly (with the 48 above the 2 and 9+3 off to the side) and gives you 288.
Also, if you trust your Mac more than google, copy and paste the question into mac's Grapher program. It displays it correctly (with the 48 above the 2 and 9+3 off to the side) and gives you 288.
balamw
Apr 10, 05:25 PM
Well Paolo, what is your answer?
This question is purely semantics. But scientists tend to write for other scientists who have no trouble saying this is 288.
288. Like the rest of us who actually studied in a field that requires math in college and work in such a field. ;)
This is really only confusing/unclear for those who stopped really using math daily after grade school.
B
This question is purely semantics. But scientists tend to write for other scientists who have no trouble saying this is 288.
288. Like the rest of us who actually studied in a field that requires math in college and work in such a field. ;)
This is really only confusing/unclear for those who stopped really using math daily after grade school.
B
bigjohn
Jul 29, 10:21 PM
sadly with all the hype, real and otherwise, i won't be impressed with the first iteration even if it slices and toasts bagels for me. you gotta admit that some first apple efforts, while cool in design, limp out of the gate when compared to other manufacturers (how long did it take to get a CD-R in a laptop or desktop as one example)
that's not to say that i don't usually end up embracing what cupertino puts forth, please everyone understand that nokia, sony-e, motorola and the others have been doing phones far longer than apple. there's no possible way apple one-ups them on the first go.
that's not to say that i don't usually end up embracing what cupertino puts forth, please everyone understand that nokia, sony-e, motorola and the others have been doing phones far longer than apple. there's no possible way apple one-ups them on the first go.
poppe
Aug 4, 12:04 AM
Please apple what ever you do. Don't leave me stuck with a Merom MBP at 2.16... we need the 2.33!!
ViviUO
Apr 23, 07:08 PM
I really REALLY hope they do not use that ugly picture as the default background when Lion is retail.
xfiftyfour
Jul 29, 10:11 PM
http://www.devilducky.com/media/46492/
I haven't seen this before but I guess it's old news?
Looks pretty cool anyway..
i hadn't seen the link before, either, but wow! i know it's a fake, but that is an AMAZING looking phone!
"dear steve, please trash whatever progress you've made on your supposed iPhone and get working on this iTalk. thanks." :p
I haven't seen this before but I guess it's old news?
Looks pretty cool anyway..
i hadn't seen the link before, either, but wow! i know it's a fake, but that is an AMAZING looking phone!
"dear steve, please trash whatever progress you've made on your supposed iPhone and get working on this iTalk. thanks." :p