SevenInchScrew
Nov 28, 09:56 PM
Hardline lets you get killstreaks a kill earlier. Hardline Pro lets you double tap X on a killstreak crate to switch out what's inside.
So, with this setup you can enable: SAM Turret for 3 kills, Care Package for 4, and Sentry Gun for 5. You can then switch out every single one of those for something random, which is usually Napalm Strike, B-52, or Valkyrie Rockets.
It's so overpowered.
Not really. I've been using that setup for a couple weeks now (See post #39). Much more often than not, I get boring stuff. I've only had them swap for Chopper Gunner, Gunship, or Dogs on about 5 times, with the occasional SR71. This is out of probably 250 or so packages. But either way, Treyarch have said that this for sure will be patched in the next update. It will then only work on actual Care Packages, and not the SAM or Sentry drops.
... i have been trying to get ghost to pro for a while now and ironically i'm stuck on destroying an enemy turrent.
Just set one of your killstreaks as Sentry, and then throw it in the middle of the map when you get it. Then just wait for the enemy to get it, and kill it once they've deployed it.
So, with this setup you can enable: SAM Turret for 3 kills, Care Package for 4, and Sentry Gun for 5. You can then switch out every single one of those for something random, which is usually Napalm Strike, B-52, or Valkyrie Rockets.
It's so overpowered.
Not really. I've been using that setup for a couple weeks now (See post #39). Much more often than not, I get boring stuff. I've only had them swap for Chopper Gunner, Gunship, or Dogs on about 5 times, with the occasional SR71. This is out of probably 250 or so packages. But either way, Treyarch have said that this for sure will be patched in the next update. It will then only work on actual Care Packages, and not the SAM or Sentry drops.
... i have been trying to get ghost to pro for a while now and ironically i'm stuck on destroying an enemy turrent.
Just set one of your killstreaks as Sentry, and then throw it in the middle of the map when you get it. Then just wait for the enemy to get it, and kill it once they've deployed it.
SiliconAddict
Nov 16, 07:41 PM
I'd have to disagree with that.
A better statement would be your average user doesn't care about chip brand as long as the computer is relatively fast, and you get good battery life.
if this does happen would apple finaly consider leting there Os's on ur standart hp compaqs etcs ?
No.
A better statement would be your average user doesn't care about chip brand as long as the computer is relatively fast, and you get good battery life.
if this does happen would apple finaly consider leting there Os's on ur standart hp compaqs etcs ?
No.
slb
Mar 29, 11:26 AM
Welcome to 1984.
This has nothing to do with 1984.
This has nothing to do with 1984.
Patch^
Aug 8, 12:05 PM
is it me or has the 20" ACD just dropped by �20 and still has the same specs as before?
Why has is dropped by $100 in the US and got better specs? o well, maybe they being lazy to update it or get rid of old stock. I think there will be some new ACDs coming soon and the Dells seem quite tempting at the moment.
Why has is dropped by $100 in the US and got better specs? o well, maybe they being lazy to update it or get rid of old stock. I think there will be some new ACDs coming soon and the Dells seem quite tempting at the moment.
more...
CAWjr
Mar 17, 09:22 AM
I don't understand why the register even opened if the transaction was not complete. If the kid rang up the Ipad at $499 the plus the applicable state tax, you gave him the cash on hand, the register still should have required the balance from the credit card? The register in the my opinion should not have even opened up? Much less print a receipt saying the full price was paid?
The only way I can this happening is if the kid keyed in the exact amount of the purchase price as cash.
It sounds like that's exactly what happened. the cashier thought the OP handed him exact change & just keyed in the full amount as cash.
The cashier certainly bears some of the blame for the error, but the OP was fully aware of the error from the start and did nothing to correct it.
The only way I can this happening is if the kid keyed in the exact amount of the purchase price as cash.
It sounds like that's exactly what happened. the cashier thought the OP handed him exact change & just keyed in the full amount as cash.
The cashier certainly bears some of the blame for the error, but the OP was fully aware of the error from the start and did nothing to correct it.
Stridder44
Oct 10, 09:50 PM
has anyone seen this yet
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/k51.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/k52.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/k53.jpg
there is a very mac 84 like video on the samsung site. also they came out with a 10 megapxl phone too.
I work at Best Buy and I've messed with it. It's actually pretty cool until you roll out the giant piece of crap that is the speakers.
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/k51.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/k52.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/k53.jpg
there is a very mac 84 like video on the samsung site. also they came out with a 10 megapxl phone too.
I work at Best Buy and I've messed with it. It's actually pretty cool until you roll out the giant piece of crap that is the speakers.
more...
xUKHCx
Jan 5, 11:55 AM
Cool i prefer to see the introduction gives it the wow factor rather than the mild excitment of reading the keynote.
TuckBodi
Oct 6, 11:41 AM
The iPhone to Verizon won't happen, especially with the announcement today that Verizon is teaming up with Google and their Android phone. I at first thought the commercial was just a leverage ploy on Verizons part, working on Apple and their negotiations. Now I think it's just the first shot over the bow.
Time to look at unlocking and bailing to T-Mo again and get out of this crap-shoot called AT$T.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091006-709550.html
Time to look at unlocking and bailing to T-Mo again and get out of this crap-shoot called AT$T.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091006-709550.html
more...
Geckotek
Dec 20, 11:49 AM
Yes I'm well aware of China Mobile's vast GSM Edge network. But this is a 3g phone. So that 558 Million actually doesn't count given that it would be like giving the phone to T-Mobile knowing that they can't support 3g. And Apple doesn't pull moves like that since it would open them up for lawsuits (if someone unlocks on their own, that's on them).
The real numbers to look at are 152 Million valid GSM 3g subscribers against 178 Million CDMA customers. And no contract prohibiting having a phone for both. So again, if this is about making money, why didn't they make a CDMA phone for that second group. Assuming they are open to having a CDMA iphone at all.
You can't add. That would be 152M GSM 3G subscribers vs 85M CDMA subscribers. And to answer the last question, probably because they had a GSM phone all ready to go.
And on what basis would someone have a lawsuit? Because the phone has more capability than the network????? Sorry, no basis for a lawsuit there. That just makes no sense.
I don't think China has much interest in the iPhone.
We're talking about China specifically.
Edit: DOH! You changed your post. (actually, Apple had problems keeping up w/ demand in China)
The real numbers to look at are 152 Million valid GSM 3g subscribers against 178 Million CDMA customers. And no contract prohibiting having a phone for both. So again, if this is about making money, why didn't they make a CDMA phone for that second group. Assuming they are open to having a CDMA iphone at all.
You can't add. That would be 152M GSM 3G subscribers vs 85M CDMA subscribers. And to answer the last question, probably because they had a GSM phone all ready to go.
And on what basis would someone have a lawsuit? Because the phone has more capability than the network????? Sorry, no basis for a lawsuit there. That just makes no sense.
I don't think China has much interest in the iPhone.
We're talking about China specifically.
Edit: DOH! You changed your post. (actually, Apple had problems keeping up w/ demand in China)
wlh99
Apr 27, 02:44 PM
Target is the object that the message is going to execute isn't it. For example, if it's self, that means that those parameters are for the timer object you just created. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not trying to challenge your knowledge, just to learn as I go.
If you see my code before, I'm using NSDate for my timePicker. One favor, I'm not answering more quiz questions, I get your point.. I still need to learn more fundamentals.. I get it, just please contribute with the thread to find solutions or not.. (there are many Professional Forums).
If this were a "Professional Forum" I would just give you an answer. I want to know what you do and do not know, so I can help you learn it. So please don't take the questions as condescending, they will help us help you.
Think of objects as people, so to speak. Not only is the NSTimer an object, but so is your viewcontroller. So are the buttons. These objects know how to do things. These things they know how to do are methods. A message is an instruction for an object to do something.
cancelIt: is a method in your viewcontroller object, as are all the methods we have discussed. Then self would refer to the viewcontroller, not the timer. Self would refer to the timer if you had access to apples code that implemets the timer and you were modifiying that.
So a target is the object you are sending a message to. The message is the name of the method you want the object to execute.
[aTimer invalidate]; // tells the timer pointed to by aTimer to execute the invalidate method
When you press a button, a message is sent. The target and method are chosen when you make the connection in Interface Builder. In your case, the target is your viewcontroller, and the method is one of the start or cancel methods.
I asked the question becasue it is fundamental to what an NSTimer is/does.
An NSTimer sends a message to an object at regular intervals.
In your case, the NSTimer is telling your viewcontroller to execute the echoIt: every second. The important part is that your viewcontroller is an object, echoIt: is something your viewcontroller is doing (not the timer). You only have one viewcontroller, so anything it stores (for example seconds) will persit for any NSTimer you create.
Now look at the NSTimer documentation:
more...
Latest Curly Medium Length
Medium-Length Hairstyle
more...
Medium Length Hairstyles for
Medium Length Hairstyles for
more...
emo hairstyles for girls with
Browse our medium hairstyle
more...
Hairstyle 2011 Medium Length
Short and Cute Curly Hairstyle
Grenier#39;s curly hair. Men
If you see my code before, I'm using NSDate for my timePicker. One favor, I'm not answering more quiz questions, I get your point.. I still need to learn more fundamentals.. I get it, just please contribute with the thread to find solutions or not.. (there are many Professional Forums).
If this were a "Professional Forum" I would just give you an answer. I want to know what you do and do not know, so I can help you learn it. So please don't take the questions as condescending, they will help us help you.
Think of objects as people, so to speak. Not only is the NSTimer an object, but so is your viewcontroller. So are the buttons. These objects know how to do things. These things they know how to do are methods. A message is an instruction for an object to do something.
cancelIt: is a method in your viewcontroller object, as are all the methods we have discussed. Then self would refer to the viewcontroller, not the timer. Self would refer to the timer if you had access to apples code that implemets the timer and you were modifiying that.
So a target is the object you are sending a message to. The message is the name of the method you want the object to execute.
[aTimer invalidate]; // tells the timer pointed to by aTimer to execute the invalidate method
When you press a button, a message is sent. The target and method are chosen when you make the connection in Interface Builder. In your case, the target is your viewcontroller, and the method is one of the start or cancel methods.
I asked the question becasue it is fundamental to what an NSTimer is/does.
An NSTimer sends a message to an object at regular intervals.
In your case, the NSTimer is telling your viewcontroller to execute the echoIt: every second. The important part is that your viewcontroller is an object, echoIt: is something your viewcontroller is doing (not the timer). You only have one viewcontroller, so anything it stores (for example seconds) will persit for any NSTimer you create.
Now look at the NSTimer documentation:
more...
timmell
Jan 9, 11:18 AM
1.ACD Updates (Touchscreen, iSight, Firewire 800 added ports built in, better res, contrast, etc....
2. iPhone update to 3g and 16GB model for $449 and 8GB now only $349.
3. Apple TV/Movie Deal, Rental Deal. 250GB Apple TV with 1080p output and iTunes Purchases for movies and HDTV shows, up to 720P Res. downloads.
Or at lease I hope for #1. I doubt it, but if my dream came true I would buy one and a ton of apple stock.:apple:
2. iPhone update to 3g and 16GB model for $449 and 8GB now only $349.
3. Apple TV/Movie Deal, Rental Deal. 250GB Apple TV with 1080p output and iTunes Purchases for movies and HDTV shows, up to 720P Res. downloads.
Or at lease I hope for #1. I doubt it, but if my dream came true I would buy one and a ton of apple stock.:apple:
*LTD*
Mar 6, 11:59 AM
Why is Apple the only tech company that makes unique products? All the other big ones seem to just drop in behind Apple after they invent something... Examples:
�Phones that are designed to simply compete with the iPhone.
�
This is proven. Others react to Apple, change (or attempt to) in response to Apple, sometimes even to the point of having to admit it (i.e., Nokia and Samsung.) Some even design their entire strategy around competing against Apple. That's really saying something. And it is also puts paid the notion that Apple's leadership in this industry is without equal and that there's a good reason their value will surpass that of Exxon Mobil's faster than we think.
�Phones that are designed to simply compete with the iPhone.
�
This is proven. Others react to Apple, change (or attempt to) in response to Apple, sometimes even to the point of having to admit it (i.e., Nokia and Samsung.) Some even design their entire strategy around competing against Apple. That's really saying something. And it is also puts paid the notion that Apple's leadership in this industry is without equal and that there's a good reason their value will surpass that of Exxon Mobil's faster than we think.
more...
Lesser Evets
Mar 24, 03:17 PM
I used that "shaky public beta" and it was so bizarre at first. By Christmas I was hooked and ditched 9 from all my Macs as the prime-start up OS. iTunes was instantly brilliant to me, and I spent 4 days straight ripping all 600 cds in my library.
That was 10 years ago? Good God.
That was 10 years ago? Good God.
inket
Apr 9, 05:08 PM
-Apple is using iOS' popularity to promote Lion while Microsoft is doing the opposite.
-Lion has Arabic support. They're targeting the Middle East.
-Some Lion changes are welcome and long-awaited but I'm still not impressed. Jobs better be at that WWDC presenting some awesome stuff 2 months from now.
-Windows 8 will support ARM and tablets. => Getting farther away from good Software-Hardware integration.
-Windows 8 is getting a PDF reader... that's so 2005! I can even open .ppt (Microsoft's format) on a Mac without additional software.
-Windows 8 is catching up to Snow Leopard and maybe a bit more but nothing new to Mac users.
-Metro UI will look really bad on PCs.
-Lion has Arabic support. They're targeting the Middle East.
-Some Lion changes are welcome and long-awaited but I'm still not impressed. Jobs better be at that WWDC presenting some awesome stuff 2 months from now.
-Windows 8 will support ARM and tablets. => Getting farther away from good Software-Hardware integration.
-Windows 8 is getting a PDF reader... that's so 2005! I can even open .ppt (Microsoft's format) on a Mac without additional software.
-Windows 8 is catching up to Snow Leopard and maybe a bit more but nothing new to Mac users.
-Metro UI will look really bad on PCs.
more...
langis.elbasunu
Mar 17, 11:00 AM
Of course, but dishonesty is immoral. Dishonesty coupled with theft and injury is illegal.
dishonesty in the abstract sense is the main tenet of your profession counsel.
dishonesty in the abstract sense is the main tenet of your profession counsel.
Lynxpro
Oct 20, 01:40 PM
Seriously, the more I think about it, the more upset I am that they aren't offering one. I mean, what the heck are they goint to do with $10 billion? Even the most aggressive expansion and R&D strategy doesn't justify holding onto that. And it would be a great way to offset any damage from the options fiasco. And it would boost the shares 5% (at least) on announcement. They USED to pay a dividend (1987-1995). It's time to bring it back!
Oh, I dunno, perhaps acquire some more companies? You know, like TiVo - with its valuable IP - for an easy $400 million. Or pump it into R&D. Or a stake in Nintendo or Sony. Or acquire the EMI Music Group (for $1 billion) as a buffer against the other RIAA members pressuring for an increase in the iTunes Store pricing. Or finally pay off Apple Records once and for all. Those are several things Apple could do* with that $10 billion that could be more useful than artificially boosting the stock by paying out an expensive dividend to grumpy shareholders.
Heck, maybe they could go all-solar on the Apple campus like what Google is doing.
*My personal favorite idea would be for Apple to acquire Atari dirt-cheap. This would give Apple a large library of classic titles that could be ported to the iPod, not to mention giving Apple a brand that could be used to pump out OS X "compatible" computers geared towards gamers in order to boost gaming on OS X overall and a means at gunning after Dell-owned Alienware and Dell's own XPS line.
Oh, I dunno, perhaps acquire some more companies? You know, like TiVo - with its valuable IP - for an easy $400 million. Or pump it into R&D. Or a stake in Nintendo or Sony. Or acquire the EMI Music Group (for $1 billion) as a buffer against the other RIAA members pressuring for an increase in the iTunes Store pricing. Or finally pay off Apple Records once and for all. Those are several things Apple could do* with that $10 billion that could be more useful than artificially boosting the stock by paying out an expensive dividend to grumpy shareholders.
Heck, maybe they could go all-solar on the Apple campus like what Google is doing.
*My personal favorite idea would be for Apple to acquire Atari dirt-cheap. This would give Apple a large library of classic titles that could be ported to the iPod, not to mention giving Apple a brand that could be used to pump out OS X "compatible" computers geared towards gamers in order to boost gaming on OS X overall and a means at gunning after Dell-owned Alienware and Dell's own XPS line.
more...
kppolich
Apr 7, 01:30 PM
http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/217343_534454402728_79701617_31025867_5141190_n.jpg
fivepoint
May 4, 05:55 PM
Dude, you're clueless.
I have a severe congenital hearing loss and it's really amazing how parents don't really understand the long term consequences of poor hearing protection.
Just as in almost all other health matters, the more exposure to loud noises when young, the more likely a child is to end up with a hearing loss as he ages. Some parents do insist on hearing protection when using firearms, but I'm sure there are a lot that don't. Shooting guns without hearing protection is like taking a five year old to a Nascar race. Very, very irresponsible simply based on the noise level.
I'm sure Dr Choi was speaking of the danger of firearms being discharged by and around children with a lack of supervision, but your tunnel vision when it comes to the health and safety of children is appalling.
I think it's you who's clueless. You make it seem as if it's the role of government and physicians to eliminate risk in our lives. What's more risky, taking your kid to a NASCAR event without hearing protection, or raising them in a large city with lots of traffic and crime? What's more risky, raising your kids in a home with un-locked guns, or raising them with an ultra-protective disregard for a child's need to learn life lessons and experience the value of trust/responsibility first hand?
My dad had a rifle hanging on a gun-rack above his computer in his office for my entire life. The ammunition was directly below the gun in a drawer as part of the gun-rack. I was raised to respect the weapon and to never touch it unless I was given permission. I earned my parents' trust, and learned responsibility as a consequence. Was that wrong of my parents? Absolutely not, but I guess I'm just 'clueless.'
Where do you live? Cedar Rapids, where the nearest next physician is five or ten minutes away, at most? What if you were in Guttenberg, where the next physician is half an hour or more? Open-ended liberty to refuse to provide treatment at a whim is just plain irresponsible.
An unpopular physician creates the market demand for an alternative. Supply, unencumbered by any sort of rationing by the gov't subsidized higher-education system, would produce the complimentary supply.
In any event, do you seriously contend that this is a situation solveable by by big intrusive government controlling physicians and eliminating their ability to render services as they see fit?
I have a severe congenital hearing loss and it's really amazing how parents don't really understand the long term consequences of poor hearing protection.
Just as in almost all other health matters, the more exposure to loud noises when young, the more likely a child is to end up with a hearing loss as he ages. Some parents do insist on hearing protection when using firearms, but I'm sure there are a lot that don't. Shooting guns without hearing protection is like taking a five year old to a Nascar race. Very, very irresponsible simply based on the noise level.
I'm sure Dr Choi was speaking of the danger of firearms being discharged by and around children with a lack of supervision, but your tunnel vision when it comes to the health and safety of children is appalling.
I think it's you who's clueless. You make it seem as if it's the role of government and physicians to eliminate risk in our lives. What's more risky, taking your kid to a NASCAR event without hearing protection, or raising them in a large city with lots of traffic and crime? What's more risky, raising your kids in a home with un-locked guns, or raising them with an ultra-protective disregard for a child's need to learn life lessons and experience the value of trust/responsibility first hand?
My dad had a rifle hanging on a gun-rack above his computer in his office for my entire life. The ammunition was directly below the gun in a drawer as part of the gun-rack. I was raised to respect the weapon and to never touch it unless I was given permission. I earned my parents' trust, and learned responsibility as a consequence. Was that wrong of my parents? Absolutely not, but I guess I'm just 'clueless.'
Where do you live? Cedar Rapids, where the nearest next physician is five or ten minutes away, at most? What if you were in Guttenberg, where the next physician is half an hour or more? Open-ended liberty to refuse to provide treatment at a whim is just plain irresponsible.
An unpopular physician creates the market demand for an alternative. Supply, unencumbered by any sort of rationing by the gov't subsidized higher-education system, would produce the complimentary supply.
In any event, do you seriously contend that this is a situation solveable by by big intrusive government controlling physicians and eliminating their ability to render services as they see fit?
goober1223
Apr 6, 11:21 AM
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
kvizzel
Mar 17, 05:44 AM
That's messed up.
The kid is going to have to pay.
You know, karma is a bitch.
The kid is going to have to pay.
You know, karma is a bitch.
megfilmworks
Jan 10, 06:41 PM
but like allways apple are allways interestet in proclaming that there products state of the art some of the products are.But if the product are state of the art -
Huh?? I think your first priority should be a lesson in how to write.
Huh?? I think your first priority should be a lesson in how to write.
baryon
Sep 29, 07:55 AM
If the garage is detached, what does he do when it's raining?
You know, like, use an umbrella, or, like, run.
You know, like, use an umbrella, or, like, run.
Naimfan
May 4, 02:40 PM
If guns are so important to society, why is it taboo to have an adult conversation about their impact on that society?
That is an EXCELLENT question.
That is an EXCELLENT question.
Koodauw
Sep 12, 01:01 AM
That phone looks amazing. Wish I could have one.
0 comments:
Post a Comment