SactoGuy18
Apr 16, 12:30 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.
I'd almost agree but if you look at the Forbes flat income tax plan, the plan has a very generous initial income exemption before the no-deductions flat income tax kicks in (somewhere between US$42,000 to US$44,000 for a family of two adults and two dependents). As such, that right there makes this plan progressive, since low-income households are no longer subject to income tax.
And best of all, with essentially all those complex deductions, exemptions, credits, etc. no longer in the tax code, it means income tax forms will be simple enough that the whole thing for most taxpayers will be not much more than a postcard! :D Just the savings in income tax compliance costs would mean potentially hundreds of billions of dollars now can be used for more productive purposes.
I'd almost agree but if you look at the Forbes flat income tax plan, the plan has a very generous initial income exemption before the no-deductions flat income tax kicks in (somewhere between US$42,000 to US$44,000 for a family of two adults and two dependents). As such, that right there makes this plan progressive, since low-income households are no longer subject to income tax.
And best of all, with essentially all those complex deductions, exemptions, credits, etc. no longer in the tax code, it means income tax forms will be simple enough that the whole thing for most taxpayers will be not much more than a postcard! :D Just the savings in income tax compliance costs would mean potentially hundreds of billions of dollars now can be used for more productive purposes.
kresh
Sep 15, 05:05 PM
According to this review, it runs measurably (not necessarily significantly) cooler with longer battery life, etc.
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=288
I hope so :)
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=288
I hope so :)
danerh
May 7, 06:17 PM
Advertising with iAds could still fit into that scenario too... Though again, as is standard with most services, premium paying customers (perhaps 3 apple products or something similar) won't receive ads.
Demoman
Aug 7, 10:27 PM
So if I want a mid-range tower, I can configured it to have less RAM, a smaller HD and a completely useless graphics card, and still come in $200-300 more than a comparable machine from Dell/Gateway/etc.? Why can't Apple sell me a desktop with 2GB RAM stock and a 250GB HD for less than two grand?
Yes, the Apple is a quad instead of a dual - but exactly which apps does that matter on? Is a quad really going to be a vast improvement for Photoshop through Rosetta over, say, a single Xeon or 2.4 Conroe?
All I ask for is a moderately priced OS X desktop that isn't crippled in any way (still paying for 802.11g! $350 to get a usable graphics card!).
If using Windows didn't make my eyes bleed, I'd turn and run from Apple hardware in a heartbeat. (And that, of course, is why fanboy dreams of a retail OS X package for any computer would never happen - you'd have to be a fool to use Apple hardware.)
Your logic completely defeats my ability to understand it. I use Apple hardware and do not like being called a fool by a 'user of a lesser God'.
There does seem to be a market for a mid-range tower/desktop, user-configurable Apple computer. I am sure that if Apple can make the manufacturing and numbers come out, they will do this.
But, the rest of your post seems to be useless, irrational grandstanding. Dell does not offer any decent video card standard, nor do they offer 2 GB of RAM. You say the graphics card is useless, but it is fine for a high-end file-server. Those wanting high-end graphics have two solid options.
If you need to be schooled in "..but exactly which apps does that matter on?", this machine is definitely NOT for you. If you cannot find an Apple computer that fits your requirements, that is sad. But, you should have to walk away reluctantly, not "..turn and run from Apple hardware in a heartbeat."
Yes, the Apple is a quad instead of a dual - but exactly which apps does that matter on? Is a quad really going to be a vast improvement for Photoshop through Rosetta over, say, a single Xeon or 2.4 Conroe?
All I ask for is a moderately priced OS X desktop that isn't crippled in any way (still paying for 802.11g! $350 to get a usable graphics card!).
If using Windows didn't make my eyes bleed, I'd turn and run from Apple hardware in a heartbeat. (And that, of course, is why fanboy dreams of a retail OS X package for any computer would never happen - you'd have to be a fool to use Apple hardware.)
Your logic completely defeats my ability to understand it. I use Apple hardware and do not like being called a fool by a 'user of a lesser God'.
There does seem to be a market for a mid-range tower/desktop, user-configurable Apple computer. I am sure that if Apple can make the manufacturing and numbers come out, they will do this.
But, the rest of your post seems to be useless, irrational grandstanding. Dell does not offer any decent video card standard, nor do they offer 2 GB of RAM. You say the graphics card is useless, but it is fine for a high-end file-server. Those wanting high-end graphics have two solid options.
If you need to be schooled in "..but exactly which apps does that matter on?", this machine is definitely NOT for you. If you cannot find an Apple computer that fits your requirements, that is sad. But, you should have to walk away reluctantly, not "..turn and run from Apple hardware in a heartbeat."
Mac'nCheese
May 6, 05:44 PM
We do? Not the impression I get.
Sorry, forgot to put that part in blue.
Sorry, forgot to put that part in blue.
CJM
Aug 4, 12:26 PM
I don't see why Apple would put a mobile chip into the iMac. I bought one for my work around a month ago and yes, its portable but not that portable.
call of duty 4 gun list
Amazon has Call of Duty 4:
call of duty black ops guns
call of duty 4 guns list.
call of duty modern warfare 4
call of duty modern warfare 4
Call of Duty 4 had the M40.
Call of Duty: Black Ops,
3 guns list. call of duty
warfare 3 guns list. duty
guns list. Call of Duty 4
call of duty black ops guns
Call of Duty 4 heavy running
Reach
Sep 16, 01:08 AM
Sorry for being stupid here, but why do you guys want magnetic latches? It just doesn't seem superior to me, but then again I haven't tried the new macbooks, I just know that the solution on my old 17" powerbook was fine.
The swappable HD is nice though, I'd like that.
Anyway, fingers crossed, let it be true please! :)
The swappable HD is nice though, I'd like that.
Anyway, fingers crossed, let it be true please! :)
NATO
Apr 18, 04:43 PM
Then they should sue google for making android so similar to iOS, not Samsung. And im not sure if the "look" of icons on a screen can be patented anyway.
That's the thing, stock Android isn't really anything like iOS, it's Samsung's proprietary UI which is added on top which makes it more iOS-like (in the same way that HTC has their own proprietary 'Sense UI' to differentiate their products from the competition)
That's the thing, stock Android isn't really anything like iOS, it's Samsung's proprietary UI which is added on top which makes it more iOS-like (in the same way that HTC has their own proprietary 'Sense UI' to differentiate their products from the competition)
hynke
May 6, 07:00 AM
Citation needed. Especially in light of this 2 month old article :
Intel, Google Doubt ARM and Atom Have Chances in Servers (http://www.cpu-wars.com/2011/03/intel-google-doubt-arm-and-atom-have.html)
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/04/21/google-buys-agnilux-eyeing-processors/
The article doesn't mention the processor architecture, but it is really supposed to be ARM.
Intel, Google Doubt ARM and Atom Have Chances in Servers (http://www.cpu-wars.com/2011/03/intel-google-doubt-arm-and-atom-have.html)
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/04/21/google-buys-agnilux-eyeing-processors/
The article doesn't mention the processor architecture, but it is really supposed to be ARM.
wordoflife
Apr 23, 04:35 PM
Wow, that App Store icon devoured my whole screen (MBP 13)
coolwater
Apr 9, 05:04 PM
Depending 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! :)
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! :)
srathi
Apr 26, 04:05 PM
Market share and product quality is not always 1:1 :rolleyes:relationship.
You mean iPhone quality is even worse than what its 25% market share suggests??
You mean iPhone quality is even worse than what its 25% market share suggests??
ECUpirate44
Apr 9, 06:12 PM
The answer is 288.
Back to 7th grade Math: Order of operations= PEMDAS
Parentheses first 9+3=12
Then division 48/2=24 because 24X2 is 48. Multiplication and division go together.
Then multiplication because they are next to each other. 24(12)=288
Back to 7th grade Math: Order of operations= PEMDAS
Parentheses first 9+3=12
Then division 48/2=24 because 24X2 is 48. Multiplication and division go together.
Then multiplication because they are next to each other. 24(12)=288
-aggie-
May 3, 05:32 PM
I would rather that you started leading us since you seem to be much more versed in the rules guiding us :).
We�re doomed.:D
We�re doomed.:D
Old Smuggler
Sep 11, 02:34 AM
I can't see how Apple can begin an sell movies and not also sell a Media Mac.
It would be like iTMS and no iPods... how well would that work? :rolleyes:
Has anyone ever considered that the media mac would not be a hardware upgrade to the mini but a software one via itunes 7
or is it just me?
It would be like iTMS and no iPods... how well would that work? :rolleyes:
Has anyone ever considered that the media mac would not be a hardware upgrade to the mini but a software one via itunes 7
or is it just me?
Hildron101010
Mar 30, 05:59 PM
Thanks Captain Obvious... I think that is what Apple said at the very beginning ;)
Well, apparently, the original guy didn't get that.
Well, apparently, the original guy didn't get that.
MacbookSwitcher
Mar 29, 03:33 PM
Yeah buddy I am. Are you aware that on every Apple Device it says "DESIGNED IN CALIFORNIA, ASSEMBLED IN CHINA."
There is a reason we do not build these products and it has been well covered through this thread. Can you name any good products made by those companies that you mentioned, that are actually built in the US. You know America SUCKS at making products when we need the media to convince us of this fact. Just watch TV, you do not see Apple advertising that they make there products in China, but you do see a bunch of other companies that slap a "Made in the USA" label gain Patriot approval. I avoid those products and save my money for products that have better quality; I dont innately hate american products, but experience has proved that they are inferior to build qualities of other nations. :apple::D
The reason that simple, brainless product assembly is not done in the US has nothing to due with low quality. It is due to lower manufacturing costs in China, which has no regulations.
There is no evidence at all that American-made products are of lower quality than any other country's products. (Is there any fighter jet better than the American-made F-16 or F-22?)
There is a reason we do not build these products and it has been well covered through this thread. Can you name any good products made by those companies that you mentioned, that are actually built in the US. You know America SUCKS at making products when we need the media to convince us of this fact. Just watch TV, you do not see Apple advertising that they make there products in China, but you do see a bunch of other companies that slap a "Made in the USA" label gain Patriot approval. I avoid those products and save my money for products that have better quality; I dont innately hate american products, but experience has proved that they are inferior to build qualities of other nations. :apple::D
The reason that simple, brainless product assembly is not done in the US has nothing to due with low quality. It is due to lower manufacturing costs in China, which has no regulations.
There is no evidence at all that American-made products are of lower quality than any other country's products. (Is there any fighter jet better than the American-made F-16 or F-22?)
bedifferent
Mar 31, 03:44 AM
You (and others) are aware that "Developer Previews", when available, have always predated the Beta releases? It's not even a beta.
Apple says they will release Lion in summer, only Dev Previews have appeared so far, and suddenly people think it plausible for Apple to release a GM build in March?
And btw, I'm really disappointed in the reporting of the ludicrous "GM" rumour as it's pretty obviously wrong - usually MacRumors curates their news better than this.
Agreed :) 100% correct, these have been only two developer previews so a "straight to GM" claim is highly unlikely. I was/am amazed at how many sites are reporting a GM build is close/in the works as this has not been Apple's OS X development system of years prior (and should still be as developers/etc need beta's to flesh out their applications for porting and debugging to Apple engineers). Looking forward to the beta's, I'm guessing there is more to Lion than what we currently know from perusing some of the Lion Dev forums.
Apparently they claim to know than they do, which is typical. Your observations are spot on.
Is this directed towards me? If so, I'm very familiar with how things are done and I would like to believe I am fairly knowledgable in the systemic approach taken by Apple in 10.X releases :). My comment was regarding the veracity of the reports from MacRumors and many other Apple/tech oriented sites stating a GM build is around the corner while we haven't even reached beta builds (I've posted on this quite a bit in the Lion forum).
Apple says they will release Lion in summer, only Dev Previews have appeared so far, and suddenly people think it plausible for Apple to release a GM build in March?
And btw, I'm really disappointed in the reporting of the ludicrous "GM" rumour as it's pretty obviously wrong - usually MacRumors curates their news better than this.
Agreed :) 100% correct, these have been only two developer previews so a "straight to GM" claim is highly unlikely. I was/am amazed at how many sites are reporting a GM build is close/in the works as this has not been Apple's OS X development system of years prior (and should still be as developers/etc need beta's to flesh out their applications for porting and debugging to Apple engineers). Looking forward to the beta's, I'm guessing there is more to Lion than what we currently know from perusing some of the Lion Dev forums.
Apparently they claim to know than they do, which is typical. Your observations are spot on.
Is this directed towards me? If so, I'm very familiar with how things are done and I would like to believe I am fairly knowledgable in the systemic approach taken by Apple in 10.X releases :). My comment was regarding the veracity of the reports from MacRumors and many other Apple/tech oriented sites stating a GM build is around the corner while we haven't even reached beta builds (I've posted on this quite a bit in the Lion forum).
Westacular
Apr 23, 04:40 PM
Wish Apple did something towards resolution independence and not make images bigger and bigger. :confused:
The basic fact is vector graphics aren't always appropriate. A lot of things really can only be done, or can be done much better, with pixels. For any image with a lot of detail, it's easier -- both for the artists making them, and for the computers rendering them -- to store an extremely high resolution bitmapped image, and then downscale it as necessary, than it is to make and render a vectorized version that is "truly" resolution independent.
And now Apple's realized that by targeting "Retina Display" resolution levels, this is the last increase in image sizes they'll ever reasonably need: there's no point in making images bigger beyond this point (or displays with higher-than-retina-level DPI one would need to render them) because your eyes really won't be able to tell the difference.
The basic fact is vector graphics aren't always appropriate. A lot of things really can only be done, or can be done much better, with pixels. For any image with a lot of detail, it's easier -- both for the artists making them, and for the computers rendering them -- to store an extremely high resolution bitmapped image, and then downscale it as necessary, than it is to make and render a vectorized version that is "truly" resolution independent.
And now Apple's realized that by targeting "Retina Display" resolution levels, this is the last increase in image sizes they'll ever reasonably need: there's no point in making images bigger beyond this point (or displays with higher-than-retina-level DPI one would need to render them) because your eyes really won't be able to tell the difference.
asdf542
Mar 28, 09:56 AM
The original article is just basing this off of the one sentence Apple included on the invitation. They have no source. Sounds to me like is is some good old fashioned FUD. If the iPhone 5 is just a 3GS like upgrade then there really won't be all that much to talk about which is why the main attraction will be the software. That doesn't mean there won't be any hardware updates.
R0bert
Nov 23, 04:55 PM
http://aycu26.webshots.com/image/6825/2003902622332125549_rs.jpg
linuxcooldude
Apr 21, 02:53 PM
Making the width & height those dimensions, might make the length a lot longer. I could see space requirement problems & how would placement be effected without it being rack mounted?
Don't panic
May 4, 11:42 AM
Whoaaaaaaa! Easy! This game has no time limits. I'm not in any hurry to expedite our exploration and prefer a slower, more systematic approach with the strength of the full group intact. Also, this game is a group game, not DP v. Villain. I think majority group input within reasonable timeframes ( everyone is able to play at different times of the day) and consensus is important. At least at this time.
that is exactly what we did: kept together, and very conservatively explored the room we are in and then move to another room.
we couldn't be moving any slower than we are
that is exactly what we did: kept together, and very conservatively explored the room we are in and then move to another room.
we couldn't be moving any slower than we are
0010101
Nov 25, 10:14 PM
Apple could very easily set up their 'own' cell network.. the same way Virgin Mobile, TracPhone, and several other cell phone companies have done.
Not by building towers and cell sites.. but by buying blocks of numbers from an existing large carrier and rebranding it as their own.
Of course, for voice and text usage, this gets expensive for the customer.. but for things like downloads of video and music files, they could simply tack on a 'wireless' surcharge.
For instance, a particular iTunes song could cost say.. $2 if downloaded with a computer.. but $2.50 if downloaded 'direct to iPod'.
It would work very simular to the way those 'pre-paid' cell phones work. You buy the iPod from the store, no contract to sign, no comitments. Take it home and 'activate' it for wireless access, then pay for what you download, and pay nothing if you never use the wireless features.
iPod wireless. Don't talk. Listen.
Send me a free 17" MacBook Pro and you can have that slogan, Steve!
That makes perfect sense to me. Especially since the data center Apple just bought would be the perfect rig of the increased download demand, as well as billing for such a service.
Not by building towers and cell sites.. but by buying blocks of numbers from an existing large carrier and rebranding it as their own.
Of course, for voice and text usage, this gets expensive for the customer.. but for things like downloads of video and music files, they could simply tack on a 'wireless' surcharge.
For instance, a particular iTunes song could cost say.. $2 if downloaded with a computer.. but $2.50 if downloaded 'direct to iPod'.
It would work very simular to the way those 'pre-paid' cell phones work. You buy the iPod from the store, no contract to sign, no comitments. Take it home and 'activate' it for wireless access, then pay for what you download, and pay nothing if you never use the wireless features.
iPod wireless. Don't talk. Listen.
Send me a free 17" MacBook Pro and you can have that slogan, Steve!
That makes perfect sense to me. Especially since the data center Apple just bought would be the perfect rig of the increased download demand, as well as billing for such a service.
0 comments:
Post a Comment