AlphaBob
Jan 30, 04:57 PM
...some people look at their paper money (cash, stock & bonds) and start to worry that all of it could go bankrupt...so they look for a little insurance in Gold, just incase the worse happens then they still have something of real value.
I understand the theory of what you say, that gold has intrinsic value. However, the theory has never been tested in a true crisis. Trust me, if everything went bankrupt (stocks, bonds, t-bills, banks, etc.), then gold will be of little value as well. The ONLY thing of true value under those circumstances will be food and those things that can be used to barter for food (gold would have some value in that case, but so would a box of ammunition) The fact that someone paid $1000 or $2000 an ounce for gold before a crisis will mean nothing. It will be worth only as much as someone is capable of paying, and that will be very little.
The last run-up in the price of gold in the 80s was met with a rapid drop less than two years later to the $350 range, which is where gold sat for almost twenty years. While I have no idea how much more it will increase in value over the short term, the problem is that when the fall comes it will be quite rapid.
The biggest difference I see between gold and stocks is that one is based on negative gloom/doom thinking, and the other is based on positive/growth thinking. I have little to no interest in investing in gloom/doom, and history is the reason why. Periods of negative thinking tend to be short-lived.
I understand the theory of what you say, that gold has intrinsic value. However, the theory has never been tested in a true crisis. Trust me, if everything went bankrupt (stocks, bonds, t-bills, banks, etc.), then gold will be of little value as well. The ONLY thing of true value under those circumstances will be food and those things that can be used to barter for food (gold would have some value in that case, but so would a box of ammunition) The fact that someone paid $1000 or $2000 an ounce for gold before a crisis will mean nothing. It will be worth only as much as someone is capable of paying, and that will be very little.
The last run-up in the price of gold in the 80s was met with a rapid drop less than two years later to the $350 range, which is where gold sat for almost twenty years. While I have no idea how much more it will increase in value over the short term, the problem is that when the fall comes it will be quite rapid.
The biggest difference I see between gold and stocks is that one is based on negative gloom/doom thinking, and the other is based on positive/growth thinking. I have little to no interest in investing in gloom/doom, and history is the reason why. Periods of negative thinking tend to be short-lived.
Lord Appleseed
Apr 21, 11:10 PM
Several reasons. It's very fast - Mannheim is about a year, and Dusseldorf about two. You can't raise invalidity of the patent as a defense. You have to very early in the case explain your theory of non-infringement, etc. The system works very differently than the U.S.
How so? (not saying you're wrong, I'm genuinely curious)
As cmaier said, the Court system works very different in Germany and the other german speaking countries such as Austria or Switzerland.
A lawsuit takes a very long time.
Also a precedent is not working the same as in the US here.
How so? (not saying you're wrong, I'm genuinely curious)
As cmaier said, the Court system works very different in Germany and the other german speaking countries such as Austria or Switzerland.
A lawsuit takes a very long time.
Also a precedent is not working the same as in the US here.
Queso
Oct 19, 04:20 AM
Dell is DEAD. HP is DEAD. Apple RULES!
Dell is losing out in all directions, but HP? They just became the #1 worldwide PC manufacturer again after increasing sales 6%. Dell meanwhile lost 6% last quarter.
I know a loss of 6% and a gain of 6% aren't the same numbers unless you start at a common baseline, but it doesn't take a genius to work out where most of Dell's lost sales went.
Dell is losing out in all directions, but HP? They just became the #1 worldwide PC manufacturer again after increasing sales 6%. Dell meanwhile lost 6% last quarter.
I know a loss of 6% and a gain of 6% aren't the same numbers unless you start at a common baseline, but it doesn't take a genius to work out where most of Dell's lost sales went.
KnightWRX
Dec 30, 08:09 AM
without going into TMI territory.
I think we went passed that line back on page 1.
I think we went passed that line back on page 1.
more...
firestarter
May 1, 09:46 PM
The rumour I hear is he's dead and US forces have his body.
President about to make a statement.
President about to make a statement.
FloatingBones
Nov 26, 11:43 PM
this very thread and the sales thereof indicate a HUGE interest in being able to view Flash on iOS devices and no amount of BS nonsense on your part will change that fact.
The popularity of SkyFire is a wake-up call to website owners to update their media inventory from legacy Flash wrappers to HTML5.
Your implication that people would return an iOS device based on just a single feature alone is ludicrous.
Flash is either a mission-critical for people or it is not. Evidently it is not mission-critical to the owners of 120M+ iOS devices.
I've pointed out there is no equivalent of the iPod Touch from Android and therefore no reasonable alternative regardless of one's feelings about the inability to view Flash web sites.
Makes no difference. If Flash were mission-critical, they wouldn't be using an iPad.
Instead of just acknowledging that not everyone likes Steve Jobs decision to not allow Flash
We're all very clear you don't like the decision. There are plenty of Flash fanboys. If they want Flash in browsers, they shouldn't use iPhones, iPads, or iPod Touches.
The owners of 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. There are serious problems with Flash on laptop and desktop computers:
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users.
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
You can't competently address those serious concerns with Flash in a browser.
(hardly an unreasonable opinion to have and clearly shared by everyone who bought this app to be able to view those sites)
See above. There are serious fundamental problems with Flash on websites. There's also a fundamental problem with Flash for advertisers: more users are blocking their ads with click-to-flash blockers every day. Putting your content in Flash now decreases the odds that it will be seen by users.
Adobe understands all of this. They are providing tools to update sites from Flash to HTML5 (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html). Sites should do the same and get their videos updated to HTML5. Lose the Flash, and you'll be able to serve up your content to all browser users on all platforms.
I'm sure there's some reason you're unhappy with that solution. That's fine. You're welcome to be a Flash Luddite if you wish.
The popularity of SkyFire is a wake-up call to website owners to update their media inventory from legacy Flash wrappers to HTML5.
Your implication that people would return an iOS device based on just a single feature alone is ludicrous.
Flash is either a mission-critical for people or it is not. Evidently it is not mission-critical to the owners of 120M+ iOS devices.
I've pointed out there is no equivalent of the iPod Touch from Android and therefore no reasonable alternative regardless of one's feelings about the inability to view Flash web sites.
Makes no difference. If Flash were mission-critical, they wouldn't be using an iPad.
Instead of just acknowledging that not everyone likes Steve Jobs decision to not allow Flash
We're all very clear you don't like the decision. There are plenty of Flash fanboys. If they want Flash in browsers, they shouldn't use iPhones, iPads, or iPod Touches.
The owners of 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. There are serious problems with Flash on laptop and desktop computers:
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users.
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
You can't competently address those serious concerns with Flash in a browser.
(hardly an unreasonable opinion to have and clearly shared by everyone who bought this app to be able to view those sites)
See above. There are serious fundamental problems with Flash on websites. There's also a fundamental problem with Flash for advertisers: more users are blocking their ads with click-to-flash blockers every day. Putting your content in Flash now decreases the odds that it will be seen by users.
Adobe understands all of this. They are providing tools to update sites from Flash to HTML5 (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html). Sites should do the same and get their videos updated to HTML5. Lose the Flash, and you'll be able to serve up your content to all browser users on all platforms.
I'm sure there's some reason you're unhappy with that solution. That's fine. You're welcome to be a Flash Luddite if you wish.
more...
shawnce
Nov 6, 09:55 AM
No I've been waiting for VM to get their butt in gear to launch Workstation. Parallels was simply a work around, a crappy one at that, until I could get VMWare. There is simply no way in heck I'm spending $80 on a piece of software that can crash my system. And before someone tells me to use Bootcamp. Yah right. Advanced Power Management does not work right under Bootcamp even with the latest version. When Parallels starts making a product that
1. Doesn't crash\freeze my system
2. Doesn't require me to force quite the application once every couple of weeks because the progress bar when I'm suspending a session has stalled.
3. Doesn't have sharing between folders that takes a good 5 seconds to parse the files and doesn't drop a file mapping in your file explorer.
4. Doesn't have the world's crappiest networking passthrough. I can't count how many times I've gone from one network to another to another and had it get confused telling me I might have limited network connectivity. So I need to repair the connection.
Parallels sucks but until now its been the only REAL game in town. Again... weird... I don't have any of the problems you are reporting on the now 4 different systems we run parallels on (2 x MacBook Pro 1 and 2 GiB, 2 x Mac Pro 2 and 6 GiB). On all system not a single crash, system lockup or stall and Windows XP Pro fells like it runs faster then on my dedicated Dell system.
One thing you have to realize is that when Parallels fires up a VM it wires down all of the memory for that VM. So basically it is making the VM memory fully unavailable for use by Mac OS X. If your VMs are large and your working set for the applications you are running on Mac OS X is also large then you will get swapping.
1. Doesn't crash\freeze my system
2. Doesn't require me to force quite the application once every couple of weeks because the progress bar when I'm suspending a session has stalled.
3. Doesn't have sharing between folders that takes a good 5 seconds to parse the files and doesn't drop a file mapping in your file explorer.
4. Doesn't have the world's crappiest networking passthrough. I can't count how many times I've gone from one network to another to another and had it get confused telling me I might have limited network connectivity. So I need to repair the connection.
Parallels sucks but until now its been the only REAL game in town. Again... weird... I don't have any of the problems you are reporting on the now 4 different systems we run parallels on (2 x MacBook Pro 1 and 2 GiB, 2 x Mac Pro 2 and 6 GiB). On all system not a single crash, system lockup or stall and Windows XP Pro fells like it runs faster then on my dedicated Dell system.
One thing you have to realize is that when Parallels fires up a VM it wires down all of the memory for that VM. So basically it is making the VM memory fully unavailable for use by Mac OS X. If your VMs are large and your working set for the applications you are running on Mac OS X is also large then you will get swapping.
sprtnbsblplya
Sep 14, 09:02 PM
some new goodies i got today
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4128/4987561074_a20919b8fc_b.jpg
Grats! I have the 20mm f/2.8, not as nice as 1.8 but I love playing with the wide angles.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4128/4987561074_a20919b8fc_b.jpg
Grats! I have the 20mm f/2.8, not as nice as 1.8 but I love playing with the wide angles.
more...
Sodner
Apr 26, 08:32 PM
I saw and got my hands on a possible prototype IMac that had a touchable screen and a smug free screen. It also had the earlier uncoded virtual keyboard in the Lion OS. though it was only a prototype but a very realistic one for production. I believe it to be the IMac I and my father both got our hands on earlier this year.:apple:
Ah.... I cry foul. Not real at all.
Ah.... I cry foul. Not real at all.
NaMMeR
Jun 6, 06:02 AM
My brother has a android phone (:mad:) and if he buys an app from the android market and doesn't like it he can get a refund and it is deleted. I think it is in a 15 minute time gap.
However this would be a nice feature to the apple app store.
15 minutes?
45 Seconds is all it took to get the facts...
Google search: "android market return policy"
First result: http://www.google.com/mobile/android/market-policies.html
For those too lazy to click...
"Returns: You have 24 hours from the time of purchase (not download) to return any applications purchased from Android Market for a full refund of any applicable fees."
Summary: 24 Hours, not 15 minutes.
However this would be a nice feature to the apple app store.
15 minutes?
45 Seconds is all it took to get the facts...
Google search: "android market return policy"
First result: http://www.google.com/mobile/android/market-policies.html
For those too lazy to click...
"Returns: You have 24 hours from the time of purchase (not download) to return any applications purchased from Android Market for a full refund of any applicable fees."
Summary: 24 Hours, not 15 minutes.
more...
trainguy77
Oct 6, 07:59 PM
Maybe I will get my brother going under my username though. He has a 8 core.....
csimmons
Oct 19, 04:22 AM
Yes, thank you. At least someone else out there is emotionally distanced enough from the iPod and the Apple entertainment sector to be a bit objective.
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
Apple surely does it's homework, otherwise they wouldn't be as successful as they are currently. Perhaps their market research has shown them that there's no "real" market for an ultra-portable, pda, prosumer tower, or the other things that you and a few other have requested? the MP3 player market was a different animal, since the market was there already, albeit heavily segmented.
Insisting over and over again that the iPod is Apple's cash cow when the facts state differently doesn't make sense. It's clearly a large part of Apple business, but it's CORE business is still computers. The numbers clearly show that.
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
Apple surely does it's homework, otherwise they wouldn't be as successful as they are currently. Perhaps their market research has shown them that there's no "real" market for an ultra-portable, pda, prosumer tower, or the other things that you and a few other have requested? the MP3 player market was a different animal, since the market was there already, albeit heavily segmented.
Insisting over and over again that the iPod is Apple's cash cow when the facts state differently doesn't make sense. It's clearly a large part of Apple business, but it's CORE business is still computers. The numbers clearly show that.
more...
firewood
Apr 18, 12:29 AM
So for .17 GHz upgrade we are sacrificing around 30% graphic power?
The i5 can retire more instructions per clock cycle, and so could actually run real software faster at even a lower GHz clock speed than a C2D.
The i5 can retire more instructions per clock cycle, and so could actually run real software faster at even a lower GHz clock speed than a C2D.
jellomizer
Oct 23, 12:28 PM
If Vista can run soley in a virtuallized environment without breaking the EULA, but not be installed on a machine that also is using it in a virtualized way. How does this affect anyone-(Mac or PC)?
If I own a PC and I want to run Vista, why would I want to also run Vista, on the same machine, in a virtual environment?
For Mac users, why would we want to install Vista-(via BootCamp) and then also use it under virtualization?
What situation is there that you would want to run the same OS on the same box, one natively installed and one in virtualization?:confused:
Very confused about how this affects anyone?
Well it is an issue on who you want incharge. For example If I am doing some web development I may want to virtualize Vista to insture the page renders correctly in IE 7. Then switch back to my Mac Enviroment. But there are other times say I want to play a windows game I would want Windows to have full control. So I want to run it nativly.
I think Microsoft wants to make sure you are not putting the same copy of windows on different virtual devices so you can have 10 Versions of windows from the same license. (ALthough it is on the same box)
If I own a PC and I want to run Vista, why would I want to also run Vista, on the same machine, in a virtual environment?
For Mac users, why would we want to install Vista-(via BootCamp) and then also use it under virtualization?
What situation is there that you would want to run the same OS on the same box, one natively installed and one in virtualization?:confused:
Very confused about how this affects anyone?
Well it is an issue on who you want incharge. For example If I am doing some web development I may want to virtualize Vista to insture the page renders correctly in IE 7. Then switch back to my Mac Enviroment. But there are other times say I want to play a windows game I would want Windows to have full control. So I want to run it nativly.
I think Microsoft wants to make sure you are not putting the same copy of windows on different virtual devices so you can have 10 Versions of windows from the same license. (ALthough it is on the same box)
more...
AaronEdwards
Apr 28, 06:32 PM
I don't know if you know how math works, but there are no discounts for not having a subsidy. You don't factor in the cost of service, that is not relevant. You will pay that regardless of the handset device. My regular iPhone would cost that.
What about someone with multiple accounts? The additional line is $10 a month. You failed to consider all the factors in your math.
For people buying an expensive smartphone getting the 3GS is a good deal. Notice how they sell more of them then any other smartphone besides the iPhone 4, even when Android handset makers give away their product.
The plan is part of the price, getting a 3GS without a plan would net you $449.
And, you don't get an 3GS for $50 for an $10/month additional line. You need to pay for a real plan for that. And the least expensive would still net you more per month than you paid up front for the 3GS.
Not sure why you bring up Android phones? I'm discussing the stupidity of getting a 3GS instead of a 4. Or for that matter a 4 instead of a 5.
My math is correct.
What about someone with multiple accounts? The additional line is $10 a month. You failed to consider all the factors in your math.
For people buying an expensive smartphone getting the 3GS is a good deal. Notice how they sell more of them then any other smartphone besides the iPhone 4, even when Android handset makers give away their product.
The plan is part of the price, getting a 3GS without a plan would net you $449.
And, you don't get an 3GS for $50 for an $10/month additional line. You need to pay for a real plan for that. And the least expensive would still net you more per month than you paid up front for the 3GS.
Not sure why you bring up Android phones? I'm discussing the stupidity of getting a 3GS instead of a 4. Or for that matter a 4 instead of a 5.
My math is correct.
OdduWon
Jul 22, 12:42 AM
No, that's this guy (http://www.lebonze.co.uk/playground/bunnylove.htm).
more...
Jayalalitha+house+photos
selvi jayalalitha photos
image: Jayalalitha
more...
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 18, 04:38 PM
Hopefully, the websites that provide their videos through a legacy Flash wrapper will soon be providing their users with a choice.
I am elated that iOS Safari has no Flash support. I do not want the CPU suck, the identity suck, the unpredictable behavior, and the exposure to Adobe bugs. If you want those things, feel free to get an Android device.
It would be better if Apple provided its users with a choice of whether they want to enable a flash plugin or not in their devices instead of screwing us all over by making so many web sites unusable (although I'm sure the author of Skyfire is thrilled about that choice since it's making him rich beyond his wildest dreams all because Apple is run by an egomaniac).
I am elated that iOS Safari has no Flash support. I do not want the CPU suck, the identity suck, the unpredictable behavior, and the exposure to Adobe bugs. If you want those things, feel free to get an Android device.
It would be better if Apple provided its users with a choice of whether they want to enable a flash plugin or not in their devices instead of screwing us all over by making so many web sites unusable (although I'm sure the author of Skyfire is thrilled about that choice since it's making him rich beyond his wildest dreams all because Apple is run by an egomaniac).
neil1980
Apr 25, 11:29 AM
What about a screen bigger than 21.5" but less than 27"?
Skint at the moment but exactly the above.
I was looking at the 24" and held off for the update when they did the 21.5 and 27.
21.5 is too small for me really and 27 is too big.... 24 would have been the ideal size really so I held off and in the end didn't bother.
Will probably get a 24" monitor and a henge dock or maybe a mac mini instead
Skint at the moment but exactly the above.
I was looking at the 24" and held off for the update when they did the 21.5 and 27.
21.5 is too small for me really and 27 is too big.... 24 would have been the ideal size really so I held off and in the end didn't bother.
Will probably get a 24" monitor and a henge dock or maybe a mac mini instead
littleman23408
Sep 17, 04:21 PM
Blink 182 - Blink 182
First Pressing Pink/Green Swirl 1/500
Lazer Etched D side
2xLP
I want!!!!!!:)
Oooh! Nice! Well done!
Oh dear, nevermind;)
haha, that made me laugh pretty good. Cosmo's factory turned out to be better than i thought it would be. I have Green River and prefer Cosmo's Factory over it.
Thanks!
First Pressing Pink/Green Swirl 1/500
Lazer Etched D side
2xLP
I want!!!!!!:)
Oooh! Nice! Well done!
Oh dear, nevermind;)
haha, that made me laugh pretty good. Cosmo's factory turned out to be better than i thought it would be. I have Green River and prefer Cosmo's Factory over it.
Thanks!
busybee
Apr 18, 12:31 AM
Actually the reason for the battery drain is Apple updated the network baseband vocoder to the latest support UMTS/HSPA+ and better cell hand-offs in order to reduce dropped calls to an absolute minimum on GSM and similar on Verizon...
You get a trade off, worse battery life (some of it has to do with the software though, drain the BATTERY ENTIRELY, and recharge it should get to 80%-90% now... ALSO DO A SETTINGS RESET BECAUSE your phone is running on OLD settings PREVIOUS to 4.3.2) but improved performance in everything else or crappy voice calls because your iPhone can't use the latest network capacity enhancements AT&T/*insert GSM carrier here*/Apple has made or Verizon/*insert CDMA carrier here*/Apple has made.
Personally I like PERFECT VOICE QUALITY on GSM/CDMA.
When I'm @ work I charge on the computer/USB port anyways... Or in the car...
Is the reset you're referring to is in Settings - General -Reset - Reset all settings? Will it erase the sms/messages or email accounts setting?
Thx
You get a trade off, worse battery life (some of it has to do with the software though, drain the BATTERY ENTIRELY, and recharge it should get to 80%-90% now... ALSO DO A SETTINGS RESET BECAUSE your phone is running on OLD settings PREVIOUS to 4.3.2) but improved performance in everything else or crappy voice calls because your iPhone can't use the latest network capacity enhancements AT&T/*insert GSM carrier here*/Apple has made or Verizon/*insert CDMA carrier here*/Apple has made.
Personally I like PERFECT VOICE QUALITY on GSM/CDMA.
When I'm @ work I charge on the computer/USB port anyways... Or in the car...
Is the reset you're referring to is in Settings - General -Reset - Reset all settings? Will it erase the sms/messages or email accounts setting?
Thx
imacken
Nov 13, 03:33 AM
It's available in the Canadian Store.
That's weird. On the web-site it says US only - coming soon to ROW.
That's weird. On the web-site it says US only - coming soon to ROW.
Patriks7
Apr 2, 03:42 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5110/5579935080_db002ab73f_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/patriksvitek/5579935080/)
freeny
Oct 23, 09:25 AM
Let the pirating begin....
chrmjenkins
Apr 28, 04:50 PM
another confirmation from the Tipb.com editor
http://twitter.com/#!/reneritchie/status/63718878731190272
dietgate 2011 confirmed
http://twitter.com/#!/reneritchie/status/63718878731190272
dietgate 2011 confirmed
No comments:
Post a Comment