roadbloc
Feb 1, 11:45 AM
http://i.imgur.com/QA1oo.jpg
iJaz
Oct 31, 09:00 AM
How can you pre-order if the 2GB shuffle is not even on Apple's website?
Tell me that's a joke. I even put a clarification in the story this time. 2G = SECOND GENERATION
HAHAHA, actually very funny! :D
Tell me that's a joke. I even put a clarification in the story this time. 2G = SECOND GENERATION
HAHAHA, actually very funny! :D
AndrewR23
Mar 27, 06:56 PM
No ... a seller can't leave a negative for a purchaser. The worse he can do is file a non-payment complaint. You need a few of these before Ebay will do anything to you....
Lets have some fun!! Lets start a bidding war and get this sucker up to $10,000,000!!! LMAO!!!
Haha the guy took off the buy it now!
Lets have some fun!! Lets start a bidding war and get this sucker up to $10,000,000!!! LMAO!!!
Haha the guy took off the buy it now!
livingfortoday
Jun 20, 05:46 PM
I've got a 80GB HD from a PC I parted out. It's a Hitachi Deskstar, 7200rpm SATA drive. It's got a warranty on it until April of but I don't know if it's transferable.
Lemme know what you're willing to pay for it.
Lemme know what you're willing to pay for it.
NCW
Aug 1, 03:31 PM
what app are you all using to apply themes?
Patmian212
Dec 8, 05:22 AM
Hi all,
I want a 512MB stick of emac ram. If it will lower the price I can give you a 128MB stick of emac ram as part of the deal.
I want a 512MB stick of emac ram. If it will lower the price I can give you a 128MB stick of emac ram as part of the deal.
bizzle
Oct 7, 02:45 PM
http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/7130/picture1n.png
stevietheb
Mar 18, 12:43 AM
Not free.Some of the features are free--however the iCal integration is not. In fact, it costs something like $20--$5-10 and I mighta bought it.
barkomatic
Mar 2, 11:53 AM
According to data on your first chart I'd say that corporate income tax revenues need to increase dramatically. Corporate income taxes only represent 9%(191 billion) of revenue yet individual income tax represents 41% (899 billion). Combine that with all the bailouts the government handed out to the banks and some corporations and I'm guessing the net rate might be close to 0%.
I'm not saying individual taxpayers won't have to sacrifice in order to solve the problem, but I'm not sure why there are those that argue that no matter how many tax breaks corporations get or even government bailouts---that's its always the individual who has to pay.
It's a policy based on greed straight from the richest people and companies in this country.
I'm not saying individual taxpayers won't have to sacrifice in order to solve the problem, but I'm not sure why there are those that argue that no matter how many tax breaks corporations get or even government bailouts---that's its always the individual who has to pay.
It's a policy based on greed straight from the richest people and companies in this country.
canyonblue737
Mar 25, 02:04 PM
I'm just wondering when they're going to unveil it! If I'm not mistaken, March/April is usually the announcement period, with a launch in June-July.
They haven't announced anything yet, which either means that they're working on something HUGE, or it's behind schedule
Ummm, you do realize it isn't April yet? ;)
They haven't announced anything yet, which either means that they're working on something HUGE, or it's behind schedule
Ummm, you do realize it isn't April yet? ;)
nidserz
May 3, 12:11 AM
Hi everyone,
I've jailbroken my iPhone for the last 8 months, but have upgraded and been using it normally.
However, today when I turned it to vibrate, the bell with the line showed up on the screen, but on the top right hand corner next to the battery symbol, there was no indication that it was on vibrate mode. Is this normal (i may have forgotten)? Is the symbol just for jailbroken phones? I suddenly noticed this so I am not sure. I have asked around people, but gotten no help. Thanks in advance. Sorry for the stupid question.
I've jailbroken my iPhone for the last 8 months, but have upgraded and been using it normally.
However, today when I turned it to vibrate, the bell with the line showed up on the screen, but on the top right hand corner next to the battery symbol, there was no indication that it was on vibrate mode. Is this normal (i may have forgotten)? Is the symbol just for jailbroken phones? I suddenly noticed this so I am not sure. I have asked around people, but gotten no help. Thanks in advance. Sorry for the stupid question.
jrko
Apr 12, 01:57 AM
oh yeah - its gonna be in my bedroom also serving as media player for watching itunes movies and streams off the internet. Its really struggling at the moment so a graphics upgrade seemed like a good idea for the price that was on offer.
Mr.Noisy
Feb 1, 09:45 AM
February already, Here's mine........For now
Source of Original (http://tomkoole.com/includes/pages/wallpapers/dailies/100113_Streak.png)
Source of Original (http://tomkoole.com/includes/pages/wallpapers/dailies/100113_Streak.png)
karichristensen
Mar 31, 03:06 PM
Oh wow! Oh wait. I have four apps that already did all that when the iPad was first released. How about masks, brushes, stamp tools, and decent selection tools? Do they not know how far behind they are with this?
And all this debate over usefulness of the iPad. Forget it. If you are a creative professional and you have an iPad, and you haven't figured out to use it to make your work faster and better. I say you are lacking some creativity. I've been using the first iPad from day one for sketching, figure studies, portfolio reviews, etc. See for yourself on my website. It is no toy- if you know what you are doing.
And all this debate over usefulness of the iPad. Forget it. If you are a creative professional and you have an iPad, and you haven't figured out to use it to make your work faster and better. I say you are lacking some creativity. I've been using the first iPad from day one for sketching, figure studies, portfolio reviews, etc. See for yourself on my website. It is no toy- if you know what you are doing.
ethical
Aug 12, 09:24 AM
am i doing something wrong? why won't my picture show up on here?
How are you trying to do it? Two options:
1) Click the little paper-clip icon and attach the image (size restrictions though).
2) Upload it to an image hosting site, and paste the link between [t*img] and [/t*img] tags (minus the *s). Make sure the link ends in .jpg or .png or whatever extension the image has.
How are you trying to do it? Two options:
1) Click the little paper-clip icon and attach the image (size restrictions though).
2) Upload it to an image hosting site, and paste the link between [t*img] and [/t*img] tags (minus the *s). Make sure the link ends in .jpg or .png or whatever extension the image has.
goober1223
Apr 4, 04:05 PM
I'm at a loss for how GV makes any difference in this scenario. If you move to another carrier, you can port your number to that carrier and not lose the number, so how exactly does GV help?
You're aware that GV is NOT a carrier service right? All it does it route calls to the carrier(s) you are using...
But to stay with the same carrier with the same number and upgrade earlier you will pay this advertised price, which just went up. My point is that in order for you to retain the number and not go on contract, GV is one of the best options. Let me fully spell out my two options, as they are right now:
1) Pay early upgrade pricing to upgrade my 16GB iPhone 3Gs to the 32 GB iPhone 4. This would cost $549 under the new pricing arrangement.
2) Transfer my number to GV. This part costs $20 once, and AT&T will give me a new number. I suppose that this may also include an activation fee, as well, so I'll give my cost with and without it. This will definitely incur an early termination fee, however, so I will add this in regardless. Then, the price to upgrade to a new phone, while still being able to use the same number would be: $299 + $20 + $175 - $5/month * 18 months = $404 without an activation fee or + $36 = $440 with the largest activation fee.
As you can see, option two is cheaper in both cases. The only difference is that you end up with a different number to call your phone directly, but I'd prefer to route my number through GV anyway, and I could give out my direct line for those that really need it (my wife) and route everything else through GV.
Here's AT&T's support section for activation fees (http://www.wireless.att.com/answer-center/main.jsp?solutionId=52268&t=solutionTab), which actually appear to favor my theory that I would NOT be charged an activation fee. But even if I did, it would be more cheaper than early upgrade pricing if, like me, you started your contract prior to June 2010 when they changed their ETF. Their ETF section is here (http://www.wireless.att.com/answer-center/main.jsp?solutionId=KB92264&t=solutionTab).
Just for the fun of it, I'll run through the calculation for those that purchased the iPhone 4 last June to see if it makes sense for them to upgrade, assuming the prices stay the same and the iPhone comes out in September (Fall which seems to be pretty likely): $299 + $20 + $325 - $10/month * 16 months = $484.
So, either way, it doesn't seem to make much sense to pay the early upgrade prices unless you want to avoid GV.
You're aware that GV is NOT a carrier service right? All it does it route calls to the carrier(s) you are using...
But to stay with the same carrier with the same number and upgrade earlier you will pay this advertised price, which just went up. My point is that in order for you to retain the number and not go on contract, GV is one of the best options. Let me fully spell out my two options, as they are right now:
1) Pay early upgrade pricing to upgrade my 16GB iPhone 3Gs to the 32 GB iPhone 4. This would cost $549 under the new pricing arrangement.
2) Transfer my number to GV. This part costs $20 once, and AT&T will give me a new number. I suppose that this may also include an activation fee, as well, so I'll give my cost with and without it. This will definitely incur an early termination fee, however, so I will add this in regardless. Then, the price to upgrade to a new phone, while still being able to use the same number would be: $299 + $20 + $175 - $5/month * 18 months = $404 without an activation fee or + $36 = $440 with the largest activation fee.
As you can see, option two is cheaper in both cases. The only difference is that you end up with a different number to call your phone directly, but I'd prefer to route my number through GV anyway, and I could give out my direct line for those that really need it (my wife) and route everything else through GV.
Here's AT&T's support section for activation fees (http://www.wireless.att.com/answer-center/main.jsp?solutionId=52268&t=solutionTab), which actually appear to favor my theory that I would NOT be charged an activation fee. But even if I did, it would be more cheaper than early upgrade pricing if, like me, you started your contract prior to June 2010 when they changed their ETF. Their ETF section is here (http://www.wireless.att.com/answer-center/main.jsp?solutionId=KB92264&t=solutionTab).
Just for the fun of it, I'll run through the calculation for those that purchased the iPhone 4 last June to see if it makes sense for them to upgrade, assuming the prices stay the same and the iPhone comes out in September (Fall which seems to be pretty likely): $299 + $20 + $325 - $10/month * 16 months = $484.
So, either way, it doesn't seem to make much sense to pay the early upgrade prices unless you want to avoid GV.
hayesk
Mar 23, 10:01 AM
A coworker tells me Bertrand wrote Interface Builder as part of his thesis before being hired at NeXT - imagine where Mac and iOS development would be today without him!
Nameci
Apr 16, 10:28 AM
yes, it was not showing cache size, it shows none... my temps were to on the higher 30's on idle, but never cranked up as high as 58 like before I installed CHUD, that it maintains the temperature at 56 the lowest even on idle. Good luck with it and enjoy your PMG4 Dual MDD...
OutThere
Dec 24, 03:58 PM
I just found this:
http://www.powersupportusa.com/products/kf.php?category=pb
Crystal Film for Powerbook screens...it's supposed to make the screen appear brighter and clearer (not sure how that works, but whatever), and I was wondering if anyone has used it/tried it. It's intriguing to me, but I don't want to waste $35 on a gimmick.
Edit:
:Sigh: after 3 years here, I still forget to search. I did like 5 google searches for reviews. :o
http://www.powersupportusa.com/products/kf.php?category=pb
Crystal Film for Powerbook screens...it's supposed to make the screen appear brighter and clearer (not sure how that works, but whatever), and I was wondering if anyone has used it/tried it. It's intriguing to me, but I don't want to waste $35 on a gimmick.
Edit:
:Sigh: after 3 years here, I still forget to search. I did like 5 google searches for reviews. :o
Kelzorz
May 6, 05:45 PM
How do i put button detection in an if statement, here is my code where IBActionA is a button...
- (IBAction)A: (id)sender {
- (IBAction)A: (id)sender {
Ramsteiner
May 6, 09:13 PM
My prayers are answered. This was a long time coming - works as advertised. Second most favorite app after LockInfo.
Prof.
Apr 1, 05:04 PM
What Twitter app are you using, sir?
It's the official twitter for mac app. It can be downloaded for free in the Mac App Store. (http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/twitter/id409789998?mt=12)
It's the official twitter for mac app. It can be downloaded for free in the Mac App Store. (http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/twitter/id409789998?mt=12)
samiwas
Mar 3, 04:37 PM
I know you WANT to give your solution... you're so close... c'mon... say it: "I think we should drastically increase taxation on wealthy Americans to fix this problem."
What I want to know is how exactly you expect businesses to grow jobs, expand operations, etc. in this type of situation. It seems fairly clear based on the facts that A) this wouldn't be near enough money to solve the problem B)that the end result in the long run will almost certainly be less growth, fewer jobs, and less government 'revenue' than before. C) that you'd kill what chance we have left at regaining a strong economy as large businesses would do whatever they could to get their assets in locations of lower tax burden.
Can you point me to a time in history where lower taxes led to more growth? Can you point me to the time when high taxes meant things were not progressing? As I seem to recall from the history classes I mostly failed, the mid-20th century was quite a boom for this country, right? Since I'm not so good at history, I looked up tax rates.
The last time tax rates were as low as they are now started in about 1925. What followed 5 years later? The Great Depression and massive unemployment. Shortly after 1930, tax rates skyrocketed. You know what else happened around that time? Massive growth and employment. Then, since 1981 when taxes started getting much lower, the economy slowly started to go downhill. Many people were still making gobs of money, but the middle class started to see things going away. There must be some huge factor I'm missing. Maybe you can fill me, and everyone else here, in.
And as for me wanting to "drastically increase taxes on wealthy Americans", you can stop right there. I want to get rid of the TAX BREAKS, the TAX CUTS...for everyone, and especially for excessively wealthy people.
'turned into' a a profit machine? As opposed to... when?
Providing health services and goods has always been a for-profit enterprise. This is exactly what has lead to the amazing growth in medical technology in the past 100 years.
While the advances in medical technology are great, let's not for one second think that the massive profit machine known as the health care industry is not as corrupt as can be. You take a service that by it's very definition is essential for life, and turn it into a profit operation...nothing good can come from that. That's why a Tylenol in a hospital costs $14 and you go in for a bad cough and walk out with a $21,000 bill. Ludicrous.
I tend to agree. Cut programs until our expenses match our current 'revenues.' When the two are equal or are in the black, let's immediately pass an balanged-budget amendment so this problem never happens again.
I think we definitely need to include in the cuts the health care and pensions for all senators, congressmen, house members, and any other "lawmaker" types.
For the record, they are paying their fair share. The top 50% of wage earners pay over 95% of the income tax.
And as pointed out above, they also make and have the vast majority of the money in this country.
If 90 people make $1,000 each, and 10 people make $50,000 each and they were evenly taxed on income, you'd still have 10% of the people paying 84.7% of the taxes. Is that unfair? No, it's not. Not in the slightest. And once you take out even a basic cost-of-living exemption, which should be the start of any tax system, that number would increase dramatically. Like, just over 95% maybe?
In this free market, you have the choice to make more money. And if you want to make metric ass-tons of money, you can pay the taxes that go along with that. Free market capitalism.
I agree. I would start with a MASSIVE simplification of the tax code, and virtual elimination of all government subsidies over the next 5-10 years.
Probably the only thing I agree with you on. Individual tax returns should require a post card and nothing else. Corporate taxes, well...I don't know enough about them to know how to simplify them, but I'm sure they are ridiculously complex.
I tend to agree. Reduce the budget by half, let them become more efficient and more reliant on technology. Take a more defensive posture around the globe and avoid entangling alliances, etc. abroad. That being said, I believe its important for us to maintain a strong national DEFENSE. We do have enemies... and defense is one of the primary constitutional roles of the federal government.
OK, two things.
If the top 50% are declaring earnings equivalent to 88% of the total, it seems entirely proportionate that they should be paying 95% of the total tax. Their true earnings are probably vastly more in percentage terms, anyway.
Yep.
What I want to know is how exactly you expect businesses to grow jobs, expand operations, etc. in this type of situation. It seems fairly clear based on the facts that A) this wouldn't be near enough money to solve the problem B)that the end result in the long run will almost certainly be less growth, fewer jobs, and less government 'revenue' than before. C) that you'd kill what chance we have left at regaining a strong economy as large businesses would do whatever they could to get their assets in locations of lower tax burden.
Can you point me to a time in history where lower taxes led to more growth? Can you point me to the time when high taxes meant things were not progressing? As I seem to recall from the history classes I mostly failed, the mid-20th century was quite a boom for this country, right? Since I'm not so good at history, I looked up tax rates.
The last time tax rates were as low as they are now started in about 1925. What followed 5 years later? The Great Depression and massive unemployment. Shortly after 1930, tax rates skyrocketed. You know what else happened around that time? Massive growth and employment. Then, since 1981 when taxes started getting much lower, the economy slowly started to go downhill. Many people were still making gobs of money, but the middle class started to see things going away. There must be some huge factor I'm missing. Maybe you can fill me, and everyone else here, in.
And as for me wanting to "drastically increase taxes on wealthy Americans", you can stop right there. I want to get rid of the TAX BREAKS, the TAX CUTS...for everyone, and especially for excessively wealthy people.
'turned into' a a profit machine? As opposed to... when?
Providing health services and goods has always been a for-profit enterprise. This is exactly what has lead to the amazing growth in medical technology in the past 100 years.
While the advances in medical technology are great, let's not for one second think that the massive profit machine known as the health care industry is not as corrupt as can be. You take a service that by it's very definition is essential for life, and turn it into a profit operation...nothing good can come from that. That's why a Tylenol in a hospital costs $14 and you go in for a bad cough and walk out with a $21,000 bill. Ludicrous.
I tend to agree. Cut programs until our expenses match our current 'revenues.' When the two are equal or are in the black, let's immediately pass an balanged-budget amendment so this problem never happens again.
I think we definitely need to include in the cuts the health care and pensions for all senators, congressmen, house members, and any other "lawmaker" types.
For the record, they are paying their fair share. The top 50% of wage earners pay over 95% of the income tax.
And as pointed out above, they also make and have the vast majority of the money in this country.
If 90 people make $1,000 each, and 10 people make $50,000 each and they were evenly taxed on income, you'd still have 10% of the people paying 84.7% of the taxes. Is that unfair? No, it's not. Not in the slightest. And once you take out even a basic cost-of-living exemption, which should be the start of any tax system, that number would increase dramatically. Like, just over 95% maybe?
In this free market, you have the choice to make more money. And if you want to make metric ass-tons of money, you can pay the taxes that go along with that. Free market capitalism.
I agree. I would start with a MASSIVE simplification of the tax code, and virtual elimination of all government subsidies over the next 5-10 years.
Probably the only thing I agree with you on. Individual tax returns should require a post card and nothing else. Corporate taxes, well...I don't know enough about them to know how to simplify them, but I'm sure they are ridiculously complex.
I tend to agree. Reduce the budget by half, let them become more efficient and more reliant on technology. Take a more defensive posture around the globe and avoid entangling alliances, etc. abroad. That being said, I believe its important for us to maintain a strong national DEFENSE. We do have enemies... and defense is one of the primary constitutional roles of the federal government.
OK, two things.
If the top 50% are declaring earnings equivalent to 88% of the total, it seems entirely proportionate that they should be paying 95% of the total tax. Their true earnings are probably vastly more in percentage terms, anyway.
Yep.
rprebel
Sep 1, 12:07 AM
Nothing much. A little geektool and a modified bowtie theme. Original on the right.
No comments:
Post a Comment