yagran
Jan 9, 02:13 PM
when he said were releasing three new products today, i was like 'oh thats cool, a fair few then'. then he goes 'but there all in the iphone', i ddnt know what to think, did he expect me to be happy they were only releasing 1 instead of 3 products. :(
Vogue Harper
Dec 11, 03:35 AM
Attended the launch of the McLaren MP4-12C this week here in Qatar. Wallpaper is one of my photos of the car...
gmckenzi
Oct 1, 06:20 PM
Folks,
Even though I believe .mac to be overpriced for the value, after buying a couple of iMacs for my extended family, I decided that it made sense to by a Family Pack license of .mac because the members of my extended family aren't that computer savvy, so making photocasting and sharing files as easy as possible was a priority.
All the retailers I called had no stock on .mac retail boxes and told me they were on backorder. After placing an order a few days ago via the Apple Store online, the original ship date was estimated 1-3 weeks, but my order now shows an estimated ship date of October 24th.
I can only hope that this means that the .mac service and retail boxes are going to get released in late October with new functionality. I'm not going to hold my breath, but I can't figure why something as simple as a .mac retail box with an activation code is backordered more than a month since placing my order unless something was afoot.
I'll secretly wish for Merom MBPs at the same time of course. :D
Gavin.
Even though I believe .mac to be overpriced for the value, after buying a couple of iMacs for my extended family, I decided that it made sense to by a Family Pack license of .mac because the members of my extended family aren't that computer savvy, so making photocasting and sharing files as easy as possible was a priority.
All the retailers I called had no stock on .mac retail boxes and told me they were on backorder. After placing an order a few days ago via the Apple Store online, the original ship date was estimated 1-3 weeks, but my order now shows an estimated ship date of October 24th.
I can only hope that this means that the .mac service and retail boxes are going to get released in late October with new functionality. I'm not going to hold my breath, but I can't figure why something as simple as a .mac retail box with an activation code is backordered more than a month since placing my order unless something was afoot.
I'll secretly wish for Merom MBPs at the same time of course. :D
Gavin.
Wilshire Court
Apr 9, 04:18 PM
Does XCode or interface builder include a grid object or data grid object? Are there any third-party developers who offer those objects?
thanks
thanks
more...
LeoNobilis
Mar 31, 12:23 PM
That's nice, but…
2011 calendar template word.
more...
february 2011 calendar
2011 calendar template with
more...
may 2011 calendar template.
2011 calendar template excel.
more...
2011 calendar template
2011 calendar template with
more...
2011 calendar template
2011 CALENDAR TEMPLATE APRIL
more...
2011 calendar template
2011 calendar template.
more...
2011 calendar template. july
may 2011 calendar template.
May 2011 Calendar template
idonotliketostu
Apr 1, 08:56 PM
Demand don't lie.
more...
ConceptVBS
Apr 29, 10:12 PM
Don't be daft, Samsung are the suppliers because they gave the best price.
Samsung will also be locked into supply contracts anyway, and they interfered with them, Samsung would be in a world of hurt, not just from Apple and litigation, but every other company they supply.
And don't you believe there aren't alternatives for Apples component supplies either - every company that can build something that Samsung already does has been on the phone this week to Apple.
The end result in all of this is that Samsung are putting at risk an $8bn turnover for copying a customers phone design.
Even if Samsung win any of these suits, Samsung will lose the $8bn turnover, and will hand their component rivals the same amount.
The question at the end of the day is whether the Galaxy/Tab/S/S2 are really worth $8bn a year - which they aren't.
So who loses? Samsung every time.
Heres the clue - never sue your customer.
You dont seem to know how much pull Samsung has in the components arena do you?
They are
#1 in RAM Memory
#2 in semiconductor LSI
#1 in flat panel display
#1 in rechargeable battery
#2 in mobile phones over all
#1 in NAND flash memory
$8 billion to a company with revenue generation in excess of $140 billion is chunp change. That is around 4% of total revenue.
Never sue your supplier when your supplier can turn around and gobble up other suppliers and increase the price for all OEM makers, but giving itself the cost effective goods, because it also itself is an OEM maker.
Unlike Apple, who is just a customer, Samsung is BOTH a customer AND a supplier at the same time. Either way, they win.
Quite recently, Samsung attempted to take over Sandisk, the NAND flash memory company. It wasnt successful due to some differences in price offers. That alone tells you that Samsung is willing to strangle hold the market even more than it already has. NAND flash market alone, Samsung has over 30 % of the market all to itself. For RAM memory, it close to 40%.
Apple is barking up the wrong tree.
Samsung will also be locked into supply contracts anyway, and they interfered with them, Samsung would be in a world of hurt, not just from Apple and litigation, but every other company they supply.
And don't you believe there aren't alternatives for Apples component supplies either - every company that can build something that Samsung already does has been on the phone this week to Apple.
The end result in all of this is that Samsung are putting at risk an $8bn turnover for copying a customers phone design.
Even if Samsung win any of these suits, Samsung will lose the $8bn turnover, and will hand their component rivals the same amount.
The question at the end of the day is whether the Galaxy/Tab/S/S2 are really worth $8bn a year - which they aren't.
So who loses? Samsung every time.
Heres the clue - never sue your customer.
You dont seem to know how much pull Samsung has in the components arena do you?
They are
#1 in RAM Memory
#2 in semiconductor LSI
#1 in flat panel display
#1 in rechargeable battery
#2 in mobile phones over all
#1 in NAND flash memory
$8 billion to a company with revenue generation in excess of $140 billion is chunp change. That is around 4% of total revenue.
Never sue your supplier when your supplier can turn around and gobble up other suppliers and increase the price for all OEM makers, but giving itself the cost effective goods, because it also itself is an OEM maker.
Unlike Apple, who is just a customer, Samsung is BOTH a customer AND a supplier at the same time. Either way, they win.
Quite recently, Samsung attempted to take over Sandisk, the NAND flash memory company. It wasnt successful due to some differences in price offers. That alone tells you that Samsung is willing to strangle hold the market even more than it already has. NAND flash market alone, Samsung has over 30 % of the market all to itself. For RAM memory, it close to 40%.
Apple is barking up the wrong tree.
RobertD63
Apr 18, 11:51 PM
When I try to go to the guides site it tries to connect and then fails. Anyone else getting this problem??
more...
Prom1
Mar 23, 06:53 PM
Serlet, is a pure (if you will) technical computer engineer... He get enjoyment about scientific computation, advanced algorithms, multi-threaded efficiency. The guy was nicknamed the "mad scientist" by Jobs himself, not because of his appearance, but because of he advanced studies in engineering and scientific computation.
He's like the man in the tech French community.
I can understand why he may want to leave, he's been gradually selling off his stock of Apple in recent years as well, so this makes sense.
Apple is more iOS then OS X and since Forstall heads the iOS development, there was no viable way Bertrand could have stayed on when Apple decided to merge the OS's.
I say it's a big loss for Apple. Though Craig should be a pleasant transition, and maybe a more frequent keynote speaker, since he's more understandable to the public.
Serlet will be missed. He's pretty much one of the Core brains behind OS X
I completed agree - except the part about being understandable. The ENTIRE audience got many of his jokes with Vista at the Leopard announcement and even with Snow Leopard. Just cause your ears cannot focus out the intricacies of a slight french accent doesn't mean the generic public cannot.
He's like the man in the tech French community.
I can understand why he may want to leave, he's been gradually selling off his stock of Apple in recent years as well, so this makes sense.
Apple is more iOS then OS X and since Forstall heads the iOS development, there was no viable way Bertrand could have stayed on when Apple decided to merge the OS's.
I say it's a big loss for Apple. Though Craig should be a pleasant transition, and maybe a more frequent keynote speaker, since he's more understandable to the public.
Serlet will be missed. He's pretty much one of the Core brains behind OS X
I completed agree - except the part about being understandable. The ENTIRE audience got many of his jokes with Vista at the Leopard announcement and even with Snow Leopard. Just cause your ears cannot focus out the intricacies of a slight french accent doesn't mean the generic public cannot.
MikeT
Jul 26, 07:49 PM
At this point, I couldn't really care less about Blu Ray or HD-DVD. I'd be more excited if Apple included Lightscribe or equivalent capability in their drives. Unlabeled discs are piled high on my desk.
more...
Will Cheyney
Dec 19, 04:49 PM
Another Steve 'tar!
a.jfred
Feb 9, 03:35 PM
I'm on the 450 minute plan, and I have 1770 roll over minutes. I've stuck w/the 450 plan, mostly cus almost everyone I call is on AT&T (I switched from Verizon, and saved a boatload, since it's just me on the plan). In the 4 years I've been with AT&T, I've only ever gone into my roll over minutes *twice*. They always end up expiring on me.
Text messaging & the (grandfathered unlimited) data plan are far more valuable to me.
Text messaging & the (grandfathered unlimited) data plan are far more valuable to me.
more...
mscriv
Apr 6, 12:49 PM
Worth quoting, given the back-and-forth that's gone on since this was originally posted.
Thank you sir. I'm glad you enjoyed the post and appreciate the compliment. :)
No woman was ever raped because of the kind of clothes she was wearing. Women are raped because people (almost exclusively men) choose to rape them.
While it is true that people can put themselves at a higher risk through certain activities, for a politician to blame a young girl for her own rape is absolutely disgusting. It's also nauseating and ignorant for politicians to suggest modest dress as a way to prevent rape. Such thinking is completely backward.
I agree with the notion that people should try to take steps to avoid risk, and that people can greatly reduce personal risk by making safer choices.
But this nugget of wisdom does not really touch on the substance of the issue arising in the OP, to wit - how much responsiblity does a rape victim carry? Or, to turn the question around, how much of the rape is not the rapist's fault?
Here's the thing. A woman's choice in dress or action does not mean she is to "blame" for being victimized, but we can not deny that her choice in dress or behavior can be a factor in her chances of being targeted.
As far as the politician's comments, let's not forget that multiple articles have been written about her quote and she claims to have been misquoted. Regardless of our own personal political views, we must admit that people do get misquoted. Additionally, none of us are above making a error in judgement with our words. Sometimes things don't come out as we intend them or they sound different when they come out of our mouths as opposed to how it sounded in our heads.
She responded to an email written to her by a blogger (http://www.timesofmalta.com/blogs/view/20110318/tanja-cilia/unjust-justice)with this:
Thank you for your e-mail. You may want to read the article that appeared in the New York Times. When I read the article my heart went out to the little girl and I was angry that she was brutally assaulted. I was angry that nobody protected her and that she was even allowed to leave with an older boy. In my opinion an 11 year old girl is still a child and as such shouldn't be expected to understand that certain actions or attire are not appropriate for her. I did not indicate that she was raped because she was wearing inappropriate attire. What I did say (which was not reported) was that if her parents don't protect her then all that's left is the school.
Additionally, the writer who wrote the story quoted by the OP has written two follow up stories on the matter. In the most recent one he states (http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/juice/2011/03/11_year_olds_dressed_like_pros.php#):
But, look -- no matter where Kathleen Passidomo exists on the feminist spectrum, whether she's a closet burqa-wearer or the secret owner of a lucrative chain of abortion clinics -- the fact is, Kathleen Passidomo probably doesn't think this 11-year-old deserved to be gang-raped. How do we know? Because Kathleen Passidomo is a human being, and human beings do not generally feel that justice has been served when children are tortured and brutalized. However regrettable her phrasing, what Passidomo was trying to express is an obvious if unpopular truth: that although a child has every right to safety in any environment she chooses to enter, that right will not be equally protected by all individuals in all environments.
* bold emphasis mine
It's also, by the way, fallacious to assume that only young, attractive and/or scantily-clad women are raped.
Great point. My post was intended to speak on the connection between personal responsibility and possible victimization. There is often a correlation between these variables. My comments in that post and in this one are not directed solely at this one sad case, but towards all types of victimization. If we focus on the topic of rape specifically there are a variety of types of rapes each carrying their own specific factors.
If your interested my thoughts on post 50 is that it fundamentally misses the point.
Everyone understands that we live in a world which contains certain dangers which can be mitigated by changing our behaviors.
That isn't the point of this conversation, were all talking about BLAMING the victim in this case. Just because a victim makes a bad decision does not remove their reasonable expectation of safety.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think your view is very short sighted and continues to be rooted in a morality vacuum as opposed to reality. Sure, we can all agree that the ideal is every person, everywhere, regardless of circumstances should be safe, but the fact of the matter is that we aren't.
No one is arguing that victims deserve what happens to them or that perpetrators should be any less to blame for the actions they take. However, we must learn to accept that a variety of factors are involved and that even victims can bear a measure of responsibility in putting themselves in situations where they are more likely to be victimized.
Like I said above there are a variety of types of rape. Let's take the broad category of date rape as an example. The female that chooses to dress and carry herself in a suggestive manner might be sending signals that she does not intend to send and in doing so is making herself more of a target. Add alcohol to the mix and risks go way up. Does this mean the predator who chooses to take advantage in this situation is any less culpable, of course not, but to ignore the risk factors is like burying your head in the sand. Young women need to be taught about risk factors and learn how certain choices can either increase or minimize risk.
As I have suggested, we cannot really know the answers to these questions without first interviewing (or obtaining transcripts of interviews of) rapists. Most of us on this forum are not rapists (I hope), so making broad inferences on what goes through such a monster's mind is rather pointless.
Another great point. Guess what, in my experience as a therapist I've worked with rapists and abusers directly. I've done the interviews and talked with these indivduals about "what goes through [their] mind".
Continuing the line of reasoning I started in my answer to AP_piano295, one young man who had "date raped" more than one female explained to me that at college parties he would target the girls who dressed and acted provocatively in addition to drinking heavily. In his words, "you know, the party girls" His reasoning was that these girls were easy marks and in most cases were less likely to report anything because they would rationalize the experience, if they remembered it, as "having gotten a little out of control or having drank too much" as opposed to having been victimized or raped.
You see, rape is not always about power. Sometimes it is, but at other times it's about abuse, pain, fear, rage, or just plain sexual desire/conquest.
One young male offender I worked with was in the system for sexually molesting his younger brother. He was a victim of abuse himself and his motivation for abusing his brother was jealously and anger. He felt his parents loved the younger brother more because he wasn't "damaged" and thus he acted out so his brother would be "just like him".
I agree, but there's a vast difference between trying to 'minimize risk' and the post below:
...If a man sees a woman with a low top, lots of cleavage showing, high skirts and heels, then he will view her as trash.....
Which acts as a kind of justification.
Yes and no. While based on my own personal morals/ethics I agree with you that such a line of thinking is ridiculous, I must keep in mind that there are people that do think this way. And, they will use whatever rationalization it takes to both motivate and justify their judgements or actions. In the case of a predator the kind of thinking above could be the initial thought that starts a chain of events which ultimately results in an attack of some kind.
In this specific gang rape case the victim is a child and thus there is limited capacity for personal responsibility. However, there are a variety of potential factors that ultimately contributed to what occurred: lack of parental supervision, negative peer involvement, possible previous sexually inappropriate behavior, socioeconomic conditions, etc. etc. I don't know the specifics and thus these are just generalizations, but regardless, the perpetrators are solely responsible for their actions and should be held responsible to the fullest extent of the law.
Please understand, I'm not talking about morals, ideals, and values here (what I've previously referred to as the morality vacuum). I'm talking about understanding the link between personal responsibility and potential victimization. Simply put, while our choices do not make us responsible for any victimization that may befall us, we must recognize that our actions can contribute to the chances of us being targeted for victimization.
I apologize for the long post, but I wanted to touch on the many comments that had been made and attempt to better explain my position. :)
Thank you sir. I'm glad you enjoyed the post and appreciate the compliment. :)
No woman was ever raped because of the kind of clothes she was wearing. Women are raped because people (almost exclusively men) choose to rape them.
While it is true that people can put themselves at a higher risk through certain activities, for a politician to blame a young girl for her own rape is absolutely disgusting. It's also nauseating and ignorant for politicians to suggest modest dress as a way to prevent rape. Such thinking is completely backward.
I agree with the notion that people should try to take steps to avoid risk, and that people can greatly reduce personal risk by making safer choices.
But this nugget of wisdom does not really touch on the substance of the issue arising in the OP, to wit - how much responsiblity does a rape victim carry? Or, to turn the question around, how much of the rape is not the rapist's fault?
Here's the thing. A woman's choice in dress or action does not mean she is to "blame" for being victimized, but we can not deny that her choice in dress or behavior can be a factor in her chances of being targeted.
As far as the politician's comments, let's not forget that multiple articles have been written about her quote and she claims to have been misquoted. Regardless of our own personal political views, we must admit that people do get misquoted. Additionally, none of us are above making a error in judgement with our words. Sometimes things don't come out as we intend them or they sound different when they come out of our mouths as opposed to how it sounded in our heads.
She responded to an email written to her by a blogger (http://www.timesofmalta.com/blogs/view/20110318/tanja-cilia/unjust-justice)with this:
Thank you for your e-mail. You may want to read the article that appeared in the New York Times. When I read the article my heart went out to the little girl and I was angry that she was brutally assaulted. I was angry that nobody protected her and that she was even allowed to leave with an older boy. In my opinion an 11 year old girl is still a child and as such shouldn't be expected to understand that certain actions or attire are not appropriate for her. I did not indicate that she was raped because she was wearing inappropriate attire. What I did say (which was not reported) was that if her parents don't protect her then all that's left is the school.
Additionally, the writer who wrote the story quoted by the OP has written two follow up stories on the matter. In the most recent one he states (http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/juice/2011/03/11_year_olds_dressed_like_pros.php#):
But, look -- no matter where Kathleen Passidomo exists on the feminist spectrum, whether she's a closet burqa-wearer or the secret owner of a lucrative chain of abortion clinics -- the fact is, Kathleen Passidomo probably doesn't think this 11-year-old deserved to be gang-raped. How do we know? Because Kathleen Passidomo is a human being, and human beings do not generally feel that justice has been served when children are tortured and brutalized. However regrettable her phrasing, what Passidomo was trying to express is an obvious if unpopular truth: that although a child has every right to safety in any environment she chooses to enter, that right will not be equally protected by all individuals in all environments.
* bold emphasis mine
It's also, by the way, fallacious to assume that only young, attractive and/or scantily-clad women are raped.
Great point. My post was intended to speak on the connection between personal responsibility and possible victimization. There is often a correlation between these variables. My comments in that post and in this one are not directed solely at this one sad case, but towards all types of victimization. If we focus on the topic of rape specifically there are a variety of types of rapes each carrying their own specific factors.
If your interested my thoughts on post 50 is that it fundamentally misses the point.
Everyone understands that we live in a world which contains certain dangers which can be mitigated by changing our behaviors.
That isn't the point of this conversation, were all talking about BLAMING the victim in this case. Just because a victim makes a bad decision does not remove their reasonable expectation of safety.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think your view is very short sighted and continues to be rooted in a morality vacuum as opposed to reality. Sure, we can all agree that the ideal is every person, everywhere, regardless of circumstances should be safe, but the fact of the matter is that we aren't.
No one is arguing that victims deserve what happens to them or that perpetrators should be any less to blame for the actions they take. However, we must learn to accept that a variety of factors are involved and that even victims can bear a measure of responsibility in putting themselves in situations where they are more likely to be victimized.
Like I said above there are a variety of types of rape. Let's take the broad category of date rape as an example. The female that chooses to dress and carry herself in a suggestive manner might be sending signals that she does not intend to send and in doing so is making herself more of a target. Add alcohol to the mix and risks go way up. Does this mean the predator who chooses to take advantage in this situation is any less culpable, of course not, but to ignore the risk factors is like burying your head in the sand. Young women need to be taught about risk factors and learn how certain choices can either increase or minimize risk.
As I have suggested, we cannot really know the answers to these questions without first interviewing (or obtaining transcripts of interviews of) rapists. Most of us on this forum are not rapists (I hope), so making broad inferences on what goes through such a monster's mind is rather pointless.
Another great point. Guess what, in my experience as a therapist I've worked with rapists and abusers directly. I've done the interviews and talked with these indivduals about "what goes through [their] mind".
Continuing the line of reasoning I started in my answer to AP_piano295, one young man who had "date raped" more than one female explained to me that at college parties he would target the girls who dressed and acted provocatively in addition to drinking heavily. In his words, "you know, the party girls" His reasoning was that these girls were easy marks and in most cases were less likely to report anything because they would rationalize the experience, if they remembered it, as "having gotten a little out of control or having drank too much" as opposed to having been victimized or raped.
You see, rape is not always about power. Sometimes it is, but at other times it's about abuse, pain, fear, rage, or just plain sexual desire/conquest.
One young male offender I worked with was in the system for sexually molesting his younger brother. He was a victim of abuse himself and his motivation for abusing his brother was jealously and anger. He felt his parents loved the younger brother more because he wasn't "damaged" and thus he acted out so his brother would be "just like him".
I agree, but there's a vast difference between trying to 'minimize risk' and the post below:
...If a man sees a woman with a low top, lots of cleavage showing, high skirts and heels, then he will view her as trash.....
Which acts as a kind of justification.
Yes and no. While based on my own personal morals/ethics I agree with you that such a line of thinking is ridiculous, I must keep in mind that there are people that do think this way. And, they will use whatever rationalization it takes to both motivate and justify their judgements or actions. In the case of a predator the kind of thinking above could be the initial thought that starts a chain of events which ultimately results in an attack of some kind.
In this specific gang rape case the victim is a child and thus there is limited capacity for personal responsibility. However, there are a variety of potential factors that ultimately contributed to what occurred: lack of parental supervision, negative peer involvement, possible previous sexually inappropriate behavior, socioeconomic conditions, etc. etc. I don't know the specifics and thus these are just generalizations, but regardless, the perpetrators are solely responsible for their actions and should be held responsible to the fullest extent of the law.
Please understand, I'm not talking about morals, ideals, and values here (what I've previously referred to as the morality vacuum). I'm talking about understanding the link between personal responsibility and potential victimization. Simply put, while our choices do not make us responsible for any victimization that may befall us, we must recognize that our actions can contribute to the chances of us being targeted for victimization.
I apologize for the long post, but I wanted to touch on the many comments that had been made and attempt to better explain my position. :)
peapody
Jun 28, 04:12 PM
I have a minty black I could let go of for $120 shipped US. It freezes occasionally, but is okay after you do a hard reset. Comes with agent18 eco case.
more...
bri1212
Nov 30, 07:17 PM
Lets face it, Mail on iphone blows when compared to blackberry. There is no security like blackberry has on top of the entirely inadequate mail program.
You can't search well beyond the most recent emails. on a blackberry you can search thousands of recent emails and it just works.
What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? This has nothing to do with TJ Maxx buying ipads. OH, and if you do not like the mail app on the iphone, or ipad, don't buy it, or don't use it. For me it works
You can't search well beyond the most recent emails. on a blackberry you can search thousands of recent emails and it just works.
What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? This has nothing to do with TJ Maxx buying ipads. OH, and if you do not like the mail app on the iphone, or ipad, don't buy it, or don't use it. For me it works
JGowan
Apr 13, 10:10 AM
I didn't get a 4 because I was holding out for a bigger screen. I really want to keep buying Apple products. But at this point, if the phone is delayed or the screen is staying the same size, I am going to have to start checking out some of the HTCs. My 3G is almost unusable since OS4.Enjoy! HTC looks a very capable phone. Cheers! It sounds like you need an upgrade, too. I'm on the original iPhone — but I know whatever I buy will have to do me for 2-3 years so I'm waiting on iPhone 5, no matter what.
Good, bad, right or wrong, Apple [...] it rolls out its "cloud." [...] flips the switch [...] No iPhone until late fall at earliest. Probably not until next year.Nice insight... your sources?
-------
I can understand frustration — feeling it too, just not venting — the tea leaves all pointed to new iPhones in June and then, Blammo. But we have to realize that Apple does not want to be predictable. We don't really know just exactly how the JAPAN devastation affected Apple and how it will deliver its products. That could be very well what has delayed things. If this is the case, patience is all we can give anybody at this point. They lost so much.
Good, bad, right or wrong, Apple [...] it rolls out its "cloud." [...] flips the switch [...] No iPhone until late fall at earliest. Probably not until next year.Nice insight... your sources?
-------
I can understand frustration — feeling it too, just not venting — the tea leaves all pointed to new iPhones in June and then, Blammo. But we have to realize that Apple does not want to be predictable. We don't really know just exactly how the JAPAN devastation affected Apple and how it will deliver its products. That could be very well what has delayed things. If this is the case, patience is all we can give anybody at this point. They lost so much.
more...
FFTT
Oct 21, 10:22 AM
What's the point of using Lotus Notes at all?
Any SMART company could be encrypting all their secure e-mail with PGP encryption.
I suppose these IT administrators feel better knowing they can read the content
of all your e-mails which makes their jobs more secure.
Any SMART company could be encrypting all their secure e-mail with PGP encryption.
I suppose these IT administrators feel better knowing they can read the content
of all your e-mails which makes their jobs more secure.
LightSpeed1
Mar 27, 03:54 PM
This showed us exactly how many people read what they are bidding on.
SeaFox
Nov 30, 01:35 AM
The studios want to avoid the experience of the music industry, which has yet to recover from years of illegal digital piracy. Apple must introduce a �new model� for feature film content delivery, said one studio executive involved in the talks. With the average cost of a blockbuster film approaching $100m, movie studios had more to lose than music companies, he added.
Wow, pardon me for stating the obvious here. But you can't "buy" a good movie. So there's no requirement that a studio spend $100 mil per picture. You don't have to use expensive special effects to bring in audiences. There are these things called "good writing" "engaging plot" and "talented acting" that I hear also draw people to theaters as well.
Wow, pardon me for stating the obvious here. But you can't "buy" a good movie. So there's no requirement that a studio spend $100 mil per picture. You don't have to use expensive special effects to bring in audiences. There are these things called "good writing" "engaging plot" and "talented acting" that I hear also draw people to theaters as well.
iAAPL
Apr 26, 09:56 PM
What do you guys think of the 'promo' I made for my App?
YouTube Link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXnra7X8RzQ)
I couldn't believe how easy it was to use the iMovie '11 Trailers feature. It was a little bit strict, so I did have to export it, then import it to make some minor adjustments, but still, very simple.
YouTube Link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXnra7X8RzQ)
I couldn't believe how easy it was to use the iMovie '11 Trailers feature. It was a little bit strict, so I did have to export it, then import it to make some minor adjustments, but still, very simple.
poppe
Jul 26, 07:28 PM
Man you need EyeTV2 with an EyeTV 500 Digital Broadcast reccorder. You don't need no stinkin HDMI and it plays beautiful 1080p on any 24" Apple or Dell Display from your 1.25GHz G4 without choking at all.
Ooo that sounds nice... have to look in to that...
Ooo that sounds nice... have to look in to that...
Huntn
Mar 4, 10:55 AM
My problem with it isn't that businesses and people are in it for a profit (well, in certain areas). Hey, you got to make something. It's that the only thing that matters is the highest profit possible, at all costs.
That's when it's a problem. If you look at Policemen and Firemen, they get paid, they make money, but how much would our costs go up if these entities were for-profit? My guess substantially. Doctors have always have made a profit, they'd have to, to make a living. But it's the degree of profit. Big business seems to be bad for health care as the profit margins rise.
That's when it's a problem. If you look at Policemen and Firemen, they get paid, they make money, but how much would our costs go up if these entities were for-profit? My guess substantially. Doctors have always have made a profit, they'd have to, to make a living. But it's the degree of profit. Big business seems to be bad for health care as the profit margins rise.
jeffzoom91
Sep 8, 03:48 PM
Hit command-j at the desktop and you'll get something that looks like this. Check 'Show Item Info' and you're good to go. :)
jeffzoom91: someone's familiar with TonyMac's site. *grin*
Now if I could only figure out how to keep this thing overclocked to 4.4ghz without making the clock run like it's on meth it'll be perfect!
Hey COOL!
Its nice to see a Portuguese monument in this thread. I loved visiting Pal�cio da Pena in Sintra.
I'll always remember this as the place that cracked my original iPhone 2G's screen :D
jeffzoom91: someone's familiar with TonyMac's site. *grin*
Now if I could only figure out how to keep this thing overclocked to 4.4ghz without making the clock run like it's on meth it'll be perfect!
Hey COOL!
Its nice to see a Portuguese monument in this thread. I loved visiting Pal�cio da Pena in Sintra.
I'll always remember this as the place that cracked my original iPhone 2G's screen :D
tbluhp
Apr 30, 08:51 AM
Other then those barcode scanners are there any ios apps that will scan the picture or item without barcode to tell me what the item is?
No comments:
Post a Comment