bruinsrme
Oct 6, 11:35 AM
It was a good message until they stated "Before you pick a phone, pick a network." That would be valid in an iPhone-less world. They would still be selling us phones based on a spinning CGI rendering of a phone's outer shell. "Look! A plastic candy bar! You like candy, don't you? Then you'll love our rectangular phone! Brand new features like rounded edges and three colors!"
Apple changed the game. The device should now be the focus. The service should be an afterthought in the background.
Why would anyone by something as expensive as an iPhone if the coverage is not as good As another carrier or existan at all? Yeah I want to pay $90 a month for a phone that doesn't work well in the area I spent most of my time in.
Apple changed the game. The device should now be the focus. The service should be an afterthought in the background.
Why would anyone by something as expensive as an iPhone if the coverage is not as good As another carrier or existan at all? Yeah I want to pay $90 a month for a phone that doesn't work well in the area I spent most of my time in.
Gugulino
Mar 24, 04:11 PM
Cheers! I wish Mac OS X a long and successful life! Keep going on�
Chundles
Sep 12, 04:10 AM
What will it be where you are Chundles? :D
About 2 hours prior to sparrow-fart.
3am... can't wait to spend yet another late night in front of the computer waiting for Apple to release yet another product I can't afford.
About 2 hours prior to sparrow-fart.
3am... can't wait to spend yet another late night in front of the computer waiting for Apple to release yet another product I can't afford.
Mitthrawnuruodo
Aug 2, 05:44 AM
You New York is New York, part of the USA.That's why I said local government... you have that in the US, too, you know... :rolleyes:
Saying that you are small, rich and well educated... And then you even say, you are technologically advanced?
Have you been to Singapore, Kuwait, Japan? I can name a few more places, but let's keep the list short. No I haven't been to any of those places. But what has that to do with anything...? :confused:
Again, this is not a contest, and I didn't even say we were the most technological advanced population in the world, nor the richest.
Just that we as population in general are rich and technologically advanced. Or don't you agree with that?
Saying that you are small, rich and well educated... And then you even say, you are technologically advanced?
Have you been to Singapore, Kuwait, Japan? I can name a few more places, but let's keep the list short. No I haven't been to any of those places. But what has that to do with anything...? :confused:
Again, this is not a contest, and I didn't even say we were the most technological advanced population in the world, nor the richest.
Just that we as population in general are rich and technologically advanced. Or don't you agree with that?
more...
twoodcc
Aug 15, 12:11 AM
Ooooh! great, it will be good to get the points on our team from that 465!
thanks. so far this thing is smoking. but it is using different units. i'm not sure what the ppd for the card itself is, but it's gotta be 10K ppd or more.
2 more :eek: farout man! how do you afford all that hahaha!
well only 1 465 gtx. the other was just another 9800 GT. but when i run 3 of them in the same computer, one of them overheats - to 104C! but if i take one out, then it runs fine
thanks. so far this thing is smoking. but it is using different units. i'm not sure what the ppd for the card itself is, but it's gotta be 10K ppd or more.
2 more :eek: farout man! how do you afford all that hahaha!
well only 1 465 gtx. the other was just another 9800 GT. but when i run 3 of them in the same computer, one of them overheats - to 104C! but if i take one out, then it runs fine
slffl
Oct 3, 12:23 PM
I guess the 'Year of the laptop' was for that year only.
more...
goober1223
Apr 6, 11:21 AM
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
The Mad Kiwi
Sep 25, 06:45 PM
The thing I truely love about Apple, is they look after their customers with regular updates to their software with useful features added. I can't think of another company that will add so many new features without charging users for it.
And with some luck it might be faster as well, something that Apple are great at delivering as well, better and faster.
And with some luck it might be faster as well, something that Apple are great at delivering as well, better and faster.
more...
dhc
Sep 12, 02:55 AM
iPod shuffle discontinued entirely
I can't see this happening - not without an imediate replacement (though this may be achieved by significantly reducing the cost of the Nano?)
I've been wrong before though.
I can't see this happening - not without an imediate replacement (though this may be achieved by significantly reducing the cost of the Nano?)
I've been wrong before though.
ritmomundo
Mar 18, 03:37 PM
Thats some pretty narrow minded thinking there buddy. I'm just posting about some harassment I've been experiencing because of the phone I've purchased and was wondering if other iPhone owners have experienced it, and by judging from the responses a lot have. I already feel great about my purchase, and I haven't been here long enough to know if the users are fanboys. Judging from the responses I'd say these guys seem pretty fair. Pretty judgemental and silly post in my opinion.
I couldn't exactly call myself an Apple 'fanboy' either. If HTC made a better phone I'd gladly go pick it up, but I'm simply posting my experiences.
iPhone users want to believe they've got the best thing out there, so sometimes you could misinterpret comments or even compliments as "harassment." If people were really jealous of iPhone users, what is stopping them from buying an iPhone? Its not like it costs more, or something only select VIPs are privy to. In fact, many android phones cost more than the iPhone. Most people buy based on their needs (and android phones do offer a lot of features that the iphone doesnt). Some people (including some iphone owners I know) buy just to follow the crowd.
Based on your posts in this thread, and the fact that you think people are really jealous of your iphone, yeah, I'd say you're an Apple fanboy.
I couldn't exactly call myself an Apple 'fanboy' either. If HTC made a better phone I'd gladly go pick it up, but I'm simply posting my experiences.
iPhone users want to believe they've got the best thing out there, so sometimes you could misinterpret comments or even compliments as "harassment." If people were really jealous of iPhone users, what is stopping them from buying an iPhone? Its not like it costs more, or something only select VIPs are privy to. In fact, many android phones cost more than the iPhone. Most people buy based on their needs (and android phones do offer a lot of features that the iphone doesnt). Some people (including some iphone owners I know) buy just to follow the crowd.
Based on your posts in this thread, and the fact that you think people are really jealous of your iphone, yeah, I'd say you're an Apple fanboy.
more...
door4
Sep 12, 08:30 AM
Is this new?
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/2.RSLID?mco=34809CF6&nplm=TH578LL%2FA
http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/th578lla_alt.jpg
It's recent.. The sys displays the Ipod menu on the TV for "media center" style browsing
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/2.RSLID?mco=34809CF6&nplm=TH578LL%2FA
http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/th578lla_alt.jpg
It's recent.. The sys displays the Ipod menu on the TV for "media center" style browsing
paradox00
May 3, 04:14 PM
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
I'd agree with you that there may be consideration with unlimited data plans as you might be using your phone outside the scope of what they initially envisioned when they offered you unlimited data, but those are largely a thing of the past now.
With regards to tiered pricing, what you're suggesting is that you're not entitled to the data you paid for should you choose to use some of it for tethering. If you paid for 2 GB a month, you can damn well get 2 GB a month. 2 GB a month was the consideration they offered you. It's none of your concern if the carrier sold it to you with the assumption that you'd only use 500 MB a month. They can't charge you more because your tethering makes you more likely to approach the 2 GB cap they offered you. You aren't legally obligated to pay twice for that same 2 GB of consideration if you want to use a tethering app.
Any concerns carriers have with bandwidth use can be addressed through their data plans, which they have full control of. They are not within their rights to start dictating what apps can or can't access data on your phone. Even if tethering apps generate a lot of data use, charging specifically for tethering is just a stopgap for a larger problem with their data plan pricing structure. Tethering apps are just one type of many high bandwidth apps. Are they going to start charging for all of them? Do you think that's reasonable?
Today your wireless ISP charges extra for tethering, tomorrow it will charge extra to access Netflix, and perhaps later on, your local ISP will want in on the action and start charge per device connected to your router. This segmented path of internet service is not a path I want to go down. The moment data becomes more than just data, and becomes data by application or use, is the day that consumers lose.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
I'd agree with you that there may be consideration with unlimited data plans as you might be using your phone outside the scope of what they initially envisioned when they offered you unlimited data, but those are largely a thing of the past now.
With regards to tiered pricing, what you're suggesting is that you're not entitled to the data you paid for should you choose to use some of it for tethering. If you paid for 2 GB a month, you can damn well get 2 GB a month. 2 GB a month was the consideration they offered you. It's none of your concern if the carrier sold it to you with the assumption that you'd only use 500 MB a month. They can't charge you more because your tethering makes you more likely to approach the 2 GB cap they offered you. You aren't legally obligated to pay twice for that same 2 GB of consideration if you want to use a tethering app.
Any concerns carriers have with bandwidth use can be addressed through their data plans, which they have full control of. They are not within their rights to start dictating what apps can or can't access data on your phone. Even if tethering apps generate a lot of data use, charging specifically for tethering is just a stopgap for a larger problem with their data plan pricing structure. Tethering apps are just one type of many high bandwidth apps. Are they going to start charging for all of them? Do you think that's reasonable?
Today your wireless ISP charges extra for tethering, tomorrow it will charge extra to access Netflix, and perhaps later on, your local ISP will want in on the action and start charge per device connected to your router. This segmented path of internet service is not a path I want to go down. The moment data becomes more than just data, and becomes data by application or use, is the day that consumers lose.
more...
bobber205
May 5, 12:13 PM
You must not read the news much. Or check out the robbery, rape, and murder statistics for your town. But I'll bet you're a nice friendly guy, and you live in the nice part of town, so it couldn't possibly happen to you, am I right? :rolleyes:
The better question here, is why do you feel so immune to violent crime?
Are you also confused about our obsessions with free speech? freedom of religion? or freedom of the press perhaps? Because those are protected in the Bill of Rights as well. Guns however, are unique in that they are the only material object, the only physical thing, that the Bill of Rights expressly protects ownership of. So we don't take to kindly to confused legislators who would try and take them away, or place unusual restrictions on that right.
I never said I wasn't an American. ;)
Are you open to the possibility that when the Bill of Rights was written, they wanted JUST the states to be armed and just them protected, not the everyday citizen?
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
That directly means NOT the everyday citizens to me. "Well regulated" even. Sounds like "regulations" to me. ;)
The better question here, is why do you feel so immune to violent crime?
Are you also confused about our obsessions with free speech? freedom of religion? or freedom of the press perhaps? Because those are protected in the Bill of Rights as well. Guns however, are unique in that they are the only material object, the only physical thing, that the Bill of Rights expressly protects ownership of. So we don't take to kindly to confused legislators who would try and take them away, or place unusual restrictions on that right.
I never said I wasn't an American. ;)
Are you open to the possibility that when the Bill of Rights was written, they wanted JUST the states to be armed and just them protected, not the everyday citizen?
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
That directly means NOT the everyday citizens to me. "Well regulated" even. Sounds like "regulations" to me. ;)
wpotere
Apr 13, 11:17 AM
There are already armed marshall on many flights in the US. WHen was the last time we had a shoot out in the sky? :rolleyes:
His point was remove the TSA security check and only have only armed air marshals. Bringing a gun to a bomb fight is like bringing a knife to a gun fight.
My point was that the TSA security does provide a buffer to keep terrorists from boarding a plane packed with explosives where an armed masrhal is going to be useless.
The world we once knew no longer exists, time to get used to it.
His point was remove the TSA security check and only have only armed air marshals. Bringing a gun to a bomb fight is like bringing a knife to a gun fight.
My point was that the TSA security does provide a buffer to keep terrorists from boarding a plane packed with explosives where an armed masrhal is going to be useless.
The world we once knew no longer exists, time to get used to it.
more...
SilentPanda
Apr 21, 12:03 PM
It may be that the backend has a different value stored than what displayed in your cached version. Honestly I know about as much of the system as you do. I haven't seen that behavior exhibited but I do thank you for bringing it up so that it can be looked into.
crazydreaming
Aug 7, 05:48 PM
The new educational pricing of the 23" makes it $899 now. That makes it much closer to the dell 24" price. Somewhere in the future (most likely far :p ) I want to buy a big display to go with my powerbook and use with my photography. I thought that display would be the 24" dell because the cinema was way more $$. However now, it's a much closer competition...
more...
Full of Win
Mar 24, 06:31 PM
http://futrellsoftware.com/pbeta.jpg
I hate intrude in the birthday party, but if OS X 10.0 can have indicators to which process in open and running in the background (the black triangles in the screen shot) in 2000, then why can't iOS in 2011? :rolleyes:
I hate intrude in the birthday party, but if OS X 10.0 can have indicators to which process in open and running in the background (the black triangles in the screen shot) in 2000, then why can't iOS in 2011? :rolleyes:
dmr727
Jul 27, 04:21 PM
^^^ that's what I was thinking too. This is a pretty full featured vehicle - once I start looking at all the goodies, a mid 30's price doesn't seem so out of the ballpark. I still have my prejudices against GM - but I'm really trying to give them the benefit of the doubt here.
I'm on Honda's list for their Clarity, but I'm not holding my breath that my name will be drawn anytime soon - I meet all their 'ideal candidate' guidelines, but they seem more interested in giving the first models to celebrities. So it's nice to see some other options out there for me to mull over.
I'm on Honda's list for their Clarity, but I'm not holding my breath that my name will be drawn anytime soon - I meet all their 'ideal candidate' guidelines, but they seem more interested in giving the first models to celebrities. So it's nice to see some other options out there for me to mull over.
wnurse
Aug 8, 08:32 AM
Be careful! wnurse may not have gotten a nap, and can get very cranky when people point out differences between Dell and Apple monitors. ;)
Seriously though, wnurse, lighten up and chill out! :cool:
Actually stoid, i really don't care about Dell monitors or Apple's for that matter. It's not a religious matter to me. I'm apple worst nightmare. A customer that is not passionate about their products. I would drop apple in a minute if something better comes along or something just as good with a cheaper price (hence the dell monitor). I just hate to read people making comments like "if you think apple monitors are expensive, enjoy your sucky dell monitor". It's annonying and childish. You have no idea on the quality of Dell or anyone else monitor. That was not the bad part.. that's ok, not everyone knows everything.. then when someone points out something to you, you attack without any facts. Maybe I was rough with you but I think my initial post was gentle.. I only got rough when you when into auto robot apple fanboy mode.
Apple fans are supposed to be different, think different. I thought that meant using our brains and being smarter than the average mindless pc sheep. To me, apple fans are mindless sheep just like the PC users, except they like apple products. I'm a user of apple products and unless windows dramatically improves, i intend to continue buying apple computers but it doesn't blind me to specific faults of the system. Just as I appreciate Apple strengths, I am aware of their weaknesses. Saying an Apple monitor is affordable is disingenius. This attitude is what has allowed apple to basically steal our money because they know the apple fanbase will not protest. I don't mind paying a premium for apple computers (actually, i did pay a hefty premium for my G5 computer) but paying a premium for a monitor?.. what?.. apple monitors crash less than Dells? (tongue in cheek here.. i know monitors don't crash). Maybe Apple monitors do not contract viruses as often as Dells (haha, funny). I mean, other than a nice case and the apple logo, exactly what am i paying for here?. I guess I would stop bitching if Apple made a 30 inch for graphic professionals and a 30 inch for the rest of us (although i doubt the Dell panels cost less than the apple panels so that might not be a price break anyway). It breaks my heart really that i had to resort to getting a Dell monitor (actually, at the time, Dell 20 inches were $609, apple 20 inch was over $1200). I couldn't imagine paying twice for basically the same thing but with an apple logo and a nice case.
Seriously though, wnurse, lighten up and chill out! :cool:
Actually stoid, i really don't care about Dell monitors or Apple's for that matter. It's not a religious matter to me. I'm apple worst nightmare. A customer that is not passionate about their products. I would drop apple in a minute if something better comes along or something just as good with a cheaper price (hence the dell monitor). I just hate to read people making comments like "if you think apple monitors are expensive, enjoy your sucky dell monitor". It's annonying and childish. You have no idea on the quality of Dell or anyone else monitor. That was not the bad part.. that's ok, not everyone knows everything.. then when someone points out something to you, you attack without any facts. Maybe I was rough with you but I think my initial post was gentle.. I only got rough when you when into auto robot apple fanboy mode.
Apple fans are supposed to be different, think different. I thought that meant using our brains and being smarter than the average mindless pc sheep. To me, apple fans are mindless sheep just like the PC users, except they like apple products. I'm a user of apple products and unless windows dramatically improves, i intend to continue buying apple computers but it doesn't blind me to specific faults of the system. Just as I appreciate Apple strengths, I am aware of their weaknesses. Saying an Apple monitor is affordable is disingenius. This attitude is what has allowed apple to basically steal our money because they know the apple fanbase will not protest. I don't mind paying a premium for apple computers (actually, i did pay a hefty premium for my G5 computer) but paying a premium for a monitor?.. what?.. apple monitors crash less than Dells? (tongue in cheek here.. i know monitors don't crash). Maybe Apple monitors do not contract viruses as often as Dells (haha, funny). I mean, other than a nice case and the apple logo, exactly what am i paying for here?. I guess I would stop bitching if Apple made a 30 inch for graphic professionals and a 30 inch for the rest of us (although i doubt the Dell panels cost less than the apple panels so that might not be a price break anyway). It breaks my heart really that i had to resort to getting a Dell monitor (actually, at the time, Dell 20 inches were $609, apple 20 inch was over $1200). I couldn't imagine paying twice for basically the same thing but with an apple logo and a nice case.
PeteyKohut
Jan 15, 04:05 PM
This has to be one of the worst Macworld keynotes ever....and there were a couple of stinkers. I mean....where are the new MacBook Pros? Where is a new Mini? Where is an AppleTV with an OPTICAL DRIVE! Nowhere to be seen. What do we get? A new laptop where they charge us more and give us less. I mean...when was the last time Apple shipped a computer without Firewire??? Please! Hell...they should have saved the Mac Pro announcement for today, to add SOMETHING to the awful show. Maybe then my portfolio wouldn't have taken the dive it did. Come on, Steve, is this the best you can do? Where are these new Apple/Intel devices??? My biggest disappointment is the lack of Blu-Ray though. I mean, no new iPod? No new iPhone. I mean....I don't need anything HUGE, just some storage increases. Bad....bad bad bad.
MattSepeta
Apr 27, 12:37 PM
So every woman on the pill suspends her womanhood? Every "woman" past menopause is just an empty shell?
Race and gender is pretty much non-comparable in this context.
Oh please. Explain to me why race is not a valid comparison?
Also, feel free to read a few more of the defining characteristics of a mammalian "female"...
"The mammalian female is characterized by having two copies of the X chromosome as opposed to the male which carries only one X and one smaller Y chromosome."
I have no problem with transgendered/sexual/vestite/whatever, but to claim you are actually a "woman" when you were born with a penis, have two X chromosomes, and can not, nor could ever produce an ova is ridiculous.
Just as ridiculous as my original example which you decided to brush away with no basis other than it does not fit with your views.
Race and gender is pretty much non-comparable in this context.
Oh please. Explain to me why race is not a valid comparison?
Also, feel free to read a few more of the defining characteristics of a mammalian "female"...
"The mammalian female is characterized by having two copies of the X chromosome as opposed to the male which carries only one X and one smaller Y chromosome."
I have no problem with transgendered/sexual/vestite/whatever, but to claim you are actually a "woman" when you were born with a penis, have two X chromosomes, and can not, nor could ever produce an ova is ridiculous.
Just as ridiculous as my original example which you decided to brush away with no basis other than it does not fit with your views.
Ugg
Apr 16, 08:27 AM
We probably would be speaking English and the computer might be different or it might not
So when talking about WWII, we shouldn't mention that Turing was gay? What about the fact that he was persecuted by the British government?
He was only one of many people who were involved in the war effort, but his contribution and later persecution should not be ignored.
So when talking about WWII, we shouldn't mention that Turing was gay? What about the fact that he was persecuted by the British government?
He was only one of many people who were involved in the war effort, but his contribution and later persecution should not be ignored.
Doctor Q
May 3, 07:25 PM
It's funny because nowhere in europe (well, from first hand experience in UK/ Scandanavia), do the carriers prevent tethering, nor do they charge an extra fee for it.
They have data caps (100MB, 500MB, 1GB etc) but they don't care what you use it for. And this makes sense. Thus I can work from cafes through my HTC Desire, and as long as I'm not streaming video or downloading many podcasts then the 1GB/month is more than enough for my phone and occasional tethered usage.
For once Europe seems to be ahead of the curve to the advantage of the consumer when compared to the USA.
I'd like that arrangement better. I'd rather pay for one package and use it as I like without being nickel-and-dimed.
They have data caps (100MB, 500MB, 1GB etc) but they don't care what you use it for. And this makes sense. Thus I can work from cafes through my HTC Desire, and as long as I'm not streaming video or downloading many podcasts then the 1GB/month is more than enough for my phone and occasional tethered usage.
For once Europe seems to be ahead of the curve to the advantage of the consumer when compared to the USA.
I'd like that arrangement better. I'd rather pay for one package and use it as I like without being nickel-and-dimed.
HelloKitty
Aug 8, 02:02 PM
I think the new specs and price cuts are good. I'm so tempted in buying one 23" with a new Mac Pro..
But somehow I think that Apple will come up with a new Mac Pro (new case enclosure) with new lineup of Apple Cinema Display in Spring 2007. Does anyone agree with me?..
Boy..I really don't know what to do now..
But somehow I think that Apple will come up with a new Mac Pro (new case enclosure) with new lineup of Apple Cinema Display in Spring 2007. Does anyone agree with me?..
Boy..I really don't know what to do now..
