asphalt-proof
Apr 21, 07:50 AM
I disagree.
"The ONLY thing that matters in these kind of numbers is whether or not you can run an application on it." ---If it cant make a call its a different device PERIOD.
Those are all phones. By your logic, you prove my point. By your logic there are 10 different iOS devices , are you saying that THEY -"are not the same thing or related in any relative way" ?
PS : I love my iPhone but it is not my leader. Apple is cool but I don't jump up and down for any and every Pro- Apple story I can drink down. This chart is BS...IMHO
You are creating an artificial distinction between the products. It doesn't matter to a potential developer because they know if they release to iOS, it's going to go on ALL iOS products but maybe not all ALL android products. Certainly not to a tablet. This is what the article is focusing on. You are very narrowly looking at one data point. And even the construction of your argument for the interpretation of that data point is flaw when you decide to compare one manufacture of iOS to all manufacturer's of Android. If HTC can only sell only a few units of an Android phone, then they may drop the platform and look somewhere else for a better os. (Not saying HTC is in that boat. I know they sell a bunch... just a thought experiment). to only one feature.
It's NOT about Android phone vs. iphone and not iphone products. It's about platform vs. platform.
"The ONLY thing that matters in these kind of numbers is whether or not you can run an application on it." ---If it cant make a call its a different device PERIOD.
Those are all phones. By your logic, you prove my point. By your logic there are 10 different iOS devices , are you saying that THEY -"are not the same thing or related in any relative way" ?
PS : I love my iPhone but it is not my leader. Apple is cool but I don't jump up and down for any and every Pro- Apple story I can drink down. This chart is BS...IMHO
You are creating an artificial distinction between the products. It doesn't matter to a potential developer because they know if they release to iOS, it's going to go on ALL iOS products but maybe not all ALL android products. Certainly not to a tablet. This is what the article is focusing on. You are very narrowly looking at one data point. And even the construction of your argument for the interpretation of that data point is flaw when you decide to compare one manufacture of iOS to all manufacturer's of Android. If HTC can only sell only a few units of an Android phone, then they may drop the platform and look somewhere else for a better os. (Not saying HTC is in that boat. I know they sell a bunch... just a thought experiment). to only one feature.
It's NOT about Android phone vs. iphone and not iphone products. It's about platform vs. platform.
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.
WillEH
Apr 28, 07:46 PM
Why? The law requires an rights owner to defend its IP or risk losing it. These suits are just business, no hard feelings, as seen by Apple's monster-sized component contract w/ Samsung. Any yes, business is about making money.
I suppose you're right. :eek:
I suppose you're right. :eek:
sandkicks
Apr 26, 01:51 AM
yes to both. I will post post a pic now.
http://file:///Users/Sandkicks/Pictures/iPhoto%20Library/Masters/2011/04/25/20110425-235115/IMG_0353.JPG
http://file:///Users/Sandkicks/Pictures/iPhoto%20Library/Masters/2011/04/25/20110425-235115/IMG_0353.JPG
more...
Frozonecold
Jun 18, 01:56 PM
Sorry about that, they will not work in a Mac Pro.
HikariYuki
Apr 22, 01:09 AM
Mines for this month.
https://img.skitch.com/20110422-p9k4qa8u2xg6rkubfyu3cxwt81.preview.jpg (https://skitch.com/mtlam/r51fn/fullscreen)Click for large view (https://skitch.com/mtlam/r51fn/fullscreen) - Uploaded with Skitch (http://skitch.com)
https://img.skitch.com/20110422-p9k4qa8u2xg6rkubfyu3cxwt81.preview.jpg (https://skitch.com/mtlam/r51fn/fullscreen)Click for large view (https://skitch.com/mtlam/r51fn/fullscreen) - Uploaded with Skitch (http://skitch.com)
more...
Truffy
Nov 22, 03:00 PM
+ 1. The guy who sent this email undoubtedly sniffs his own farts.
HEY! WHAT'S WRONG WITH SNIFF...:o
HEY! WHAT'S WRONG WITH SNIFF...:o
Blue Velvet
Mar 2, 11:49 AM
Social Security is fully funded to 2037, will run a surplus at that point and is separate from the budget. The ACA is fully designed to lower health care costs and lower the deficit, something which the right consistently ignores.
If the US were screwed, you wouldn't have countries queuing up to lend you money. Stop cutting taxes on the wealthy and pursuing unfunded wars for a start.
If the US were screwed, you wouldn't have countries queuing up to lend you money. Stop cutting taxes on the wealthy and pursuing unfunded wars for a start.
more...
dhc
Jan 11, 05:33 PM
5pm, I believe.
Crager724
Dec 16, 03:47 PM
Here is my first attempt at making an avatar with Gimp.
more...
techfreak85
Jan 2, 12:23 AM
Alright thanks a ton guys will fold for a long long time.
And you're set up to fold for team 3446 right?
And you're set up to fold for team 3446 right?
risenshine85
Aug 17, 09:10 AM
Bit of a rearrange.
can you post the wallpaper, theme, icons info. I really like your setup
can you post the wallpaper, theme, icons info. I really like your setup
more...
cookieme
Jan 11, 01:14 PM
Hi just read this on LaCie's website...
LaCie Unveils First Bus-Powered FireWire Speakers Design By Neil Poulton
LaCie firewire speakers (http://www.lacie.com/company/news/news.htm?id=10308)
They have also announced other new products. Anyone seen these speakers at MWSF? What do they sound like? I'm looking for a pair for my new MPB C2D. ;)
LaCie Unveils First Bus-Powered FireWire Speakers Design By Neil Poulton
LaCie firewire speakers (http://www.lacie.com/company/news/news.htm?id=10308)
They have also announced other new products. Anyone seen these speakers at MWSF? What do they sound like? I'm looking for a pair for my new MPB C2D. ;)
BruiserBear
Apr 28, 08:12 AM
I think Apple waited too long to bring the iPhone to Verizon. By the time they did many diehard Verizon customers had just bought Android alternatives. I think Apple got a little too sucked in by the exclusive money from AT&T, but in the end it might end up hurting them.
Now Apple is going to have to fight to get those customers in the coming year or two, all the while Android is getting better and better.
I'm an iPhone 4 customer on AT&T, but I'm still able to see the big picture. They should have had the iPhone on Verizon a year earlier.
Now Apple is going to have to fight to get those customers in the coming year or two, all the while Android is getting better and better.
I'm an iPhone 4 customer on AT&T, but I'm still able to see the big picture. They should have had the iPhone on Verizon a year earlier.
more...
sikuss
Apr 5, 06:07 PM
Could I get a link to this picture please?
The front end issues will likely continue for most of the season, it seems to be a trait with the bike, not a setup problem.
Sure (http://image.motorcyclistonline.com/f/30803255/122_1103_01_o+valentino_rossi_ducati_marlboro_team_qatar_motogp_test+.JPG.jpg)
Just puzzles me since they had Stoner complaining about it last year too...
The front end issues will likely continue for most of the season, it seems to be a trait with the bike, not a setup problem.
Sure (http://image.motorcyclistonline.com/f/30803255/122_1103_01_o+valentino_rossi_ducati_marlboro_team_qatar_motogp_test+.JPG.jpg)
Just puzzles me since they had Stoner complaining about it last year too...
Embed
Jan 9, 04:54 PM
*spoilers within*
Keynote now up for your consumption:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/guide/appleevents/
DAMN u got here before me
Keynote now up for your consumption:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/guide/appleevents/
DAMN u got here before me
more...
Doctor Q
Apr 28, 07:46 PM
One of the patents:
Mobile telephone capable of displaying world time and method for controlling the same
An apparatus and method for calculating and displaying local time for a plurality of cities in the world. The apparatus includes a memory for storing Greenwich mean time (GMT) information for each of the plurality of cities. The apparatus sets a reference time and counts the time that elapses from when the reference time is set. The apparatus calculates a local time of a city selected by a user, which is based on a difference between the GMT of the selected city and the GMT of a present location of the apparatus, the reference time and the counted elapsed time. The reference time may be either a time set by the user or a system time acquired from a signal generated from a remote system.
How can companies get patents for such trivial algorithms???
Mobile telephone capable of displaying world time and method for controlling the same
An apparatus and method for calculating and displaying local time for a plurality of cities in the world. The apparatus includes a memory for storing Greenwich mean time (GMT) information for each of the plurality of cities. The apparatus sets a reference time and counts the time that elapses from when the reference time is set. The apparatus calculates a local time of a city selected by a user, which is based on a difference between the GMT of the selected city and the GMT of a present location of the apparatus, the reference time and the counted elapsed time. The reference time may be either a time set by the user or a system time acquired from a signal generated from a remote system.
How can companies get patents for such trivial algorithms???
MacBytes
Jun 24, 04:40 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)
Category: Apple Hardware
Link: iPad: Apple reaches 3 Million (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20100624174055)
Description:: none
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug
Category: Apple Hardware
Link: iPad: Apple reaches 3 Million (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20100624174055)
Description:: none
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug
eva01
Sep 24, 04:03 PM
if he is 18 you can't do **** about it. You can force him to pay rent thou ^_^
and if the girl isn't 18 yet, then it is rape
and if the girl isn't 18 yet, then it is rape
kiljoy616
Mar 31, 10:05 AM
Impressive. I for one think they have something there. Wonder how much farther they will take this. :rolleyes:
hookem12387
Jun 23, 01:05 PM
Payment received. Will mail out today. Thank you. Oblivion Sold
PWC
Apr 30, 09:05 AM
Not that I know of for sure, but the concept seems VERY familiar to me. As if I have read / seen it somewhere. Good luck
Sun Baked
Feb 14, 01:42 PM
I wonder which new moderator is going to clean up the mess mymemmory just made in here...
A post likely to turn this into another mymemmory bashing thread -- and it's not even a thread about women or body parts. :(
A post likely to turn this into another mymemmory bashing thread -- and it's not even a thread about women or body parts. :(
Necross
Apr 23, 05:18 PM
Hiya folks
I have a 1tb usb drive pluged into my airport extreme. I can see the drive just fine, it's mounted on my desktop right now. But I want to get Time Machine to use it for backups... But when I try to set up time machine, it doesn't list the network drive in the list. So is there a way I can get it to work? Or will I just have to plug the drive into my Mac instead (which I don't wanna do)?
I have a 1tb usb drive pluged into my airport extreme. I can see the drive just fine, it's mounted on my desktop right now. But I want to get Time Machine to use it for backups... But when I try to set up time machine, it doesn't list the network drive in the list. So is there a way I can get it to work? Or will I just have to plug the drive into my Mac instead (which I don't wanna do)?
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét