- Love, relationships and more
- Broken Trust Quotes “ / Wilt thou trust him,
- quotes on trust in a
- Ex Boyfriend Quotes To
- building relationships.
- This is what relationships
- But trust me on one thing.
- Relationship Quotes for Your
- Broken Trust Quotes “ / Wilt thou trust him,
- to build up trust, and it only takes suspicion, not. Hurt Quotes proof, to destroy it. Get The Best Trust Quotes. Short Trust Quotes
- Quotes Trust Integrity
- love these Trust,groups
- funny quotes about love and
- Trust – This is a one-time
- Sex And The City Quotes On Relationships. quotes on understanding. quotes on understanding. Sun Baked. Feb 14, 07:40 PM
- betraying the trust.
- quotes on trust images
- quotes on trust in a
- God Quotes, Trust Quotes,
zwida
Oct 5, 09:11 PM
You can get this already (along with Tab dragging and dropping) in Safari by getting SAFT:
http://www.pimpmysafari.com
Other free plugins might also have it, but Saft is so good I never bothered to check anything else.
SAFT is a rockstar. I can't imagine using Safari without it. Frankly, I'd be happy if Apple integrates even half of what SAFT provides.
http://www.pimpmysafari.com
Other free plugins might also have it, but Saft is so good I never bothered to check anything else.
SAFT is a rockstar. I can't imagine using Safari without it. Frankly, I'd be happy if Apple integrates even half of what SAFT provides.
Kwill
Apr 28, 08:06 PM
World War Sue.
Apple has something like 200+ patents (http://www.mad4mobilephones.com/the-21-most-important-iphone-patents/562/) for the iPhone. This could get bloody when Apple responds with additional counter suits. I would pity those called for jury duty to make sense of the technical minutia. The breadth of the patent portfolios will be too detailed to battle in court. They are presented primarily as a way of saying "back off!" Ultimately, cross licensing agreements are forged.
Apple has something like 200+ patents (http://www.mad4mobilephones.com/the-21-most-important-iphone-patents/562/) for the iPhone. This could get bloody when Apple responds with additional counter suits. I would pity those called for jury duty to make sense of the technical minutia. The breadth of the patent portfolios will be too detailed to battle in court. They are presented primarily as a way of saying "back off!" Ultimately, cross licensing agreements are forged.
kugino
Nov 29, 08:59 PM
Okay, I think $100k is a *little* excessive... and could encourage those who aren't as passionate about children to pursue a teaching job just for the money.
I think starting at $50-60k would be more than reasonable... I mean for only working 9 months out of the year plus receiving the benefits that teachers usually do... that'll sweeten the deal a lot. Especially in my field, physics, the way things are now I could either start as a teacher for $40k if I'm very lucky, or $50k+ in the industry. I'm just out of college and as poor as a rat... what do you think I would do? I'm not Mr. Materialistic or anything, but I have school and an apartment to pay for.
I think the real monetary incentive in teaching should be the bottom right corner of the matrix... those who have higher degrees and have worked for many years. It'll encourage people to be into teaching for the long-haul. However, that might introduce problems with ever-changing research on effective teaching styles, so maybe that isn't just a great idea.
Just some thoughts.
-Clive
you obviously haven't taught before, have you? for "only" working 9 months...the fact is, if teaching were a year-round gig, no one would do it. and i don't know what "benefits" you're talking about. someone once figured out that if you count all the out-of-school hours that teachers spend on grading, prepping, etc., many teachers are actually paid less than minimum wage.
i've always felt that not only are good teachers worth $100grand/year, but that kind of salary would make teaching competitive so that bright, enthusiastic, and promising individuals would have a reason to pursue teaching and not be turned off by the poor wages. yes, there will be some who pursue it strictly for the money, but if the wages are high enough, there will be increased competition for jobs and the good teachers will more often than not get the jobs. bad teachers or those who don't care about the kids are easy to identify.
my 2 cents...sorry for the OT rant.
I think starting at $50-60k would be more than reasonable... I mean for only working 9 months out of the year plus receiving the benefits that teachers usually do... that'll sweeten the deal a lot. Especially in my field, physics, the way things are now I could either start as a teacher for $40k if I'm very lucky, or $50k+ in the industry. I'm just out of college and as poor as a rat... what do you think I would do? I'm not Mr. Materialistic or anything, but I have school and an apartment to pay for.
I think the real monetary incentive in teaching should be the bottom right corner of the matrix... those who have higher degrees and have worked for many years. It'll encourage people to be into teaching for the long-haul. However, that might introduce problems with ever-changing research on effective teaching styles, so maybe that isn't just a great idea.
Just some thoughts.
-Clive
you obviously haven't taught before, have you? for "only" working 9 months...the fact is, if teaching were a year-round gig, no one would do it. and i don't know what "benefits" you're talking about. someone once figured out that if you count all the out-of-school hours that teachers spend on grading, prepping, etc., many teachers are actually paid less than minimum wage.
i've always felt that not only are good teachers worth $100grand/year, but that kind of salary would make teaching competitive so that bright, enthusiastic, and promising individuals would have a reason to pursue teaching and not be turned off by the poor wages. yes, there will be some who pursue it strictly for the money, but if the wages are high enough, there will be increased competition for jobs and the good teachers will more often than not get the jobs. bad teachers or those who don't care about the kids are easy to identify.
my 2 cents...sorry for the OT rant.
nicname
Apr 19, 07:56 AM
ok so my new 2010 MBP has been extremely slow and I was instructed to go into my disk utilities and to repair disk permissions and to verify them. I did so.
I was also instructed to take this pics here and hopefully someone can help me speed up my mac.
Would i need to use Onyx. file:///Users/Nick/Desktop/Screen%20shot%202011-04-19%20at%208.51.46%20AM.png
I was also instructed to take this pics here and hopefully someone can help me speed up my mac.
Would i need to use Onyx. file:///Users/Nick/Desktop/Screen%20shot%202011-04-19%20at%208.51.46%20AM.png
more...
FX4568
Apr 4, 09:27 PM
I dont even know why people are complaining about the AT&T mobile merge.
Seriously, VZ stocks actually had a higher yield because of the merging than ATT.
The deal will pass, you know why? It actually somehow benefits more Verizon rather than ATT. Also, ATT is a private company, they have all the right to acquire another company.
Now if ATT acquired VZ (hahah which might be never) that would cause a monopoly but seriously monopolies arent that bad.
Everyone that lives in the "free world" is so entrenched in the idea that monopolies have the right to blow prices out of the water but they cant... and it is a fact.
Anyways, ATT will spend more money trying to merge differences between staff and other stuff, deciding how to merge the different cultures (since ones a German the other is American), and spending up to 8 billion dollars just in switching to the Tmobile towers. (good luck with that)
Verizon could equal the size of AT Tmobile if 1/8 people switched out from the merge. Which probably 1/16 will. I mean, why wouldnt they?
Only reason why ATT has managed to live for the past 3 years is because of the iphone.
In conclusion: ATT sucked, sucks, and will suck.
Seriously, VZ stocks actually had a higher yield because of the merging than ATT.
The deal will pass, you know why? It actually somehow benefits more Verizon rather than ATT. Also, ATT is a private company, they have all the right to acquire another company.
Now if ATT acquired VZ (hahah which might be never) that would cause a monopoly but seriously monopolies arent that bad.
Everyone that lives in the "free world" is so entrenched in the idea that monopolies have the right to blow prices out of the water but they cant... and it is a fact.
Anyways, ATT will spend more money trying to merge differences between staff and other stuff, deciding how to merge the different cultures (since ones a German the other is American), and spending up to 8 billion dollars just in switching to the Tmobile towers. (good luck with that)
Verizon could equal the size of AT Tmobile if 1/8 people switched out from the merge. Which probably 1/16 will. I mean, why wouldnt they?
Only reason why ATT has managed to live for the past 3 years is because of the iphone.
In conclusion: ATT sucked, sucks, and will suck.
TMay
Nov 11, 10:33 AM
Given the length of the original message and the terseness of Jobs' reply, it suggests that either he doesn't give a crap, or the iPad's virtual keyboard is a bit pants to type on.
All of his email responses are terse. Verbose is a bad thing if you are an executive, and frankly, people should strive for terse in business anyway.
Reminds me of an anecdote that I read of Tim Cook. In a meeting of Apple managers, he explained that there was a problem in one of the Chinese assemblies houses. A few minutes later, he looked at the engineer/manager and asked "Why are you still here?".
All of his email responses are terse. Verbose is a bad thing if you are an executive, and frankly, people should strive for terse in business anyway.
Reminds me of an anecdote that I read of Tim Cook. In a meeting of Apple managers, he explained that there was a problem in one of the Chinese assemblies houses. A few minutes later, he looked at the engineer/manager and asked "Why are you still here?".
more...
cube
Aug 21, 04:02 PM
I am thinking Cort G-260 OPN
menziep
Mar 23, 02:26 PM
edit
more...
ten-oak-druid
Apr 21, 09:36 AM
Amazon wil release a kindle phone around the time android is being abandoned by people tired of all the malware and viruses on their phones.
iOS and Kindle OS will have the top market shares.
iOS and Kindle OS will have the top market shares.
stephenli
Nov 20, 12:11 PM
okok, please add multi-language capability as well as "ink" for text input.
more...
The.316
Dec 1, 08:59 AM
Not too much going on there BTM :p
Mr Snubbles
Apr 25, 11:06 AM
Ummmm.. what if I bought a iPhone 4 at launch. Recently broke it... and now want the white one?
more...
Gavroche62
Jan 11, 01:37 AM
It does raise the bar for other manufacturers, but this isn't the portable media player market. In business you either have to be the first, or the cheapest (neither applies to iPhone), simply being the best doesn't cut it. Apple and its devotees have argued for ages that MacOS is so superior to Windows it's ridiculous, but they've never managed to even put a dent in Microsoft's market share.
With the iPod Apple was able to hog 60% of the market before the competition even woke up, but here they're up against Nokia, SonyEricsson, Motorola, Siemens, Blackberry, Palm/Treo, HP and a bunch of other giants with well established distribution channels and deals with every carrier on earth. I hope for Apple's sake they've patented the crap out of this thing because the first SonyEricsson iPhone killer is probably being designed as we speak.
You're right this isn't the portable media market - those devices are primitive compared to what's being offered here and yet the heavy weights were NEVER able to even dent THAT market. You would think the likes of SONY, HP MOTOROLA, M$SOFT and all the other consumer electronics giants, with all of their resources, could come up with something smart enough to compete with the iPod over the years, right? Wrong! The iPod was revolutionary in its design and usability (and not the first portable media device by the way). Paired with the best online music store experience distanced it even further from the rest. That's what revolutionary means: a new playing field - a new system - a new product. Apple does this better than anyone in the world. I'm not sure the competition is just Nokia, SonyEricsson, and Motorola any more. Listen closely, Apple is attempting to reinvent the mobile phone by marrying what we traditionally associate with a smartphone (smartERphone actually) under a totally new "human friendly" and intuitive package. Those things tend to have mass appeal.
If it ends up just being yet another slick mobile smartphone then yes, the competition will be a bear. On the other hand, if the mobile connectivity paradigm is changing as Apple wants it to, then its an (almost) level playing field again. Some may even argue that Apple has another head start on some of those technologies (mobile OS X for one - the best desktop OS now the best mobile OS)
In the end, we all win. Competition is great. So lets just sit back, watch the race and hope the world doesn't meltdown before we can play with all of these toys.
With the iPod Apple was able to hog 60% of the market before the competition even woke up, but here they're up against Nokia, SonyEricsson, Motorola, Siemens, Blackberry, Palm/Treo, HP and a bunch of other giants with well established distribution channels and deals with every carrier on earth. I hope for Apple's sake they've patented the crap out of this thing because the first SonyEricsson iPhone killer is probably being designed as we speak.
You're right this isn't the portable media market - those devices are primitive compared to what's being offered here and yet the heavy weights were NEVER able to even dent THAT market. You would think the likes of SONY, HP MOTOROLA, M$SOFT and all the other consumer electronics giants, with all of their resources, could come up with something smart enough to compete with the iPod over the years, right? Wrong! The iPod was revolutionary in its design and usability (and not the first portable media device by the way). Paired with the best online music store experience distanced it even further from the rest. That's what revolutionary means: a new playing field - a new system - a new product. Apple does this better than anyone in the world. I'm not sure the competition is just Nokia, SonyEricsson, and Motorola any more. Listen closely, Apple is attempting to reinvent the mobile phone by marrying what we traditionally associate with a smartphone (smartERphone actually) under a totally new "human friendly" and intuitive package. Those things tend to have mass appeal.
If it ends up just being yet another slick mobile smartphone then yes, the competition will be a bear. On the other hand, if the mobile connectivity paradigm is changing as Apple wants it to, then its an (almost) level playing field again. Some may even argue that Apple has another head start on some of those technologies (mobile OS X for one - the best desktop OS now the best mobile OS)
In the end, we all win. Competition is great. So lets just sit back, watch the race and hope the world doesn't meltdown before we can play with all of these toys.
o1no1ne
Aug 18, 12:12 AM
Cool.
more...
liketom
Dec 19, 05:12 AM
here's my first :)
stridemat
Dec 20, 03:20 PM
Point them in this direction:-
http://www.apple.com/business/profiles/
Or at least have a read yourself.
Edit* Or this http://www.apple.com/business/solutions/it/
http://www.apple.com/business/solutions/it/pc-compatibility.html
http://www.apple.com/business/profiles/
Or at least have a read yourself.
Edit* Or this http://www.apple.com/business/solutions/it/
http://www.apple.com/business/solutions/it/pc-compatibility.html
more...
Queen of Spades
Dec 2, 02:24 AM
Where's the holiday spirit, everyone? :D
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5083/5225422249_41e8ea10dc_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5083/5225422249_41e8ea10dc_b.jpg
LethalWolfe
Nov 14, 12:29 AM
The first Avid came out in 1989 on a Mac IIx. Most people up until a couple of years ago where still editing with Avid Xpress/Film Composer on Power Macintosh 9600's and G3/G4 machines because they cut and cut really well. You used to not be able to separate the word Apple from Avid until they started being bad about working with other developers over the span of OS X. I.E. Avid, Adobe & Macromedia. And developing competing products. You've seen what Steve can do with a product like flash and ban it from an OS. So Adobe and Avid started not putting all their eggs in one basket and that's why you started seeing alot of software on apple's migrate to PC's because of Apple's behavior for better or worse.
IMO the story goes slightly different. Apple was circling the drain, Mac-centric developers went "Oh, *****!" and developed Windows versions of their Apps. Steve went "Oh, *****" and started developing first party apps as a matter of necessity. It's not a coincidence that a rash of first party apps started appearing around the same time (99/00). iMovie, iTunes, iDVD and iPhoto all hit the streets around the same time and they were all free. FCP landed during the same time and while it was not free it was ridiculously cheaper than Avid's offerings.
Avid also flirted w/the idea of dropping the Mac entirely when the G4 started to stagnate (thanks Motorola), but Mac faithful editors dang near busted out the torches and pitch forks so Avid quickly backed peddled. The PC version of Avid did start to take priority though and it was only a couple of years ago that platform parity returned to Avid's products.
Lethal
IMO the story goes slightly different. Apple was circling the drain, Mac-centric developers went "Oh, *****!" and developed Windows versions of their Apps. Steve went "Oh, *****" and started developing first party apps as a matter of necessity. It's not a coincidence that a rash of first party apps started appearing around the same time (99/00). iMovie, iTunes, iDVD and iPhoto all hit the streets around the same time and they were all free. FCP landed during the same time and while it was not free it was ridiculously cheaper than Avid's offerings.
Avid also flirted w/the idea of dropping the Mac entirely when the G4 started to stagnate (thanks Motorola), but Mac faithful editors dang near busted out the torches and pitch forks so Avid quickly backed peddled. The PC version of Avid did start to take priority though and it was only a couple of years ago that platform parity returned to Avid's products.
Lethal
MykullMyerz
Mar 21, 06:20 PM
what did you ( you probably answered this 100000000 times):apple:
Huh?
Huh?
nyisles84
Oct 9, 03:40 PM
same here. lol. Was gonna go for simplytweet, tried the lite and wasn't digging the UI. Gonna dl Tweetie 2 now
Chromus
Apr 1, 04:09 PM
How do I get that "now playing" widget thing like MrHyde has?
Philberttheduck
Sep 26, 09:55 PM
Hmm.. sounds like .Mac won't be free til after '07. :(
DiamondMac
Apr 8, 11:22 AM
Looks like somebody doesn't know how to read an annual report.
AT&T (the whole company) generated $31.36 billion in revenue for ALL of 2010.
(2010 Q4 total revenue (wireless and wireline) was $9.6 billion, with $6.6 billion of that allocated to capital expenses.)
Of the $31.36 billion earned in $15.18 billion came from the wireless unit.
The rest was from wireline (U-Verse) services.
Out of that $31.36 billion, AT&T had $20.3 billion in capital expenses.
That leaves just a hair over $10 billion for upgrades and any new R&D.
Their LTE roll out is expected to cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $19 billion dollars.
So yeah... they need the money to expand while remaining profitable.
The question is, who is willing to pay it?
My guess is most will and AT&T knows it.
Sigh, excuse me. I mis-stated the 4Q numbers.
With that said, all of your numbers still convinces me that thinking a $50 increase is in anyway a "needed" plan by AT&T is unpersuasive.
AT&T (the whole company) generated $31.36 billion in revenue for ALL of 2010.
(2010 Q4 total revenue (wireless and wireline) was $9.6 billion, with $6.6 billion of that allocated to capital expenses.)
Of the $31.36 billion earned in $15.18 billion came from the wireless unit.
The rest was from wireline (U-Verse) services.
Out of that $31.36 billion, AT&T had $20.3 billion in capital expenses.
That leaves just a hair over $10 billion for upgrades and any new R&D.
Their LTE roll out is expected to cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $19 billion dollars.
So yeah... they need the money to expand while remaining profitable.
The question is, who is willing to pay it?
My guess is most will and AT&T knows it.
Sigh, excuse me. I mis-stated the 4Q numbers.
With that said, all of your numbers still convinces me that thinking a $50 increase is in anyway a "needed" plan by AT&T is unpersuasive.
luckystriked
Oct 16, 12:03 PM
my 3 hyperspaces.
all from www.wallpaperswide.com
can you give me the link to the one in the right? I can't find it!
all from www.wallpaperswide.com
can you give me the link to the one in the right? I can't find it!
Source URL: http://cyclistatlarge.blogspot.com/2010/10/trust-quotes-for-relationships.html
Visit amy winehouse for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
.bmp)
