- Live Your Life, but Count the
- quotes to live by funny. funny
- Funny Quotes
- funny quotes to live by.
- quotes to live by funny.
- funny quotes to live by
- funny quotes to live by.
- funny-life-quotes-abundance
- funny quotes to live by
- life quotes to live by. Funny
- quotes to live by funny.
- quotes to live by funny.
- quotes to live by funny. funny
- quotes to live by funny. funny
- quotes to live by funny.
- quotes to live by funny.
- funny quotes to live
- quotes to live by funny.
- quotes to live by funny.
Rodimus Prime
Jan 12, 09:41 AM
As a genuine music producer I have more than enough devices to listen to music on. I actually, don't like the quality of mp3s/aacs.. whatever. You do realize how slim the phone is right? Oh.. yes, its an ipod, and a phone.. and a fully functional internet device.
The point here is not that people can question something.. it's that people automatically attack a product without even realizing that it's the best out there. And I don't automatically praise every Apple product there is. If something is worth the praise, then yes, it's called for.. and rightly so.
Rather, the people who post 'what? its only got 8 gb? pffft.. its only got safari? pfft.. photo management? bah humbug.. quad gsm? crap.. 2 megapixel cam? not impressed'
I want YOU to come up with the phone of your dreams, keep it slim so it looks like a phone and not a Palm Treo piece of rock.. and make it priced comparable to other phones.. or rather, a little lower than the other high-end phones out there. I swear, everyone here obviously has the skills to manufacture a high-end phone out of their a$$.
COMPARE this phone to the other high-end phones.. and THEN talk. I did buy fancy phones.. Palm Treos were a nightmare. I hate Motorola's UI.. Sony Ericsson and Nokia were the only functional phones. But I saw the iPhone's UI.. features, etc.. and the price is right. I'm not buying the iphone simply because it's an apple product. If sony had made a phone like this.. I would have bought it as well.
With every popular product.. or creative company.. comes along a bunch of retards who think every other brand out there is better. I will forever be grateful to OS X simply because of the productivity it provides, which is good for me and my career. A phone with OS X and features comparable to other top notch phones (and better)? I'm sold.
And by the way.. this is MACrumors. Yes, we mac addicts do share the love. I'm getting the feeling that people who can't afford this stuff.. seem to do the most whining and bit@ching, and find every possible flaw there is.
you seem to of listed good reasons for why you wanted it. I had the other reaction to the phone. I personally think the interface is very poor. The touch screen only I honestly hate. Reason is because trying to type on a touch screen is a true pain. Plus it requires me looking at the phone to do it. With buttons I can do a lot of stuff with out looking. and having to look at my phone to use my speed dial would bother me. And based on the stuff that was shown it just looks like it has a lot of issues in it that would just annoy the crap out of me.
But then again for those very same reasons I am not going to get an iPhone. Even if it only costed like 200 bucks with the contract. It is not what I want out of a phone.
The point here is not that people can question something.. it's that people automatically attack a product without even realizing that it's the best out there. And I don't automatically praise every Apple product there is. If something is worth the praise, then yes, it's called for.. and rightly so.
Rather, the people who post 'what? its only got 8 gb? pffft.. its only got safari? pfft.. photo management? bah humbug.. quad gsm? crap.. 2 megapixel cam? not impressed'
I want YOU to come up with the phone of your dreams, keep it slim so it looks like a phone and not a Palm Treo piece of rock.. and make it priced comparable to other phones.. or rather, a little lower than the other high-end phones out there. I swear, everyone here obviously has the skills to manufacture a high-end phone out of their a$$.
COMPARE this phone to the other high-end phones.. and THEN talk. I did buy fancy phones.. Palm Treos were a nightmare. I hate Motorola's UI.. Sony Ericsson and Nokia were the only functional phones. But I saw the iPhone's UI.. features, etc.. and the price is right. I'm not buying the iphone simply because it's an apple product. If sony had made a phone like this.. I would have bought it as well.
With every popular product.. or creative company.. comes along a bunch of retards who think every other brand out there is better. I will forever be grateful to OS X simply because of the productivity it provides, which is good for me and my career. A phone with OS X and features comparable to other top notch phones (and better)? I'm sold.
And by the way.. this is MACrumors. Yes, we mac addicts do share the love. I'm getting the feeling that people who can't afford this stuff.. seem to do the most whining and bit@ching, and find every possible flaw there is.
you seem to of listed good reasons for why you wanted it. I had the other reaction to the phone. I personally think the interface is very poor. The touch screen only I honestly hate. Reason is because trying to type on a touch screen is a true pain. Plus it requires me looking at the phone to do it. With buttons I can do a lot of stuff with out looking. and having to look at my phone to use my speed dial would bother me. And based on the stuff that was shown it just looks like it has a lot of issues in it that would just annoy the crap out of me.
But then again for those very same reasons I am not going to get an iPhone. Even if it only costed like 200 bucks with the contract. It is not what I want out of a phone.
GooMan
Mar 28, 03:22 PM
Welcome to 1984.
Let me preface this by saying my household has alot of Apple products. I'm not an Apple hater.
Let me preface this by saying my household has alot of Apple products. I'm not an Apple hater.
clintob
Oct 11, 12:09 PM
I'm not sure I understand the people who (a) don't believe this is coming soon, or (b) don't believe it's coming at all because "people won't use it - it's too small." That's garbage.
Not everything Apple releases has to be an "earth shattering" revolution. Some stuff can just have a niche market and be better than what's out there. They're in it to make money first and foremost. And frankly, if people could carry an iPod-sized object, with wireless headphones, and that could play widescreen movies on a 4" or so screen (AND, oh by the way, carry their iTunes library to boot), it would be the death of the portable DVD player.
No, that's not a huge market, or a cash cow by any means. Nor is it a revolutionary product. But at the end of the day, it's pretty damned cool which means most of us will buy it (despite our attempts not to), and it's certainly another cha-ching to add to the list for Apple.
Not everything Apple releases has to be an "earth shattering" revolution. Some stuff can just have a niche market and be better than what's out there. They're in it to make money first and foremost. And frankly, if people could carry an iPod-sized object, with wireless headphones, and that could play widescreen movies on a 4" or so screen (AND, oh by the way, carry their iTunes library to boot), it would be the death of the portable DVD player.
No, that's not a huge market, or a cash cow by any means. Nor is it a revolutionary product. But at the end of the day, it's pretty damned cool which means most of us will buy it (despite our attempts not to), and it's certainly another cha-ching to add to the list for Apple.
CrownSeven
Oct 14, 04:55 PM
Wow. Do you people realize that this topic was originally posted WAY WAY back on Jan 10, 03:12 PM??? 10 months ago?
noservice2001
Oct 10, 05:31 PM
Nope... we're thinking this will be a totally different iPod product, separate from the normal iPod or the nano or the shuffle.
so like an iTV kinda thing?
so like an iTV kinda thing?
sartinsauce
Oct 17, 10:23 AM
3. porn industry choses the cheapest format -> hd-dvd
OKay, so I've heard both sides now. Can anyone say if the "pr0n industry" has chosen a format, and if so, which format have they chosen?
OKay, so I've heard both sides now. Can anyone say if the "pr0n industry" has chosen a format, and if so, which format have they chosen?
Grasbak
Jan 9, 08:30 AM
Realistically, this is want I want:
Much Ado
Oct 29, 06:50 AM
"If they Hardware worked with any software, it would not be so easy to use"
"It would also not work so well"
Sorry, but that doesn't really make sense.
Source URL: http://cyclistatlarge.blogspot.com/2010/12/quotes-to-live-by-funny.html
Visit amy winehouse for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
"It would also not work so well"
Sorry, but that doesn't really make sense.
sarper
Apr 26, 12:37 AM
As a developer, this will be pain in the ass!
Retina Displays have exactly the double number of pixels with the same resolution, having a second resolution is a giant step to gain one of the crappiest features of Android. I really doubt Apple would do that.
What if this isn't a bigger screen but a smaller device with the same screen on it? Hmm..
Retina Displays have exactly the double number of pixels with the same resolution, having a second resolution is a giant step to gain one of the crappiest features of Android. I really doubt Apple would do that.
What if this isn't a bigger screen but a smaller device with the same screen on it? Hmm..
ctrobins
Jul 21, 11:58 AM
Nokia???? What's a 'Nokia'?
z4n3
Mar 25, 05:13 AM
To complement my earlier screen shots from 2001 and I just found my original upgrade CD! from 10.0 to 10.1 love the way it states "Requires Mac OS X" quite a funny comparison when you look at in just 10 years OS X has gone from a 650Mb CD to a 8Gb Apple USB Drive :eek:
hob
Jan 9, 04:44 PM
Nice one, cheers :)
pmz
Apr 16, 10:07 AM
A quick read through this thread is proof of why I normally don't bother reading or posting here.
Almost everyone has posted that they feel the next iPhone could look something like this...
...which is completely ridiculous based on logic and common sense. But it has been my experience that Macrumors forums and "logic" and "common sense" cannot exist in the same place at the same time.
Memory also seems to be a problem around here. For example, Apple's breakthrough smartphone that changed phones for forever, was completely and totally redesigned after its first year, because the design was incredibly flawed.
To not understand the significance of this, is really to forfeit your opinion on what Apple will or will not do. You CANNOT logically state that Apple would return to an aluminum iPhone (no matter how sexy it might look), after having already moved away from it.
2 straight years, the iPhone 3G and 3GS have unibody plastic design. The SAME one. This is not a coincidence, or laziness, or any other 4th grade opinion....its what the iPhone is. It's not going to change.
The most Apple will do with the design, is make it a little taller to accommodate more pixels, but the design will remain. They may offer a few more colors, or they may not.
Plastic, Unibody iPhones are here to stay. To state otherwise, is to fantasize, and ignore reality. (which is fine, just acknowledge it please).
Almost everyone has posted that they feel the next iPhone could look something like this...
...which is completely ridiculous based on logic and common sense. But it has been my experience that Macrumors forums and "logic" and "common sense" cannot exist in the same place at the same time.
Memory also seems to be a problem around here. For example, Apple's breakthrough smartphone that changed phones for forever, was completely and totally redesigned after its first year, because the design was incredibly flawed.
To not understand the significance of this, is really to forfeit your opinion on what Apple will or will not do. You CANNOT logically state that Apple would return to an aluminum iPhone (no matter how sexy it might look), after having already moved away from it.
2 straight years, the iPhone 3G and 3GS have unibody plastic design. The SAME one. This is not a coincidence, or laziness, or any other 4th grade opinion....its what the iPhone is. It's not going to change.
The most Apple will do with the design, is make it a little taller to accommodate more pixels, but the design will remain. They may offer a few more colors, or they may not.
Plastic, Unibody iPhones are here to stay. To state otherwise, is to fantasize, and ignore reality. (which is fine, just acknowledge it please).
*LTD*
Apr 24, 02:58 PM
I hope windows gets rid of the dos command shell and don't have to rely on third party tools like cygwin. If W8 is unix based, it would be glorious.
It might be. But A lot of tech companies out there are very, very averse to risk and are slow to change.
It might be. But A lot of tech companies out there are very, very averse to risk and are slow to change.
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
bowens
Aug 9, 12:29 PM
I would love to have an Apple display, but I just can't make myselft spend $700 for a 20". I bought a 19" LCD a few months ago for $139. It's also got a 3 year warranty.
css1323
May 2, 12:10 PM
I know I'm late in this thread.. but, the supposed battery life improvements, is that simply the result of iOS no longer tracking so much information? Or is it the result of real unrelated improvements?
forrestmc4
Jan 10, 10:09 PM
I'm a regular reader of Gizmodo and their "rival" Engadget. I have to say after this stunt I don't have much respect left for Giz. A presentation, particularly a press presentation, is a key part of CES marketing for some of the biggest names around. Messing with the Motorola presentation was way, way, way over the line. Sadly, the comments on the story seem to show a rift in the Gizmodo readership trending towards acceptance of this unbelievably unprofessional conduct. There were even commenters faulting companies for leaving IR receivers uncovered by electrical tape or some other rudimentary signal blocking fix. Companies shouldn't have to shelter their product presentations from this kind of childishness, journalistic professionalism should take care of that.
Shame on Gizmodo. Bring out the banhammer.
Shame on Gizmodo. Bring out the banhammer.
MacinDoc
Sep 12, 12:57 AM
Disney is the 2nd largest media company in the world. I surely hope you don't think we're just getting Mickey Mouse and Daffy Duck movies. Here's just the movie companies that Disney owns:
Walt Disney Pictures
Touchstone Pictures
Hollywood Pictures
Miramax Films
Buena Vista Home Entertainment
Pixar
I think that's quite a good start.
-Matt
I realize that, but there are more major studios that are not on that list owned by Disney than there are on the list. But maybe it will work out like the TV downloads have, as some have suggested, starting with just a few and adding more. The problem is, Apple does not currently dominate that market; there are other players right now that are equally strong with their video download services. It seems that the market seems to favor having a dominant player, like Windows for OS and iTMS for music downloads. This could leave the door open for Microsoft to dominate this market if Apple doesn't ramp up its selection quickly.
Walt Disney Pictures
Touchstone Pictures
Hollywood Pictures
Miramax Films
Buena Vista Home Entertainment
Pixar
I think that's quite a good start.
-Matt
I realize that, but there are more major studios that are not on that list owned by Disney than there are on the list. But maybe it will work out like the TV downloads have, as some have suggested, starting with just a few and adding more. The problem is, Apple does not currently dominate that market; there are other players right now that are equally strong with their video download services. It seems that the market seems to favor having a dominant player, like Windows for OS and iTMS for music downloads. This could leave the door open for Microsoft to dominate this market if Apple doesn't ramp up its selection quickly.
Erasmus
Jan 5, 06:05 PM
Awesome!
Thanks Arn! You're a true legend.
In terms of not being able to wait, you should come live in Australia. Considering the Keynote is at like 4:00 am or something, I'll be able to get the stream when I wake up!
I think I'm going to enjoy Wednesday Morning...
Thanks Arn! You're a true legend.
In terms of not being able to wait, you should come live in Australia. Considering the Keynote is at like 4:00 am or something, I'll be able to get the stream when I wake up!
I think I'm going to enjoy Wednesday Morning...
Konfabulation
Oct 15, 12:41 PM
Apples Releases its 3Q numbers after the market close this Wednesday. There have been many times where Jobs has used blow out earnings announcements to launch new products in tandem. I wouldnt be surprised if they launched the video/wireless during their earnings call on Wed.
But when have thhey ever announced new products on a wednesday? Except after a long weekend? (C2D iMac) If anything it will be 10/24. (Mac Expo London, and a Tuesday)
But when have thhey ever announced new products on a wednesday? Except after a long weekend? (C2D iMac) If anything it will be 10/24. (Mac Expo London, and a Tuesday)
err404
May 2, 09:47 AM
I kinda liked the fact i could look at where I've been with my phone.
Sorta. Since the db wasn't meant to track you, it was not very good for this task. Any tracking info had to be inferred from the cell location data.
This would be like trying to use the Google Maps caching in Android for location tracking.
Sorta. Since the db wasn't meant to track you, it was not very good for this task. Any tracking info had to be inferred from the cell location data.
This would be like trying to use the Google Maps caching in Android for location tracking.
dalvin200
Sep 12, 02:51 AM
That's 7pm here in the UK... Just when I get home from work! :)
Are any sites offering live feeds, etc?
6 (SIX) PM UK time :)
Are any sites offering live feeds, etc?
6 (SIX) PM UK time :)
ilfn143
May 3, 02:23 PM
take out the sim, go to market on wifi. all carrier restrictions is gone. :p
Source URL: http://cyclistatlarge.blogspot.com/2010/12/quotes-to-live-by-funny.html
Visit amy winehouse for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
%25255B1%25255D.PNG)
