EricNau
Sep 13, 09:28 PM
Actually, I'm starting to question the description of this rendition. It reads:
The click-wheel portion of the device reportedly slides down to reveal a traditional numeric dial-pad underneath.
IMO, having the click-wheel slide down with a keypad underneath is a less favorable design compared to (for example), Chocolate by LG, where the body of the phone slides up revealing a second layer of the phone with the keypad.
The click-wheel portion of the device reportedly slides down to reveal a traditional numeric dial-pad underneath.
IMO, having the click-wheel slide down with a keypad underneath is a less favorable design compared to (for example), Chocolate by LG, where the body of the phone slides up revealing a second layer of the phone with the keypad.
mi5moav
Sep 14, 09:50 AM
I'm sure it's just an update to aperture along with a new aluminium skinned Apple video camera with 1/3 CCD and 100G HD. The future of video recording is on us and apple more than anyone knows about digital video. Though I'm realing hoping some sort of Leica/Zeiss/Apple announcement.
iJohnHenry
Apr 25, 10:33 AM
So it seems that the OP may be a liar or have memory recall issues, considering the inconsistences found in his prior posts. Is there a MR rule for that?
Perhaps we need a Fiction forum, in order that the children may play there?
Perhaps we need a Fiction forum, in order that the children may play there?
miamijim
Apr 4, 12:38 PM
I'm actually surprised this doesn't happen more often. Applestores must be filled with cash. I would think one would be a bit easier to rob than a bank.
I see no reason why anyone would carry cash...
You do not have to have a credit card you can have a debit card and pay with that.... cash has no place in retail anymore. This would solve a hell of a lot of hold up issues.
The only people who need to deal in cash are drug dealers.
I see no reason why anyone would carry cash...
You do not have to have a credit card you can have a debit card and pay with that.... cash has no place in retail anymore. This would solve a hell of a lot of hold up issues.
The only people who need to deal in cash are drug dealers.
diamond.g
Apr 19, 12:28 PM
I'm salaried (aka "Exempt") in my job. We used to clock in and out but they made us quit several years ago and now there is no tracking of our hours. I was told at the time it was a legal requirement that we not be made to clock in and out.
In any event, there are rules defining what jobs are and are not eligible as exempt. There are lots of references online with information.
http://www.ehow.com/facts_5179644_exempt-salary-vs_-non-exempt.html
I too am exempt. We don't clock in, but do put down hours worked on our contracts (because that is what the customer wants). Functionally I am an hourly employee, because if I do not work a full 40 hours I don't get 40 hours worth of pay.
What I don't get is if I did 40 hours worth of work, but in 35 hours I still would only get paid for 35 hours. I thought being on salary would remove that.
In any event, there are rules defining what jobs are and are not eligible as exempt. There are lots of references online with information.
http://www.ehow.com/facts_5179644_exempt-salary-vs_-non-exempt.html
I too am exempt. We don't clock in, but do put down hours worked on our contracts (because that is what the customer wants). Functionally I am an hourly employee, because if I do not work a full 40 hours I don't get 40 hours worth of pay.
What I don't get is if I did 40 hours worth of work, but in 35 hours I still would only get paid for 35 hours. I thought being on salary would remove that.
HitchHykr
Apr 20, 12:50 PM
Unless you decide to work for Google (which from your comment, I presume your aren't), or if you get famous, then I'd say that the chance that anyone at Google would decide to look at any data they collected about you is abysmal. This goes for any information Apple collects too. Obviously, there's a risqu� for security breaches, but the chance that your info then would be accessed or used is also rather small.
Not that it's not a problem.
This is different. The information is made accessible to people around you. So, while an iPhone owner is away from the house, someone else, who will be a lot more interested in him or her, can access the log in their backup.
If your behavior is risqu� then the risk of a security breach is very important. :)
Not that it's not a problem.
This is different. The information is made accessible to people around you. So, while an iPhone owner is away from the house, someone else, who will be a lot more interested in him or her, can access the log in their backup.
If your behavior is risqu� then the risk of a security breach is very important. :)
emaja
Apr 22, 01:32 PM
Streaming will never be as good as audio stored on your device. Not. Ever.
Not on 3G, not on 4G, and not even over WiFi. The software and streaming protocols are way too slow to offer even comparable performance.
While I do prefer local storage as well, streaming over WiFi for the AppleTV works wonderfully. Streaming over WiFi is fine. Streaming over 3/4G is spotty due to coverage gaps and such.
Not on 3G, not on 4G, and not even over WiFi. The software and streaming protocols are way too slow to offer even comparable performance.
While I do prefer local storage as well, streaming over WiFi for the AppleTV works wonderfully. Streaming over WiFi is fine. Streaming over 3/4G is spotty due to coverage gaps and such.
milo
Mar 30, 12:47 PM
I didn't need to hear it before. It was always generic.
Well, whether it is generic is a matter of opinion, that's what's being debated in this case. I argue that if it truly is such a generic term, there should be prior art demonstrating use of it before Apple came along.
I don't understand why the other companies have to use that term - why not just have the Android Store and the Windows Store? Seems like that would be less confusing anyway.
Well, whether it is generic is a matter of opinion, that's what's being debated in this case. I argue that if it truly is such a generic term, there should be prior art demonstrating use of it before Apple came along.
I don't understand why the other companies have to use that term - why not just have the Android Store and the Windows Store? Seems like that would be less confusing anyway.
Tampa Tom
Mar 30, 01:38 PM
How cunning. Hire a linguist.
jaw04005
Nov 14, 08:01 PM
I�m not sure if anyone�s mentioned it yet, but Rogue Amoeba has posted an update that explicitly explains the API calls and what�s actually going on. It�s not just Apple�s icons that are in play here.
None of these icons are shipped in our apps
On the iPhone side, Airfoil Speakers Touch just displays a generic �album art� image that comes from Airfoil. On the Airfoil side, both the Mac image and the application icon are fetched using public Cocoa APIs.
The call we use to fetch the computer image is [NSImage imageNamed: NSImageNameComputer]. Behind the scenes, the system has a store of machine icons stored away in the /System directory, and matches up your computer�s model identifier with their artwork to return an icon.
The call we use to get the target application�s icon is -[NSWorkspace iconForFile:], which can be used to obtain the icon for any file on the system. Applications such as the Finder would use this call to display the icons of files and applications on the hard drive when browsing its contents.
The code is not specifically designed to send Apple�s icons
The code is fully generic and simply sends the icon of whatever application the user chooses on the Mac side. Apple applications are popular audio sources for Airfoil, but it�s entirely possible to send third-party applications like Firefox, Spotify, Last.fm, our own Pulsar, and others, and many users do just that.
http://www.rogueamoeba.com/utm/2009/11/13/airfoil-speakers-touch-correcting-misconceptions/#comments
None of these icons are shipped in our apps
On the iPhone side, Airfoil Speakers Touch just displays a generic �album art� image that comes from Airfoil. On the Airfoil side, both the Mac image and the application icon are fetched using public Cocoa APIs.
The call we use to fetch the computer image is [NSImage imageNamed: NSImageNameComputer]. Behind the scenes, the system has a store of machine icons stored away in the /System directory, and matches up your computer�s model identifier with their artwork to return an icon.
The call we use to get the target application�s icon is -[NSWorkspace iconForFile:], which can be used to obtain the icon for any file on the system. Applications such as the Finder would use this call to display the icons of files and applications on the hard drive when browsing its contents.
The code is not specifically designed to send Apple�s icons
The code is fully generic and simply sends the icon of whatever application the user chooses on the Mac side. Apple applications are popular audio sources for Airfoil, but it�s entirely possible to send third-party applications like Firefox, Spotify, Last.fm, our own Pulsar, and others, and many users do just that.
http://www.rogueamoeba.com/utm/2009/11/13/airfoil-speakers-touch-correcting-misconceptions/#comments
ChazUK
Mar 29, 12:19 PM
In iOS, you have to flick and flick, especially if you have many apps.
There's always that little thing called "Spotlight". Home button, flick left, start typing.
Hardly an impossibility. ;)
There's always that little thing called "Spotlight". Home button, flick left, start typing.
Hardly an impossibility. ;)
boncellis
Sep 4, 08:55 PM
This makes sense to me, although it likely has some functionality beyond what has been described. Apple wants to move into a new forum, why reinvent the iPod when it's been done so well? The iTMS has the potential to be bigger than the iPod--big enough to drive sales of computers and a new video device as well as the iPod, it would be anathema for Apple to limit themselves.
The streaming technology is already there through iTunes, is it not? If you have a Mini hooked up to the TV, can't you just stream video to the Mini and play it there? If so, this has to be something new--something that Apple can market alongside the Mini. (Either that or Apple needs to cut the price of the Mini to make it a more realistic set-top box option--maybe Apple sees this as an improved implementation of that idea).
The streaming technology is already there through iTunes, is it not? If you have a Mini hooked up to the TV, can't you just stream video to the Mini and play it there? If so, this has to be something new--something that Apple can market alongside the Mini. (Either that or Apple needs to cut the price of the Mini to make it a more realistic set-top box option--maybe Apple sees this as an improved implementation of that idea).
vwcruisn
Mar 23, 07:21 PM
You're telling me drunk driving is on the same level as eating or talking on a cell phone?
Yes.
The study, published in the June 29 issue of Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, found that drivers talking on cell phones, either handheld or hands-free, are more likely to crash because they are distracted by conversation.
Using a driving simulator under four different conditions: with no distractions, using a handheld cell phone, talking on a hands-free cell phone, and while intoxicated to the 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level, 40 participants followed a simulated pace car that braked intermittently.
Researchers found that the drivers on cell phones drove more slowly, braked more slowly and were more likely to crash. In fact, the three participants who collided into the pace car were chatting away. None of the drunken drivers crashed.
Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6090342-7.html#ixzz1HTJlDgSO
Yes.
The study, published in the June 29 issue of Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, found that drivers talking on cell phones, either handheld or hands-free, are more likely to crash because they are distracted by conversation.
Using a driving simulator under four different conditions: with no distractions, using a handheld cell phone, talking on a hands-free cell phone, and while intoxicated to the 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level, 40 participants followed a simulated pace car that braked intermittently.
Researchers found that the drivers on cell phones drove more slowly, braked more slowly and were more likely to crash. In fact, the three participants who collided into the pace car were chatting away. None of the drunken drivers crashed.
Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6090342-7.html#ixzz1HTJlDgSO
DVK916
Sep 17, 07:56 PM
OK. hang on. back the f&6king truck up.
maybe we're backwards here. but i have NEVER, EVER heard of ANY kind of phone service where INCOMING calls are anything BUT free (excluding reverse-charge, obviously).
Im sorry, but if you all accept crappy CDMA phones specific to a carrier, and paying for incoming calls, you are kidding yourself if you think you are anything but backwards. (i wont go into the whole metric thing :P )
Sprint has free unlimited incoming calls. Also some providers have unlimited incoming and outgoing calls if you don't travel beyond your city.
Also CDMA isn't crappy it offers higherspeed than HSDPA while using less spectrum.
CDMA Rev A offers 3.8 down and 1.8 up in only 1.25 mhz of spectrum versus HSDPA of up too 14mbps down and 2 up in 5 mhz of spectrum. But with Rev B which is a software upgrade CDMA will have around 16mps down and 10mbps up in 5mhz of spectrum.
maybe we're backwards here. but i have NEVER, EVER heard of ANY kind of phone service where INCOMING calls are anything BUT free (excluding reverse-charge, obviously).
Im sorry, but if you all accept crappy CDMA phones specific to a carrier, and paying for incoming calls, you are kidding yourself if you think you are anything but backwards. (i wont go into the whole metric thing :P )
Sprint has free unlimited incoming calls. Also some providers have unlimited incoming and outgoing calls if you don't travel beyond your city.
Also CDMA isn't crappy it offers higherspeed than HSDPA while using less spectrum.
CDMA Rev A offers 3.8 down and 1.8 up in only 1.25 mhz of spectrum versus HSDPA of up too 14mbps down and 2 up in 5 mhz of spectrum. But with Rev B which is a software upgrade CDMA will have around 16mps down and 10mbps up in 5mhz of spectrum.
dethmaShine
Apr 22, 05:58 AM
Any guesses on the web interface?
Half Glass
Sep 9, 02:55 PM
Benchmarks look good...real good for a laptop chip! I wonder how the laptops will fare!
Loving the MacPro, and just like you guys waiting for some of the software to be seriously optimized for more than 2 cores. I've seen ~289% in spurts but not more from an app while encoding some video (I think the 289% was Handbrake). FCP seems to keep itself under 2 cores.
Bring on the truly optimized software and lets roll!
--Half Glass
Loving the MacPro, and just like you guys waiting for some of the software to be seriously optimized for more than 2 cores. I've seen ~289% in spurts but not more from an app while encoding some video (I think the 289% was Handbrake). FCP seems to keep itself under 2 cores.
Bring on the truly optimized software and lets roll!
--Half Glass
seek3r
May 3, 10:25 AM
So, with TB moving across the whole line, how long before we can buy a (Data | Display) splitter for TB so that people using the new systems can use external displays and the data connection at the same time without the PITA of daily chaining? Hope before I buy a new system :/
Still USB 2.0
Meh.
You'll need to wait for Ivy Bridge for USB3, that's when Intel is incorporating it into their chip sets. Did you really expect USB3 with this update? It's not like Apple has been incorporating non-Intel USB3 controllers in any other updated systems... We'll get it when Intel makes Apple get it, and not a moment before :-(
Still USB 2.0
Meh.
You'll need to wait for Ivy Bridge for USB3, that's when Intel is incorporating it into their chip sets. Did you really expect USB3 with this update? It's not like Apple has been incorporating non-Intel USB3 controllers in any other updated systems... We'll get it when Intel makes Apple get it, and not a moment before :-(
gugy
Sep 6, 12:08 AM
Don't forget the 42" HD monitor Apple will drop at the event. What else did you think Apple would let you watch a movie on? (beside your iPod of course)
Bring it on!
Bring it on!
Eidorian
Sep 9, 11:33 AM
Wanna bet that Napa64 is 100% identical to ordinary Napa, apart from the fact that the CPU is Merom, instead of Yonah? Since Napa is a platform, just chaning the CPU to something else would mean that the platform has been refreshed.I'm a little skeptical about Napa64 as well. I did read the previous links and articles on it. Why make Merom backwards compatible with Yonah?
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/09/09/preview_kentsfield_processor/
Tom's Hardware benchmarks Intel's first quad-core "Kentsfield"
Culver City (CA) - Intel's first quad-core processor "Kentsfield" has found its way into the Tom's Hardware test lab. Several weeks before Intel will provide evaluation processors to the press, Tom's Hardware was able to obtain a qualification sample: The quad-core was sent through the entire test parcours and showed impressive performance.Nice information there. I wanted a little heads up on Kentsfield. Still, isn't it dual Conroe's with separate cache and then over the front side bus?
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/09/09/preview_kentsfield_processor/
Tom's Hardware benchmarks Intel's first quad-core "Kentsfield"
Culver City (CA) - Intel's first quad-core processor "Kentsfield" has found its way into the Tom's Hardware test lab. Several weeks before Intel will provide evaluation processors to the press, Tom's Hardware was able to obtain a qualification sample: The quad-core was sent through the entire test parcours and showed impressive performance.Nice information there. I wanted a little heads up on Kentsfield. Still, isn't it dual Conroe's with separate cache and then over the front side bus?
AppleScruff1
Apr 29, 09:57 PM
You forget one thing neiltc13.... not many people seem to share your views:
� Zune Desktop Software.... way more people prefer the iTunes ecosphere (which isn't perfect either mind you).
� Zune Hardware... This is clearly a product flop... just like M$ and it's PlaysForSure DRM. Apple's iPod after 10 years still blitzes the portable music device market.
� Windows Phone 7... Yes, Windows 7 is a significant improvement over any previous boost phone OS from M$... a shame that they had to really copy the whole "multi-touch" concept from someone else. But M$ has a long way to catch up with Apple and Google with their offerings and as yet, it would suggest that Apple and Google are still better than M$.
� Windows 7... It's a LOT better than anything M$ has released in the past. All credit to them on this one. But it's uptake hasn't really been all that good though and Microsoft continues to do the "value-add" model by charging more for greater feature sets across it various Windows editions... Too many choices for people that don't understand. Just make one version and price it at $99 and they'll get a much better uptake.
� Office 2010... Yes, it's WAY better than any offering from other companies (for Excel at least). Not sure that Office 2010 is necessarily better than Office 2007 though.
� Office 2001 for Mac - Yes, especially Outlook 2011 for Mac. There was never any reason why Microsoft could not have upgraded it's old Classic Mac version of Outlook 2001 all along rather than develop it's Entourage product which in my opinion was always Microsofts half-assed way of limiting Mac Support in an attempt to marginalise the Mac platform. Guess what? It hasn't really worked so now Microsoft have realised that the best approach is to try and embrace the fact that Apple's Mac OS isn't going away anytime soon so it might as well support it properly.
� Xbox 360 - It's a pretty good product, but compared to the other two 7th generation Game Consoles (PS3/Wii), XBOX trails in third place in all markets except the US where it is second behind Wii.
� Xbox Live - Still an immature product (along with Sony's and Wii's equivalent!). I don't think ANY of the current offerings are that good really but Microsoft has a LOT more experience in internet technologies so you'd expect that Microsoft should be able to come up with something that is better than it is.
Microsoft's problem is that it struggles to actually invent something that appeals to consumers in a way that allows them to command a higher price until the market matures. Technology is a tough market to be in because most technology products fall in value dramatically when a product matures, and margins become very thin and in many cases unsustainable. The only real way to make a lot of dosh in technology is to continually be innovative and invent something new that captivates people. Simply copying someone else all the time won't cut it.
Apple started it's revolution with the iPod well before most other MP3 players came out and so it commanded a higher price (therefore profits) than conventional music devices of the time (CD Discman, Minidisc etc) had. Then just as all the me-too players jumped on the bandwagon, Apple move onto it's next innovation... iTunes Store... then iPhone... then App Store... and now the iPad.
When Microsoft goes back to it's heyday and starts being innovative like Apple and Google are now, they'll again start making a lot more money again.
They just had a record quarter, but when they innovate like Apple and Google they start to make a lot more money again. Priceless.
� Zune Desktop Software.... way more people prefer the iTunes ecosphere (which isn't perfect either mind you).
� Zune Hardware... This is clearly a product flop... just like M$ and it's PlaysForSure DRM. Apple's iPod after 10 years still blitzes the portable music device market.
� Windows Phone 7... Yes, Windows 7 is a significant improvement over any previous boost phone OS from M$... a shame that they had to really copy the whole "multi-touch" concept from someone else. But M$ has a long way to catch up with Apple and Google with their offerings and as yet, it would suggest that Apple and Google are still better than M$.
� Windows 7... It's a LOT better than anything M$ has released in the past. All credit to them on this one. But it's uptake hasn't really been all that good though and Microsoft continues to do the "value-add" model by charging more for greater feature sets across it various Windows editions... Too many choices for people that don't understand. Just make one version and price it at $99 and they'll get a much better uptake.
� Office 2010... Yes, it's WAY better than any offering from other companies (for Excel at least). Not sure that Office 2010 is necessarily better than Office 2007 though.
� Office 2001 for Mac - Yes, especially Outlook 2011 for Mac. There was never any reason why Microsoft could not have upgraded it's old Classic Mac version of Outlook 2001 all along rather than develop it's Entourage product which in my opinion was always Microsofts half-assed way of limiting Mac Support in an attempt to marginalise the Mac platform. Guess what? It hasn't really worked so now Microsoft have realised that the best approach is to try and embrace the fact that Apple's Mac OS isn't going away anytime soon so it might as well support it properly.
� Xbox 360 - It's a pretty good product, but compared to the other two 7th generation Game Consoles (PS3/Wii), XBOX trails in third place in all markets except the US where it is second behind Wii.
� Xbox Live - Still an immature product (along with Sony's and Wii's equivalent!). I don't think ANY of the current offerings are that good really but Microsoft has a LOT more experience in internet technologies so you'd expect that Microsoft should be able to come up with something that is better than it is.
Microsoft's problem is that it struggles to actually invent something that appeals to consumers in a way that allows them to command a higher price until the market matures. Technology is a tough market to be in because most technology products fall in value dramatically when a product matures, and margins become very thin and in many cases unsustainable. The only real way to make a lot of dosh in technology is to continually be innovative and invent something new that captivates people. Simply copying someone else all the time won't cut it.
Apple started it's revolution with the iPod well before most other MP3 players came out and so it commanded a higher price (therefore profits) than conventional music devices of the time (CD Discman, Minidisc etc) had. Then just as all the me-too players jumped on the bandwagon, Apple move onto it's next innovation... iTunes Store... then iPhone... then App Store... and now the iPad.
When Microsoft goes back to it's heyday and starts being innovative like Apple and Google are now, they'll again start making a lot more money again.
They just had a record quarter, but when they innovate like Apple and Google they start to make a lot more money again. Priceless.
Maxx Power
Oct 27, 09:36 AM
But this particular crap from Greenpeace has already been debunked.
They have gone from a respectable environmentalist group to a militant anti-business lobby.
I am Green, but I am not Greenpeace!
link at /. where this has been gone over a while ago, what a bogus Greenpeace report: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=198431&cid=16258305
I don't know if you can call that debunking. I see a lot of greenpeace arguments as well that are valid. If anything, I'd say the author and the posts go so far as to trivialize what greenpeace had to point out, but not invalidating it. You can't invalidate environmental risks that occur sometime down the road by purely using data from now.
Same thing with global warming, which should be renamed into a non-misleading term "global weather change" since strictly speaking some regions will warm up, others will cool down (like europe, right now, with the gulf stream cut short, they've been getting snow in Germany and France for example, consistently over the last few years where there wasn't any before), we know for a fact we can affect our weather, we know for a fact that in many regions (mine for example), the weather has been consistently warming up and gradually changing on the yearly scale (last year the temp record in winter was broken again by 1 degree, and has been since the beginning of records), so it's not a debate about whether or not global warming is an observable fact, it should be a debate about how much it is caused by us and to what extent it'll affect us and what can we actively do about it. Anymore debate into its existence is a stall of time and a waste of effort.
I think that any argument against greenpeace implying that "artificial chemicals, when dumped into our ecosystem, will not do harm as long as we don't observe it" can be safely ignored. If you put it this way, the scientific industry that does this kind of environmental research doesn't even close to the funding that R&D gets, and that it isn't revenue generating. There isn't nearly as big of a chance that the eco-scientists will catch problems as fast as they are made.
They have gone from a respectable environmentalist group to a militant anti-business lobby.
I am Green, but I am not Greenpeace!
link at /. where this has been gone over a while ago, what a bogus Greenpeace report: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=198431&cid=16258305
I don't know if you can call that debunking. I see a lot of greenpeace arguments as well that are valid. If anything, I'd say the author and the posts go so far as to trivialize what greenpeace had to point out, but not invalidating it. You can't invalidate environmental risks that occur sometime down the road by purely using data from now.
Same thing with global warming, which should be renamed into a non-misleading term "global weather change" since strictly speaking some regions will warm up, others will cool down (like europe, right now, with the gulf stream cut short, they've been getting snow in Germany and France for example, consistently over the last few years where there wasn't any before), we know for a fact we can affect our weather, we know for a fact that in many regions (mine for example), the weather has been consistently warming up and gradually changing on the yearly scale (last year the temp record in winter was broken again by 1 degree, and has been since the beginning of records), so it's not a debate about whether or not global warming is an observable fact, it should be a debate about how much it is caused by us and to what extent it'll affect us and what can we actively do about it. Anymore debate into its existence is a stall of time and a waste of effort.
I think that any argument against greenpeace implying that "artificial chemicals, when dumped into our ecosystem, will not do harm as long as we don't observe it" can be safely ignored. If you put it this way, the scientific industry that does this kind of environmental research doesn't even close to the funding that R&D gets, and that it isn't revenue generating. There isn't nearly as big of a chance that the eco-scientists will catch problems as fast as they are made.
dukebound85
Apr 11, 03:46 PM
Yeah, plus medical bills don't bankrupt you personally. I'll take what you've got up there.
No kidding right?
My buddy and I went boarding 2 days ago and he dislocated his finger (looked bad as it was all bent funny)
Anyways, took him to the clinic and was charged 1300 bucks to put it back into place and he doesnt have health insurance
Heaven forbid one needs surgery or broke a leg or anything more than dislocating a finger....would need a few million stashed away
No kidding right?
My buddy and I went boarding 2 days ago and he dislocated his finger (looked bad as it was all bent funny)
Anyways, took him to the clinic and was charged 1300 bucks to put it back into place and he doesnt have health insurance
Heaven forbid one needs surgery or broke a leg or anything more than dislocating a finger....would need a few million stashed away
JAT
Oct 27, 11:56 AM
Somebody please explain to me what GW Bush has to do with a Greenpeace story out of the London Mac Expo?
And I don't know UK law, but if they did this in the USA (handing a kid food without parent's permission), they should be arrested. And fired by the company, although there's no company in this case. If somebody does that with one of my kids, they better be prepared to back down fast and apologize, or they will GO down fast. Wouldn't be the first time.
Let them hand out leaflets wherever they want.
And I don't know UK law, but if they did this in the USA (handing a kid food without parent's permission), they should be arrested. And fired by the company, although there's no company in this case. If somebody does that with one of my kids, they better be prepared to back down fast and apologize, or they will GO down fast. Wouldn't be the first time.
Let them hand out leaflets wherever they want.
Cygnus311
Aug 28, 11:14 PM
I ordered the following iMac online yesterday and the ship date is shown as 9/12 (16 days from order date). Who knows what this means.
MAC 20/2.0/SD CTO
ATI Radeon X1600-256MB SDRAM
2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM-2x1GB
500GB Serial ATA drive
SuperDrive 8X
Kybd, Mighty Mse & Mac OS X
Country Kit
Estimated Shipped By Estimated Delivered By
Sep 12, 2006 Sep 19, 2006
You upgraded RAM and HD through Apple?
MAC 20/2.0/SD CTO
ATI Radeon X1600-256MB SDRAM
2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM-2x1GB
500GB Serial ATA drive
SuperDrive 8X
Kybd, Mighty Mse & Mac OS X
Country Kit
Estimated Shipped By Estimated Delivered By
Sep 12, 2006 Sep 19, 2006
You upgraded RAM and HD through Apple?
No comments:
Post a Comment