JasperJanssen
Apr 30, 03:52 AM
It will never be. EU adds specific tax to all products so unless apple puts a factory somewhere in the EU it won't change.
Uh, no. The difference in price between the US and the EU is the VAT or equivalent, which means that they will have to charge that for production isnide the EU just as well.
The biggest difference is that in the US it's easier to get an iPhone on contract and then skip out on the contract. *That* makes a significant difference. 600 euros including VAT or 600 dollars excluding sales tax, not so much.
Uh, no. The difference in price between the US and the EU is the VAT or equivalent, which means that they will have to charge that for production isnide the EU just as well.
The biggest difference is that in the US it's easier to get an iPhone on contract and then skip out on the contract. *That* makes a significant difference. 600 euros including VAT or 600 dollars excluding sales tax, not so much.
jettredmont
Oct 5, 11:49 PM
This is my first post. It takes a lot for me to stop being a lurker, but the idea that any user can resize a textarea on a site I design, dynamically redrawing the page, is among the dumbest ideas I've ever heard. This will break valid page layouts in new and unheard of ways. Designers make form elements a size and shape for a reason.
I look forward to finding a way using JavaScript to disable that feature the day that browser is released.
Wow, you must really freak out about cascading style sheets too. Bit of a control freak?
Look: the page design is for the benefit of the USER, not the designer. If the page looks like crap if a text area is resized larger than you expected, what's going to happen when a new browser comes out that uses a larger default font in the text area, or adds additional margin padding, etc? If that will make it look like crap, then that's your problem, not the user's!
The problem with text entry boxes in (so far as I can tell) every single browser out today, is that they are fixed width. I can have a nice big 30" monitor and want to be able to type a paragraph about this size in a single friggin' line of text across the whole monitor (more common is trying to convey source code in a text window; wrapping really sucks for source code). But, I can't, because the text box is default sized so that it fits without scrolling on my mother in law's 10-year-old 15" CRT set at 640x480. So, it's a little postage-stamp square on my 30" cinema.
The solution to date is that the user, if they're smart enough, opens up TextEdit (or Notepad), edits their text however they want, then cut/paste into the anemically-sized text box on the browser. The ability to skip the middle-app simplifies things tremendously.
One design suggestion (if Apple's listening): also provide some kind of a widget to "snap" the text box back to it's original size.
I look forward to finding a way using JavaScript to disable that feature the day that browser is released.
Wow, you must really freak out about cascading style sheets too. Bit of a control freak?
Look: the page design is for the benefit of the USER, not the designer. If the page looks like crap if a text area is resized larger than you expected, what's going to happen when a new browser comes out that uses a larger default font in the text area, or adds additional margin padding, etc? If that will make it look like crap, then that's your problem, not the user's!
The problem with text entry boxes in (so far as I can tell) every single browser out today, is that they are fixed width. I can have a nice big 30" monitor and want to be able to type a paragraph about this size in a single friggin' line of text across the whole monitor (more common is trying to convey source code in a text window; wrapping really sucks for source code). But, I can't, because the text box is default sized so that it fits without scrolling on my mother in law's 10-year-old 15" CRT set at 640x480. So, it's a little postage-stamp square on my 30" cinema.
The solution to date is that the user, if they're smart enough, opens up TextEdit (or Notepad), edits their text however they want, then cut/paste into the anemically-sized text box on the browser. The ability to skip the middle-app simplifies things tremendously.
One design suggestion (if Apple's listening): also provide some kind of a widget to "snap" the text box back to it's original size.
scotty96LSC
Oct 3, 06:46 AM
Updated.http://idisk.mac.com/txwhitehouse//Public/Oct10New.png
Link (http://nature.desktopnexus.com/wallpaper/466531/)
Link (http://nature.desktopnexus.com/wallpaper/466531/)
katie ta achoo
Sep 24, 05:35 PM
Even though you're legally an adult, you're still living at home. Mom and dad are paying for you to live there.
If they're cool with it, groovy; if they aren't, don't push it.
Wait until you're out of the house to go crazy go nuts.
If they're cool with it, groovy; if they aren't, don't push it.
Wait until you're out of the house to go crazy go nuts.
more...
michaelsaxon
Jan 9, 02:35 PM
AppleTV is interesting, but the phone is way too expensive for me. 802.11n doesn't help me because I have a Core Duo Macbook Pro which apparently doesn't upgrade to "N" like the Core 2 Duos.
No news on iLife, Leopard, iPods, etc.
Not much for me to be excited about.
No news on iLife, Leopard, iPods, etc.
Not much for me to be excited about.
Multimedia
Aug 2, 11:13 AM
Japanese Mac users get first OS X-friendly Blu-ray burner from Logitech mid-August (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/08/02/logitec_mac_blu-ray_disc_burner/). Only $1148 folks. :eek: I guess somebody's gotta start somewhere. At least we know they are really almost for sale somewhere on planet Earth. :rolleyes: ;) Comes with Blu-ray version of Toast 7 Titanium.
"Logitec also said the drive - dubbed the LBD-A2FU2/WM - will support DVD-RAM, DVD�R/RW, dual-layer DVD�R and CD-R/RW discs. The unit has both USB 2.0 and Firewire interfaces on board."
Wonder how much these burners will cost this time next summer?
For $1148 you can buy 4 Terabytes of Hard Drives today. That would be eighty 50GB Blu-ray discs @ $50 each would be $4,000 for the blank media to record 4 Terabytes. $1,000 per Terabyte Vs. $250 per Terabyte of HD storage. I just don't get the economics of this Blu-ray thing at all. :eek: :confused:
"Logitec also said the drive - dubbed the LBD-A2FU2/WM - will support DVD-RAM, DVD�R/RW, dual-layer DVD�R and CD-R/RW discs. The unit has both USB 2.0 and Firewire interfaces on board."
Wonder how much these burners will cost this time next summer?
For $1148 you can buy 4 Terabytes of Hard Drives today. That would be eighty 50GB Blu-ray discs @ $50 each would be $4,000 for the blank media to record 4 Terabytes. $1,000 per Terabyte Vs. $250 per Terabyte of HD storage. I just don't get the economics of this Blu-ray thing at all. :eek: :confused:
more...
100Years
Apr 21, 01:11 PM
I thought I read somewhere on this forum, that these models can work just fine with only 1 processor installed....so this got me thinking -- if you only install 1 processor, then you could go with a generic LGA1366 i7 even though it only has a single QPI link. Is this right, or am I wrong?
hansiedejong
Feb 2, 11:54 AM
http://f.cl.ly/items/1f39210O100O2S0X1n1F/Schermafbeelding%202011-02-02%20om%2018.52.40.png
more...
toddybody
Apr 6, 12:13 PM
Agreed. I just spent 55k on 9.6TB of raw fibre channel storage for our 3PAR. That's 16 600GB drives if you were wondering.
I just stayed at a Holiday Inn.
I just stayed at a Holiday Inn.
JDoggery
Aug 1, 02:56 PM
http://i576.photobucket.com/albums/ss210/Macdaddy1129/desktop.png
Do you have a link to the original?
Do you have a link to the original?
more...
peterparker
Aug 1, 10:51 AM
I believe the .Mac iDisk only supports WebDAV.
nunoabsilva
Dec 6, 07:27 AM
http://i55.tinypic.com/kbrozs.png
mmmmm oliviaaaaa in full 1080p
what is the first software icon in the bar (download's/bandwith !!!!!)
mmmmm oliviaaaaa in full 1080p
what is the first software icon in the bar (download's/bandwith !!!!!)
more...
AWallen90
May 2, 12:19 PM
Yes, System Preferences > Security > General > Disable Automatic Login
Thank you r.j.s I was wondering the same thing.
Thank you r.j.s I was wondering the same thing.
iStudentUK
May 4, 08:05 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
There was talk if waterboarding providing some intell, but this is now in serious doubt.
Torture and inhumane treatment is unacceptable (even if you call it enhanced interrogation). The US should adopt something equivalent to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It prohibits torture in ANY circumstance, it is an absolute right.
No matter the situation, even in the ticking bomb thought experiment, torture should not be used.
There was talk if waterboarding providing some intell, but this is now in serious doubt.
Torture and inhumane treatment is unacceptable (even if you call it enhanced interrogation). The US should adopt something equivalent to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It prohibits torture in ANY circumstance, it is an absolute right.
No matter the situation, even in the ticking bomb thought experiment, torture should not be used.
more...
saving107
Mar 18, 08:53 PM
lame post
MacBytes
Jan 5, 11:38 PM
Category: Mac Websites
Link: TheMacMind: MacWorld Expo 2004 Coverage (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20040106003833)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by arn
Link: TheMacMind: MacWorld Expo 2004 Coverage (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20040106003833)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by arn
more...
leekohler
Apr 18, 12:57 PM
A surprising, but welcome, twist.
I thought it was the frigid version of your floor-hockey league. ;)
No- totally different group of people. Great bunch of guys.
That's actually very surprising (in a good way). People usually aren't as sensitive to that word as they are with the N word, especially straight people.
That was the thing that clinched it for me. When they told me that story, I knew I had found some good people.
May I use that as my signature? :p
Yep. ;)
I thought it was the frigid version of your floor-hockey league. ;)
No- totally different group of people. Great bunch of guys.
That's actually very surprising (in a good way). People usually aren't as sensitive to that word as they are with the N word, especially straight people.
That was the thing that clinched it for me. When they told me that story, I knew I had found some good people.
May I use that as my signature? :p
Yep. ;)
ljg93
Apr 21, 01:19 PM
hey everyone i just got my first app approved
just wanted to thank everyone who helped me answer soooo many questions!
just wanted to thank everyone who helped me answer soooo many questions!
relimw
Feb 18, 11:23 PM
misterhouse (http://www.misterhouse.net/) X10 control software
FinkCommander (http://finkcommander.sourceforge.net/) fink package manager frontend
nessus (http://www.nessus.org/) Vulnerability scanner
snort (http://www.snort.org/) Network Intrustion Detection System
FinkCommander (http://finkcommander.sourceforge.net/) fink package manager frontend
nessus (http://www.nessus.org/) Vulnerability scanner
snort (http://www.snort.org/) Network Intrustion Detection System
wesrk
Feb 15, 02:38 AM
What's with the hosting sites that try to get porn pop ups?
FYI for those at work or in sensible areas
FYI for those at work or in sensible areas
ShiftyPig
Apr 6, 11:57 AM
So you can get a 1TB hard drive for $80.... 12,000 of those.... not that big of an expenditure tbf.
AvSRoCkCO1067
Sep 26, 11:08 PM
My dotmac is set to expire.
I will renew if Apple foots the bill again.
A couple of years ago they inadvertently deleted all my webpages and so when they were writing to goad me into renewing I said why should I? You deleted my webpages. So they gave me a complimentary year.
Then last year I paid for it again but they deleted a lot of my messages with an overly aggressive server-side spam filter. Plus they've been plagued with e-mail outages this last year.
I will call customer service. If they pay for it, I'll continue. If not, then I'll have a hard time justifying the expense.
Everyone's been plagued by the same email outages...why should you expect special treatment?
I will renew if Apple foots the bill again.
A couple of years ago they inadvertently deleted all my webpages and so when they were writing to goad me into renewing I said why should I? You deleted my webpages. So they gave me a complimentary year.
Then last year I paid for it again but they deleted a lot of my messages with an overly aggressive server-side spam filter. Plus they've been plagued with e-mail outages this last year.
I will call customer service. If they pay for it, I'll continue. If not, then I'll have a hard time justifying the expense.
Everyone's been plagued by the same email outages...why should you expect special treatment?
iCaleb
Jan 11, 02:36 PM
FAIL
http://allaboutstevejobs.com/pics/life/2004-2006/08-dianawalker/scaled/12.jpg
http://allaboutstevejobs.com/pics/life/2004-2006/08-dianawalker/scaled/12.jpg
Huntn
Mar 3, 03:13 PM
You indicated that the rich weren't paying their 'fair share.' I responded by pointing out that the top 50% of wage earners pay 95% of the tax burden. That is completely separate (although obviously relative and related) from the tax 'rate' which they pay.
Then adjust it down and make the top 60% of wage earners pay 90% of the burden.
Let me get this straight... your definition of 'fair' is that people who make the right decisions in life, who invest in the right ideas, who don't waste their money on immediate pursuits so they can benefit in the long-term, who work hard and earn success, and yes... have a little luck should have their money confiscated by the state? By mob rule? Since you've determined that 'they don't need it', that translates to them not 'deserving' it and you being able to steal it from them via taxation?
Yes it is completely fair. What is your definition of steal? We could call taxation stealing. We could call exporting a million jobs out of the country stealing couldn't we? We could call breaking the union so executives, executives who all ready have a lot of money, can have more of labor's pay stealing.
This has been one of my long term themes. You live in a society for a reason. That reason is mutual benefit. Because you are smart (or lucky) and make the right decisions, and you end up with all most more money than you can spend or put another way, so much money to life like a King, should you? Oh, sure some people after living that way for years, start feeling guilty, and start a charity to ease their guilty conscious.
But my point is from a moral standpoint, how much money does an individual and his immediate family need to live a comfortable life? In this case of the successful business person, they should be at the top of the income scale. But I have proposed that scale be capped and a 90% income tax rate at a high level, say over $1 million a year is completely fair. "Damn it's so unfair. I only have $1M per year to live on, when I could have $10M, $20M, $50M, bastards!" Obviously you think it's fair if you are allowed to live in excess while others do without or do even you have a cap? ;)
Now you can muster up all of your capitalistic indignity and tell me why it's not fair. Which brings us back to my original premise. How much do you need to live on and still be considered a 'moral' person? What is your definition of moral, being a glutton? That is what the excessively rich are.
BTW, I don't hold anything against them, I don't envy them as I live what I consider to be a very comfortable life in the range of 150k per year income. But I am in the minority. A whole lot of people scrape by in this country. There is 'smart' and then there is 'opportunity'. Right now large multi-national corporations are doing there best to take away 'opportunity' from average citizens so they can increase their profits. Not only do they not give a damn about society, they have absolutely no national loyalty. Call them carpet baggers.
So in conclusion, I don't think excessive wealth is moral and I have no problem with the Federal government setting the top tax bracket at 90%. Call me a suedo-socialist. :)
I really like that quote where the Brit said it was easier being rich in the U.S. because instead of envying the fat cats, many Americans want to be like them. The inference being that they are cheering them on in hopes of one day being fabulously rich when in reality that is not going to happen for most of us, but we still support federal policies that hurt average people like lemmings heading off the cliff.
Then adjust it down and make the top 60% of wage earners pay 90% of the burden.
Let me get this straight... your definition of 'fair' is that people who make the right decisions in life, who invest in the right ideas, who don't waste their money on immediate pursuits so they can benefit in the long-term, who work hard and earn success, and yes... have a little luck should have their money confiscated by the state? By mob rule? Since you've determined that 'they don't need it', that translates to them not 'deserving' it and you being able to steal it from them via taxation?
Yes it is completely fair. What is your definition of steal? We could call taxation stealing. We could call exporting a million jobs out of the country stealing couldn't we? We could call breaking the union so executives, executives who all ready have a lot of money, can have more of labor's pay stealing.
This has been one of my long term themes. You live in a society for a reason. That reason is mutual benefit. Because you are smart (or lucky) and make the right decisions, and you end up with all most more money than you can spend or put another way, so much money to life like a King, should you? Oh, sure some people after living that way for years, start feeling guilty, and start a charity to ease their guilty conscious.
But my point is from a moral standpoint, how much money does an individual and his immediate family need to live a comfortable life? In this case of the successful business person, they should be at the top of the income scale. But I have proposed that scale be capped and a 90% income tax rate at a high level, say over $1 million a year is completely fair. "Damn it's so unfair. I only have $1M per year to live on, when I could have $10M, $20M, $50M, bastards!" Obviously you think it's fair if you are allowed to live in excess while others do without or do even you have a cap? ;)
Now you can muster up all of your capitalistic indignity and tell me why it's not fair. Which brings us back to my original premise. How much do you need to live on and still be considered a 'moral' person? What is your definition of moral, being a glutton? That is what the excessively rich are.
BTW, I don't hold anything against them, I don't envy them as I live what I consider to be a very comfortable life in the range of 150k per year income. But I am in the minority. A whole lot of people scrape by in this country. There is 'smart' and then there is 'opportunity'. Right now large multi-national corporations are doing there best to take away 'opportunity' from average citizens so they can increase their profits. Not only do they not give a damn about society, they have absolutely no national loyalty. Call them carpet baggers.
So in conclusion, I don't think excessive wealth is moral and I have no problem with the Federal government setting the top tax bracket at 90%. Call me a suedo-socialist. :)
I really like that quote where the Brit said it was easier being rich in the U.S. because instead of envying the fat cats, many Americans want to be like them. The inference being that they are cheering them on in hopes of one day being fabulously rich when in reality that is not going to happen for most of us, but we still support federal policies that hurt average people like lemmings heading off the cliff.