SactoGuy18
Nov 14, 12:53 PM
99 bottles of beer on the wall,
99 bottles of beer.
If one of those bottles should happen to fall,
98 bottles of beer on the wall.
98 bottles of beer on the wall...
:D
Funny you should mention that because one time I actually sang the song and it took about 25 minutes for me to do it all the way through. :D But that's only just over two segments of an ESPN Radio show podcast....
(By the way, I always remember the third line as "Take one down, pass it around.")
But getting back on topic, :) I think this is a great idea. Especially if you listen to long podcasts like I do that can take about way over an hour per podcast. It'll be great for long cross-country flights, that's to be sure.
99 bottles of beer.
If one of those bottles should happen to fall,
98 bottles of beer on the wall.
98 bottles of beer on the wall...
:D
Funny you should mention that because one time I actually sang the song and it took about 25 minutes for me to do it all the way through. :D But that's only just over two segments of an ESPN Radio show podcast....
(By the way, I always remember the third line as "Take one down, pass it around.")
But getting back on topic, :) I think this is a great idea. Especially if you listen to long podcasts like I do that can take about way over an hour per podcast. It'll be great for long cross-country flights, that's to be sure.
doctor-don
Jun 14, 10:02 AM
depends on who you are. my bill with 500 more minutes and rollover, 1500 text and unlimited data is only $7 more than yours. of course I have had my voice plan for almost 8 years
and tmobile is simply awful
Only your [minority] opinion. I have been a customer of T-Mo for more than a decade, and I have no complaints except coverage in remote areas (which might be alleviated only with a satellite phone). My 1,000 family minutes and 4 phones and 2 datas cost $177/month, btw.
and tmobile is simply awful
Only your [minority] opinion. I have been a customer of T-Mo for more than a decade, and I have no complaints except coverage in remote areas (which might be alleviated only with a satellite phone). My 1,000 family minutes and 4 phones and 2 datas cost $177/month, btw.
reputationZed
Apr 25, 08:40 PM
No thanks. Looks like I'll be voting for Bill the Cat again.
http://thfd.smugmug.com/Other/Forums/billthecat/858186861_umpyA-L.jpg (http://thfd.smugmug.com/Other/Forums/7305329_XAcTU#858186861_umpyA-A-LB)
http://thfd.smugmug.com/Other/Forums/billthecat/858186861_umpyA-L.jpg (http://thfd.smugmug.com/Other/Forums/7305329_XAcTU#858186861_umpyA-A-LB)
studiomusic
Sep 19, 03:44 PM
I tried to install Bootcamp/XP on my Mac Pro before this, but no dice. I will try this tonight and hope it works.
more...
mac-er
Sep 17, 10:14 PM
From my experience working retail, she is going to the back and talking to other employees...."OMG, there is this creepy guy in here again."
You'll really know that is true if someone else comes out of the backroom to look at you.
You'll really know that is true if someone else comes out of the backroom to look at you.
headset
Mar 24, 03:32 PM
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)
Yeah this is a deal. I just called our local store and the guy said they're out of 16gbs nationally. Considering a 32...
Yeah this is a deal. I just called our local store and the guy said they're out of 16gbs nationally. Considering a 32...
more...
manic
Sep 25, 10:38 AM
wow. iPod integration. Now thats nice
Mebsat
Apr 12, 02:27 PM
Office for Mac or Office for Windows? Easy decision.
I haven't opened VMWare Fusion for months, since I installed Office for Mac.
YMMV.
After dealing with the bugs in Excel 2011 for Mac, I have been running the PC version of Excel 2010 in Fusion ever since...it runs far faster on the VM than Excel for the Mac runs. There is no comparison.
I'll see if the update helps but I'm not expecting much.
Plus a lot of add-ins aren't available, but you can get Solver for Mac now.
To each his own, I just use the PC version because I can build large worksheets much faster in it. (using Fusion 3, Win7Pro, Excel 2010)
I haven't opened VMWare Fusion for months, since I installed Office for Mac.
YMMV.
After dealing with the bugs in Excel 2011 for Mac, I have been running the PC version of Excel 2010 in Fusion ever since...it runs far faster on the VM than Excel for the Mac runs. There is no comparison.
I'll see if the update helps but I'm not expecting much.
Plus a lot of add-ins aren't available, but you can get Solver for Mac now.
To each his own, I just use the PC version because I can build large worksheets much faster in it. (using Fusion 3, Win7Pro, Excel 2010)
more...
puckhead193
Nov 14, 10:35 AM
holy cow, that's such a great idea, wish i had this feature when i went to china
NewGenAdam
Apr 12, 06:08 PM
All mah customers is scared of you ... you bein' black and all ... so they'all stand in the other line and make my other checker do all the work.
So's I gots to fire you and hire me more white checkers.
Yeah. Let's bring back those days ... when America was great. :rolleyes:
Haha your golden age?
Really though.
We can choose not to employ someone born stupid because they'd do a worse job so why can we not also choose not to employ somebody born of a particular ethnicity if they'd do a worse job because of it?
To clarify, I don't think we should practise racism. Please never quote me out of context. I'm just amused by the logical inconsistency if we accept that ethnicity may play a part in ability (which it probably doesn't, but it's an interesting thought path to follow): then can we choose against someone for it in the same way we choose against somebody born stupid?
I propose that we should be able to choose who to employ (and everything else) by how well they'd do the job, with one qualification: we cannot choose against them if our reason for doing so would be because discrimination against them would compromise their ability to do a job. Because ethnicity is not an absolute disadvantage; at most it can be argued as a social disadvantage in intolerant, racist countries.
Not having the 'disadvantage by social discrimination' clause would be implicitly condoning society's discrimination in allowing others to act by its harmful consequences.
Sorry if my words fell onto the thread all jumbled. I think this makes some sense.
So's I gots to fire you and hire me more white checkers.
Yeah. Let's bring back those days ... when America was great. :rolleyes:
Haha your golden age?
Really though.
We can choose not to employ someone born stupid because they'd do a worse job so why can we not also choose not to employ somebody born of a particular ethnicity if they'd do a worse job because of it?
To clarify, I don't think we should practise racism. Please never quote me out of context. I'm just amused by the logical inconsistency if we accept that ethnicity may play a part in ability (which it probably doesn't, but it's an interesting thought path to follow): then can we choose against someone for it in the same way we choose against somebody born stupid?
I propose that we should be able to choose who to employ (and everything else) by how well they'd do the job, with one qualification: we cannot choose against them if our reason for doing so would be because discrimination against them would compromise their ability to do a job. Because ethnicity is not an absolute disadvantage; at most it can be argued as a social disadvantage in intolerant, racist countries.
Not having the 'disadvantage by social discrimination' clause would be implicitly condoning society's discrimination in allowing others to act by its harmful consequences.
Sorry if my words fell onto the thread all jumbled. I think this makes some sense.
more...
ftaok
Apr 1, 02:01 PM
I'd gladly pay $5 per channel knowing those channels are supported and any funding is stripped from the others. That'd half my monthly bill, and $5 a channel is more than fair, right?Then perhaps you'd be one of the ones that would end up paying less. However, if you think the channels you keep would remain unchanged, I think you'd be disappointed. Get ready for sitcoms, reality shows, and political pundits 24/7.
If the others can't appeal to their subscribers, bye bye crap channels.Just because a channel can't garner enough subscribers doesn't mean it's crap. Look at the stuff these days that get the ratings. This is what cable TV may be reduced to if forced to go ALC.
But PS - All of the above is utterly irrelevant. These cable channels are ADVERTISEMENT supported, like newspapers, NOT subscription supported.... so they'd fail because they could no longer sell false numbers of "potential viewers" anymore, so they'd fail because they suck, not because they don't make money from subscribers.You're right that it's irrelevant, but not because of where the money comes from. It's irrelevant because it won't happen any time soon. There's no support for ALC from any group other than consumers. The Democrats don't want ALC because it will hurt diversity in programming. The Republicans don't want ALC because they see it as interfering with a free market. The cable companies don't want ALC because it involves change and may hurt their bottom line. The networks don't want ALC because it would mean fewer channels/less profits. People who work in the TV industry don't want ALC because they may lose their jobs.
Yeah because being hard headed and refusing to change with the times has done so well for us as a country (Car Industry, housing market, manufacturing process, infrastructure improvements, etc)....I'm not saying that ALC is bad; some days, I'm on your side. I flip flop on this all the time because there are such goodsides and downsides to this. Change can be good, but there are always unintended consequences to change. In the end, it's just TV, so there's nothing earth shattering. Just good, honest debate.
BTW, this has gotten way off topic. Sorry.
If the others can't appeal to their subscribers, bye bye crap channels.Just because a channel can't garner enough subscribers doesn't mean it's crap. Look at the stuff these days that get the ratings. This is what cable TV may be reduced to if forced to go ALC.
But PS - All of the above is utterly irrelevant. These cable channels are ADVERTISEMENT supported, like newspapers, NOT subscription supported.... so they'd fail because they could no longer sell false numbers of "potential viewers" anymore, so they'd fail because they suck, not because they don't make money from subscribers.You're right that it's irrelevant, but not because of where the money comes from. It's irrelevant because it won't happen any time soon. There's no support for ALC from any group other than consumers. The Democrats don't want ALC because it will hurt diversity in programming. The Republicans don't want ALC because they see it as interfering with a free market. The cable companies don't want ALC because it involves change and may hurt their bottom line. The networks don't want ALC because it would mean fewer channels/less profits. People who work in the TV industry don't want ALC because they may lose their jobs.
Yeah because being hard headed and refusing to change with the times has done so well for us as a country (Car Industry, housing market, manufacturing process, infrastructure improvements, etc)....I'm not saying that ALC is bad; some days, I'm on your side. I flip flop on this all the time because there are such goodsides and downsides to this. Change can be good, but there are always unintended consequences to change. In the end, it's just TV, so there's nothing earth shattering. Just good, honest debate.
BTW, this has gotten way off topic. Sorry.
maclaptop
Apr 26, 08:21 AM
I wonder who the ringmaster will be?
Not that it matters, they all are trained in the art of smoke & mirrors.
Not that it matters, they all are trained in the art of smoke & mirrors.
more...
gnasher729
Mar 25, 10:35 AM
Samsung and LG already settled with Kodak.
Kodak's (NYSE:EK) market cap is < $1B.
Why doesn't Apple just buy them and continue the suit against RIM?
Probably because Apple's lawyers and engineers have looked at the patent, decided there is little risk for Apple having to pay up, and Apple has no intention spending money to buy ailing companies, and Apple has no intention of suing RIM with patents that RIM is most likely not infringing on either.
And of course it would open up Apple to an avalanche of lawsuits from companies that are not doing too well, have some patent that is vaguely related to some Apple product, and would sue Apple in the hope of being bought out.
Kodak's (NYSE:EK) market cap is < $1B.
Why doesn't Apple just buy them and continue the suit against RIM?
Probably because Apple's lawyers and engineers have looked at the patent, decided there is little risk for Apple having to pay up, and Apple has no intention spending money to buy ailing companies, and Apple has no intention of suing RIM with patents that RIM is most likely not infringing on either.
And of course it would open up Apple to an avalanche of lawsuits from companies that are not doing too well, have some patent that is vaguely related to some Apple product, and would sue Apple in the hope of being bought out.
fourthtunz
Sep 13, 04:06 PM
I think peecees are a great value if, you aren't using pci cards and you build your own but I just got the new dual 867 and it rocks! If your doing video you should check out final cut pro on OSX.2 Very solid and very fast!
I adimit I don't have the very newest pc with the newest apps but the reason the Mac is now an even better deal is the very real speed of the new Machines,the new OS, and the Included apps are very good. Final cut does not exist for the Pc, its nearest competitor, from avid is about $700 more and not as good,so if you factor in everything,the New Macs are the best values in a long time. It will be interesting to see what happens on both sides next year:D
Daniel
I adimit I don't have the very newest pc with the newest apps but the reason the Mac is now an even better deal is the very real speed of the new Machines,the new OS, and the Included apps are very good. Final cut does not exist for the Pc, its nearest competitor, from avid is about $700 more and not as good,so if you factor in everything,the New Macs are the best values in a long time. It will be interesting to see what happens on both sides next year:D
Daniel
more...
TRUCRACKER
Apr 28, 06:24 PM
Arlington, VA Yesterday :(
$3.99 in Springfield, VA :p
Still bad tho
$3.99 in Springfield, VA :p
Still bad tho
JDDavis
Mar 4, 05:04 AM
http://jddavis.zenfolio.com/img/s9/v0/p1055447075-5.jpg
more...
iJon
Apr 25, 11:00 AM
Rich bastard who deserves to be shot 300 times in the heart.. Yes, I hate rich people... I am glad many died in WWII and other wars.. at least they can't take their money which is worthless anyway to heaven.
Yikes, this post is frightening.
Yikes, this post is frightening.
rdowns
Apr 7, 06:36 PM
This farce is merely Act I. Act II will be the fight over raising the debt ceiling. Finally, in Act III, we implode over the 2012 budget.
mook
Nov 7, 11:38 AM
I think the RFID devices have to be basically be touching to actually do anything, I don't think walking through turn style would pick it up. I guess this level of sensitivity is adjustable, but my AMEX card has to actually touch and remain on the reader for few seconds to actually read the card.
You're right. There's a visualisation of the dimensions of RFID 'readable volumes' here:
http://www.nearfield.org/2009/10/immaterials-the-ghost-in-the-field
You're right. There's a visualisation of the dimensions of RFID 'readable volumes' here:
http://www.nearfield.org/2009/10/immaterials-the-ghost-in-the-field
grawk
Feb 24, 11:20 AM
This is fantabulous news. I have been watching ebay listings of snow leopard server, so this makes it a no brainer. I'll just wait a few weeks.
iMikeT
Sep 1, 04:09 AM
I think this is page 1 worthy only if Apple released some new feature in Leopard.:rolleyes:
djdole
Mar 23, 04:57 PM
I'm all for more agencies adopting Macs! Heck, one day we might be able to classify them as switchers :D
You do understand that it's not that they're adopting them as their primary system for day to day use, but rather they're purchasing more because (with the slight increase in popularity of the OSX platform) they have to be able to counter said OSX threats.
They're mirroring the increased OSX hacker population. This isn't really anything for any Apple fanboi to be proud of.
Someone recently said Windows is a house with bars in a bad neighborhood and OSX being a house without locks in the country.
That being true, the FBI is just reacting in the expected manner to the increasing the number of criminals in the country (due to the increased number of country houses).
You do understand that it's not that they're adopting them as their primary system for day to day use, but rather they're purchasing more because (with the slight increase in popularity of the OSX platform) they have to be able to counter said OSX threats.
They're mirroring the increased OSX hacker population. This isn't really anything for any Apple fanboi to be proud of.
Someone recently said Windows is a house with bars in a bad neighborhood and OSX being a house without locks in the country.
That being true, the FBI is just reacting in the expected manner to the increasing the number of criminals in the country (due to the increased number of country houses).
bc2610
Sep 28, 01:33 PM
I have not even downloaded any update yet but I have to say that safari is snappier in anticipation.
dcv
Oct 17, 04:59 PM
Are you all crazy? It's heaving in there at the best of times!
(that's a "maybe" :D)
(that's a "maybe" :D)
No comments:
Post a Comment