jessica.
Apr 25, 09:13 AM
Interesting coincidence. I just got off the line with someone who just told me how her brother was killed 2 weeks ago in a car wreck. A 16 year old was doing 55 in a 35 in a brand new Toyota truck, he hit her brother, t-boned, and he was killed instantly.
So yes, at 16 when you're speeding, you're clearly an awesome and safe driver. :rolleyes: I'm sure this could have happened to anyone by anyone, but at 16 in a nice fancy new car, I'm betting you're more impressed with yourself than you are with the laws on the road.
I'm 20 going 2x the speed limit, in this case the posted limit is 80mph (my car won't go any faster...)
safe driving has nothing to do with age, in face most elderly people are utterly horrible drivers. It all has to do with attention span, (which elderly people just don't have all together) to the point, so long as no one/thing is distracting most young people are great drives.
edit: @xboxer75010 hahahahahahahah http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELZQ-Z6lASI
I disagree. At 16 you lack the years of experience that come in handy when traveling at such high speeds. However, I agree with yg17, it's a bell curve. Elderly people seem to regress into the 16 year old drivers of today. (well some, some 16 year olds think driving 20 mph over the limit is safe and funtastic!)
So yes, at 16 when you're speeding, you're clearly an awesome and safe driver. :rolleyes: I'm sure this could have happened to anyone by anyone, but at 16 in a nice fancy new car, I'm betting you're more impressed with yourself than you are with the laws on the road.
I'm 20 going 2x the speed limit, in this case the posted limit is 80mph (my car won't go any faster...)
safe driving has nothing to do with age, in face most elderly people are utterly horrible drivers. It all has to do with attention span, (which elderly people just don't have all together) to the point, so long as no one/thing is distracting most young people are great drives.
edit: @xboxer75010 hahahahahahahah http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELZQ-Z6lASI
I disagree. At 16 you lack the years of experience that come in handy when traveling at such high speeds. However, I agree with yg17, it's a bell curve. Elderly people seem to regress into the 16 year old drivers of today. (well some, some 16 year olds think driving 20 mph over the limit is safe and funtastic!)
obeygiant
Apr 11, 01:22 AM
Ikea's doing it because they can get away with it. They know labor laws in the US are there to protect the employer, not the employee. They couldn't do this back home in Sweden.
Who is passing all the anti-union legislation? The right or the left?
Are you referring to the public-sector unions that workers must join and must pay dues to? Because Unions exist everywhere in just about every field. How would the recent push against public sector unions collective bargaining effect this private company? It seems IKEA has the power to mistreat its employees because they're desperate for work. They've even hired a firm to "convince" the workers not to unionize.
As Ugg pointed out, the 'right' has pushed for anti-union policies, including 'right-to-work' status for states like Virginia. That said, I don't think this is a 'right' or 'left' issue per se, but rather a gleeful removal of worker's rights to garner jobs—regardless of the health of a community funded by low-wage, short-term positions.
yes, but I'm looking for evidence that the workers are unable to unionize due to a law that the "right" has passed.
Who is passing all the anti-union legislation? The right or the left?
Are you referring to the public-sector unions that workers must join and must pay dues to? Because Unions exist everywhere in just about every field. How would the recent push against public sector unions collective bargaining effect this private company? It seems IKEA has the power to mistreat its employees because they're desperate for work. They've even hired a firm to "convince" the workers not to unionize.
As Ugg pointed out, the 'right' has pushed for anti-union policies, including 'right-to-work' status for states like Virginia. That said, I don't think this is a 'right' or 'left' issue per se, but rather a gleeful removal of worker's rights to garner jobs—regardless of the health of a community funded by low-wage, short-term positions.
yes, but I'm looking for evidence that the workers are unable to unionize due to a law that the "right" has passed.
4God
Aug 28, 01:10 PM
I wonder if some people read the guide I made at all. :confused:
I did after you posted on this thread. As I said, Thanks.
I did after you posted on this thread. As I said, Thanks.
eNcrypTioN
Feb 24, 10:06 AM
People still use McAfee lol... :eek: Apple is smart, I doubt anything bad will come of this.
jessica.
Apr 25, 08:49 AM
Why do I feel like you are one of the people who purposely try to slow people down because you need to be on some higher moral ground and make sure the entire world does the speed you believe is safe?Higher moral ground? Read your posts ... pot meet kettle. :rolleyes:
Because I am going to. I'm a completely safe driver (even when doing 90 or above) until I run into some dunderhead who has to enforce the speed limit themselves. Had that woman just moved like everyone else did, I would have never had to cut her off in order to punish her. And yes I did have to punish her, because she needed to be taught her dang place on the road.I believe it is you who believes he holds some higher moral ground here. I believe that it is you who feels the need to punish someone. Everything you say about her and what she did to you is exactly what you're doing to her. Honking, flashing your lights, tailgating, and break checking her is punishing her for traveling at a safe speed. Just because you're a child in a car that is too much for you to handle and too expensive for a punk 16 year old doesn't make you a ****ing law. You're going 90, I am glad she didn't move and glad that it has you so worked up that you came here to cry about it.
EDIT: @adk - yes I am 16, however in this situation my mother was in the car and actually encouraged me to cut the idiot off. So it's not just an age based thing.
-DonParenting, no license required ... clearly. I think I'll keep an eye on the news in your area so I can see just when and how you kill yourself or worse yet (and much worse yet) someone else because of your awesome driving skills.
I personally love how I get the bad rap, when the woman was the one going under the speed limit and attempted to breakcheck me first. She got what was coming to her. Had she just had some common courtesy and moved over, nothing would of happened. Instead she decided that she had to play traffic cop.
You people are all laughable.
-DonYou're 16 going 20 mph over the speed limit. You are not a COMPLETELY safe driver, not even a little. Your mother supposedly allowing you to do this is equally disgusting. The driver was likely not trying to enforce the speed limit. Just because you're speeding and people are getting out of your way, doesn't mean that her unwillingness to let you by is her way of enforcing anything. Newsflash, just because you're doing 90 in a 70 doesn't mean people HAVE to move. Most move because they fear for their own lives. I also call BS, I bet she wasn't doing 65. You're no more a safe driver than you are honest. Your first post you already concluded that you would have lied about some animal in the road. Doing 90, chances are you wouldn't even see the animal. You are laughable at best. It is not common courtsey to move out of the way of some guy honking, tailgating, and flashing his brights at you. You speak of courtsey and yet you have none.
When someone like you comes knocking on my ass you get to stay behind me while I chill on cruise control. Keep in mind, all those people who moved are witnesses. Should something have happened, at least one would be there. The so-called law and your so-called awesome family member who can supposedly get you out of all of this are powerless when it comes to you touching metal. Rear-ending someone may be 100% the fault of the person behind you until a witness comes forward and explains how the accident came to be. Animal or not, you're screwed.
Because I am going to. I'm a completely safe driver (even when doing 90 or above) until I run into some dunderhead who has to enforce the speed limit themselves. Had that woman just moved like everyone else did, I would have never had to cut her off in order to punish her. And yes I did have to punish her, because she needed to be taught her dang place on the road.I believe it is you who believes he holds some higher moral ground here. I believe that it is you who feels the need to punish someone. Everything you say about her and what she did to you is exactly what you're doing to her. Honking, flashing your lights, tailgating, and break checking her is punishing her for traveling at a safe speed. Just because you're a child in a car that is too much for you to handle and too expensive for a punk 16 year old doesn't make you a ****ing law. You're going 90, I am glad she didn't move and glad that it has you so worked up that you came here to cry about it.
EDIT: @adk - yes I am 16, however in this situation my mother was in the car and actually encouraged me to cut the idiot off. So it's not just an age based thing.
-DonParenting, no license required ... clearly. I think I'll keep an eye on the news in your area so I can see just when and how you kill yourself or worse yet (and much worse yet) someone else because of your awesome driving skills.
I personally love how I get the bad rap, when the woman was the one going under the speed limit and attempted to breakcheck me first. She got what was coming to her. Had she just had some common courtesy and moved over, nothing would of happened. Instead she decided that she had to play traffic cop.
You people are all laughable.
-DonYou're 16 going 20 mph over the speed limit. You are not a COMPLETELY safe driver, not even a little. Your mother supposedly allowing you to do this is equally disgusting. The driver was likely not trying to enforce the speed limit. Just because you're speeding and people are getting out of your way, doesn't mean that her unwillingness to let you by is her way of enforcing anything. Newsflash, just because you're doing 90 in a 70 doesn't mean people HAVE to move. Most move because they fear for their own lives. I also call BS, I bet she wasn't doing 65. You're no more a safe driver than you are honest. Your first post you already concluded that you would have lied about some animal in the road. Doing 90, chances are you wouldn't even see the animal. You are laughable at best. It is not common courtsey to move out of the way of some guy honking, tailgating, and flashing his brights at you. You speak of courtsey and yet you have none.
When someone like you comes knocking on my ass you get to stay behind me while I chill on cruise control. Keep in mind, all those people who moved are witnesses. Should something have happened, at least one would be there. The so-called law and your so-called awesome family member who can supposedly get you out of all of this are powerless when it comes to you touching metal. Rear-ending someone may be 100% the fault of the person behind you until a witness comes forward and explains how the accident came to be. Animal or not, you're screwed.
cadillaccactus
Sep 5, 02:58 PM
If you have access to this media event, please contact us (mailto:webmaster@macrumors.com?Subject=Showtime Event).
aw, MR didn't get invited
aw, MR didn't get invited
kas23
Apr 4, 12:09 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134 Safari/6533.18.5)
No loss to society here. Go Mall Cop.
No loss to society here. Go Mall Cop.
bjdku
Sep 13, 09:40 PM
The only way i'd give up my Treo for an "iPhone" is if it is a true "smart phone". That means PDA functionality. It's got to do everything my Treo does. If it's simply another phone with iTunes on it then it's not worth switching, at least in my opinion.
I am with you on this. I don't see the real compelling reason to have a plain old iPod that makes phone calls and sucks all my battery so I can't play music, or vice versa. It needs to be a compelling smart phone, that will be the inovative part, not the hardware design. We all know it will look like a nano.
I am with you on this. I don't see the real compelling reason to have a plain old iPod that makes phone calls and sucks all my battery so I can't play music, or vice versa. It needs to be a compelling smart phone, that will be the inovative part, not the hardware design. We all know it will look like a nano.
ctdonath
Apr 30, 03:52 PM
Curious that everyone is clamoring for a thunderbolt-enabled machine, but there isn't a single thunderbolt drive available on the market.
what, you think there won't be any for the next 3 years?
what, you think there won't be any for the next 3 years?
CapturedDarknes
Nov 13, 10:38 PM
No, actually it says:
(d) To the best of Your knowledge and belief, Your Application and Licensed Application Information do not and will not violate, misappropriate, or infringe any Apple or third party copyrights, trademarks, rights of privacy and publicity, trade secrets, patents, or other proprietary or legal rights (e.g. musical composition or performance rights, video rights, photography or image rights, logo rights, third party data rights, etc. for content and materials that may be included in Your Application);
This is language with legal meaning. There is almost certainly no copyright infringement (fair use, which is a multi-factor test - making money off of the "copying" doesn't eliminate it. Or implied license/exhaustion.)
It doesn't say "you can't use apple icons." It says "you can't INFRINGE apple copyright."
You're absolutely right, which means, unless you OWN or LICENSE the icons from Apple, you can't use them. That's what copyright infringement means.
(d) To the best of Your knowledge and belief, Your Application and Licensed Application Information do not and will not violate, misappropriate, or infringe any Apple or third party copyrights, trademarks, rights of privacy and publicity, trade secrets, patents, or other proprietary or legal rights (e.g. musical composition or performance rights, video rights, photography or image rights, logo rights, third party data rights, etc. for content and materials that may be included in Your Application);
This is language with legal meaning. There is almost certainly no copyright infringement (fair use, which is a multi-factor test - making money off of the "copying" doesn't eliminate it. Or implied license/exhaustion.)
It doesn't say "you can't use apple icons." It says "you can't INFRINGE apple copyright."
You're absolutely right, which means, unless you OWN or LICENSE the icons from Apple, you can't use them. That's what copyright infringement means.
elgrecomac
Mar 30, 11:25 AM
He will need to be a 'cunning linguist' to assist Microsoft.
:cool:
:cool:
Lesser Evets
Mar 22, 02:56 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if the iMac and new Mac mini are the replacement for the Mac Pro...
By the time November comes around, Thunderbolt may cause the death of the Mac Pro.
Your logic is half-baked. The MacPro has one specific function which the iMac will probably never have: instant customization. You can stack tons of drive space in them, tons of RAM, and choose any sort of monitor config.
Sure, iMacs might be able to do something like that, but with a lot of garbage floating around and cluttering everything. Also, the processors in the Pro are always beefier.
However, I'd agree that for almost all people in the market, an iMac would be just as good as a MacPro. In 4 years I will probably replace my 2007 Pro with an iMac. Spending $4000 for a good Pro isn't worth it compared to $2000 for an iMac.
By the time November comes around, Thunderbolt may cause the death of the Mac Pro.
Your logic is half-baked. The MacPro has one specific function which the iMac will probably never have: instant customization. You can stack tons of drive space in them, tons of RAM, and choose any sort of monitor config.
Sure, iMacs might be able to do something like that, but with a lot of garbage floating around and cluttering everything. Also, the processors in the Pro are always beefier.
However, I'd agree that for almost all people in the market, an iMac would be just as good as a MacPro. In 4 years I will probably replace my 2007 Pro with an iMac. Spending $4000 for a good Pro isn't worth it compared to $2000 for an iMac.
blybug
Sep 5, 10:00 AM
Anyone else notice that Elgato have now pulled their Eyehome media streaming device without a replacement? Anything to do with rumors of a rival device from Apple?
I'd be overjoyed if Apple has "bought out" the EyeHome from Elgato and gives it the polish and compatibility only Apple could do. I've used EyeHome for over 2 years and it's at best "OK" as a media hub. The box itself is tacky (make it look like the mini or a stereo component...and give it an optical drive), the on-screen interface is pretty kludgy (replace it with Front Row), protected media cannot play (of course Apple can fix that), MP4 support/quality is inconsistent and H.264 support completely absent (again Apple can fix that).
I've always seen EyeHome as a good try by a 3rd party, but really needing some spit and shine that only Apple could provide. I bet the quiet disappearance of this product from Elgato will indeed prove itself to be the hardware analogy to SoundJam-->iTunes. The new Apple "EyeHome" (iHome??? hmmm...already taken...iPod Home?? Front Row Media Center??) should be a very stripped-down mac mini that boots up to Front Row with the addition of a "Settings" menu, and access to purchasing music and/or movies which end up in the iTunes library of a connected computer.
I was planning to buy a mini to replace my EyeHome as soon as it had Front Row available, but then the price went up by $100...simply not worth buying a whole computer for this use. Sell a device like this for $200 and you've got me!:D
I'd be overjoyed if Apple has "bought out" the EyeHome from Elgato and gives it the polish and compatibility only Apple could do. I've used EyeHome for over 2 years and it's at best "OK" as a media hub. The box itself is tacky (make it look like the mini or a stereo component...and give it an optical drive), the on-screen interface is pretty kludgy (replace it with Front Row), protected media cannot play (of course Apple can fix that), MP4 support/quality is inconsistent and H.264 support completely absent (again Apple can fix that).
I've always seen EyeHome as a good try by a 3rd party, but really needing some spit and shine that only Apple could provide. I bet the quiet disappearance of this product from Elgato will indeed prove itself to be the hardware analogy to SoundJam-->iTunes. The new Apple "EyeHome" (iHome??? hmmm...already taken...iPod Home?? Front Row Media Center??) should be a very stripped-down mac mini that boots up to Front Row with the addition of a "Settings" menu, and access to purchasing music and/or movies which end up in the iTunes library of a connected computer.
I was planning to buy a mini to replace my EyeHome as soon as it had Front Row available, but then the price went up by $100...simply not worth buying a whole computer for this use. Sell a device like this for $200 and you've got me!:D
whateverandever
Mar 23, 05:21 PM
People who speed and drive under the influence make me sick. Pull the apps. And when you catch the scum, throw them in jail and take away their licence. The don't deserve to walk among us.
So... you're calling everyone who's ever gone over the speed limit scum that is worth of jail? Chances are good you'd fall into that category as well, even if you only accidentally went 1mph over the speed limit -- breaking the law is breaking the law.
So... you're calling everyone who's ever gone over the speed limit scum that is worth of jail? Chances are good you'd fall into that category as well, even if you only accidentally went 1mph over the speed limit -- breaking the law is breaking the law.
GGJstudios
Mar 18, 11:19 AM
The biggest reason that we have been Virus and attack free in general is because we have been such an exclusive club for so long. ...
I mean really when 92% of the world runs on Windows, and mere 5% runs on OSX, who would you target?
The market share myth is exactly that: a myth. It has little or nothing to do with market share.
But as that percentage begins to increase
It already has increased, while the number of viruses that run on current Mac systems has decreased... to zero.
... and the typical Mac user has more money that the typical Windows user
You can't determine a person's wealth by the computer they have. Some are millionaires and spend $500 on a computer because it's not that important to them. Some are struggling to survive and spend every penny they can borrow to buy the latest gear. If you measure a person's financial strength by the type of computer they have, Mac users would rank higher in most cases, since Macs are more expensive than PCs with the same specs.
Your arguments have no basis in fact.
The Mac Malware Myth (http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/01/29/the-mac-malware-myth/)
Apple market share tops 10%, Windows share lowest since tracking began (http://www.tuaw.com/2009/01/02/apple-market-share-tops-10-windows-share-lowest-since-tracking/)
I mean really when 92% of the world runs on Windows, and mere 5% runs on OSX, who would you target?
The market share myth is exactly that: a myth. It has little or nothing to do with market share.
But as that percentage begins to increase
It already has increased, while the number of viruses that run on current Mac systems has decreased... to zero.
... and the typical Mac user has more money that the typical Windows user
You can't determine a person's wealth by the computer they have. Some are millionaires and spend $500 on a computer because it's not that important to them. Some are struggling to survive and spend every penny they can borrow to buy the latest gear. If you measure a person's financial strength by the type of computer they have, Mac users would rank higher in most cases, since Macs are more expensive than PCs with the same specs.
Your arguments have no basis in fact.
The Mac Malware Myth (http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/01/29/the-mac-malware-myth/)
Apple market share tops 10%, Windows share lowest since tracking began (http://www.tuaw.com/2009/01/02/apple-market-share-tops-10-windows-share-lowest-since-tracking/)
jz1492
Nov 13, 04:54 PM
So I guess this puts every iPhone VNC client in violation of Apple's terms as it would be displaying Apple copyrighted images...
I'm on RA's side on this one!
You may be right, but we haven't seen the emails or the actual rejected programs.
Furthermore, "The Client Is Always Right", not because they are, but as a matter of principle. The client is in command.
And I insist, Apple's model makes them the client, which I have to admit brings many benefits to the end user and the platform in general -not so many to the suppliers or developers, except maybe for the fact that it makes the end user more confident to part with their money, of which Apple has the numbers to prove.
I'm on RA's side on this one!
You may be right, but we haven't seen the emails or the actual rejected programs.
Furthermore, "The Client Is Always Right", not because they are, but as a matter of principle. The client is in command.
And I insist, Apple's model makes them the client, which I have to admit brings many benefits to the end user and the platform in general -not so many to the suppliers or developers, except maybe for the fact that it makes the end user more confident to part with their money, of which Apple has the numbers to prove.
dokein
Sep 27, 05:04 AM
I really hope Apple doesn't jump on the camera-phone bandwagon. Seems to go against their philosophy of having devices that do few things but to them far better. And it would make the phone useless to me. But that's just because my employers are sensitive about such devices, with the nuclear reactors and all.
And signing on with Cingular or any other major carrier seems like an even bigger mistake. The only way to truly improve the cell phone user experience is to take them out of the picture and introduce a fair and simple billing system (i.e. MVNO w/ daily flat rate, iTunes-style micropayments).
And signing on with Cingular or any other major carrier seems like an even bigger mistake. The only way to truly improve the cell phone user experience is to take them out of the picture and introduce a fair and simple billing system (i.e. MVNO w/ daily flat rate, iTunes-style micropayments).
Dmac77
Apr 25, 12:40 AM
I personally love how I get the bad rap, when the woman was the one going under the speed limit and attempted to breakcheck me first. She got what was coming to her. Had she just had some common courtesy and moved over, nothing would of happened. Instead she decided that she had to play traffic cop.
You people are all laughable.
-Don
You people are all laughable.
-Don
dongmin
Sep 4, 09:28 PM
There may be lots of TV options out there, but right now Apple isn't servicing any of them. They're losing potential business to 3rd Party companies like Elgato. If they released a simple box with analog/digital standard/hidef options, they would be servicing the overwhelming majority of the market (most digital, satelite and other special services require set-top boxes anyway).I don't see anything wrong with letting Third Party developers pick up the slack where Apple is not delivering. EyeTV is a pretty good product for people who want PVR fundationality on their Macs. Sure, it'd be great if Apple did something innovative in this arena, but for a simple PVR, EyeTV does the job.
Counterfit
Apr 25, 03:10 AM
Because I actually care about my grandparents. They have done something genuine for me, they have cared for me, they have loved me, etc. Some random idiot woman in a minivan is just another person, why should I care about her? Because she is a human? I think not. I have no personal connection to that woman, I cannot feasibly or easily use her to advance myself, so why should I care what happens to her today, tomorrow, or 20 years from now? Logically, I shouldn't; emotionally and morally I should because she is another person, I think that is nonsensical.
-Don
I await the day that the person you run off the road is the one who can destroy your career and/or life.
-Don
I await the day that the person you run off the road is the one who can destroy your career and/or life.
mrsir2009
Apr 25, 01:42 AM
wow clearly no one in your family should not be hind the wheel of a car.
You all do road rage.
One day someone will pull a gun on you.
Sadly the cop was a crappy investigatory because your mom did an illegally lane changed. plus road rage and really there was a lot of room to prove it but you had a lazy cop and then a mother who lies and teachers her son to lie and pull the same crap.
Speaking of road rage: Recently my Nana leaned out the window of her car and shook her fist at a taxi driver because he accidentally cut her off or something. It was so funny, and it was good that the taxi driver didn't take offense ;)
You all do road rage.
One day someone will pull a gun on you.
Sadly the cop was a crappy investigatory because your mom did an illegally lane changed. plus road rage and really there was a lot of room to prove it but you had a lazy cop and then a mother who lies and teachers her son to lie and pull the same crap.
Speaking of road rage: Recently my Nana leaned out the window of her car and shook her fist at a taxi driver because he accidentally cut her off or something. It was so funny, and it was good that the taxi driver didn't take offense ;)
alust2013
Apr 25, 12:50 AM
I think the point is that traffic laws were made to prevent stuff like this in the first place. Had you been obeying the law, there would be no issue, other than maybe a slight annoyance for a couple minutes driving a little slow.
If I'm reading this correctly, neither the woman nor you had a right to drive like that. Just because someone pulls something like a brake check, doesn't give you or anyone else the right to act dangerously. Aggressive driving is what gets people hurt or killed.
If I'm reading this correctly, neither the woman nor you had a right to drive like that. Just because someone pulls something like a brake check, doesn't give you or anyone else the right to act dangerously. Aggressive driving is what gets people hurt or killed.
ECUpirate44
Mar 29, 11:39 AM
I use both.... and all I can say is "CUT and paste". Windows has had it for years, OS X SL doesn't. Same with window snap.
Huh? Command C and Command V to cut and paste? You can also highlight the text and right click.
Command Shift 4= snap selection
Command Shirt 3= full screen.
Huh? Command C and Command V to cut and paste? You can also highlight the text and right click.
Command Shift 4= snap selection
Command Shirt 3= full screen.
hondaboy945
Aug 23, 10:23 PM
So dose this mean ms can sue apple if they decided to use wifi in ipods ????
I skimmed to this post, so sorry if it has been answered. Does MS own every Wi-Fi license. Just wanted too know.
I skimmed to this post, so sorry if it has been answered. Does MS own every Wi-Fi license. Just wanted too know.