Don't panic
May 5, 07:42 AM
I'd like to make sure of some things.
The villain started with 0 points. He then earned 2 points by taking two turns.
We did our thing
He took two more turns earning 2 more points for 4 total. He obviously used at least one point to make a goblin. So he had 3 or less points, depending on whether he bought more traps. They could be anywhere, even far from where we currently are (e.g., he could be putting defenses around his lair. )
Do I have that straight?
You got all that correct.
ravenvii, correct me if i am wrong, but wouldn't the points remaining be 2, and not 3, since in the turn he summoned and placed the goblin he would not be collecting any point?
vR1T1:collect 1 point, TP=1
vR1T2:use point for goblin, TP=0
vR2T1: collect point?. TP=1?
vR2T2: collect point?, TP=2?
The villain started with 0 points. He then earned 2 points by taking two turns.
We did our thing
He took two more turns earning 2 more points for 4 total. He obviously used at least one point to make a goblin. So he had 3 or less points, depending on whether he bought more traps. They could be anywhere, even far from where we currently are (e.g., he could be putting defenses around his lair. )
Do I have that straight?
You got all that correct.
ravenvii, correct me if i am wrong, but wouldn't the points remaining be 2, and not 3, since in the turn he summoned and placed the goblin he would not be collecting any point?
vR1T1:collect 1 point, TP=1
vR1T2:use point for goblin, TP=0
vR2T1: collect point?. TP=1?
vR2T2: collect point?, TP=2?
Winni
Apr 6, 03:53 AM
It sort of makes you think what it would be like if Apple took a hand at other industries. This theme is absolutely fugly. Toyota basically turned the iphone into a zone.
What if the tables were turned? If Toyota can make the iphone so unappealing, then how much better would the design of a Toyota be if Apple redesigned it?
Just because you know how to design a computer user interface doesn't mean that you also know how to design a car. Cars are much more complex than computers -- all cars have computers built in, but no computer has a car built in.
Also, most of Apple's products look better than they are user friendly or work well. Their keyboards and mice are horrible, for example - every Microsoft or Logitech keyboard or mice blows the Apple competition out of the water when it comes to ergonomics. And ergonomics is something that's VERY important in a car. Apple very obviously sucks at that.
If you want a car that looks and feels like something that could have been designed by Apple, buy a Smart (Diesel). They're great and affordable city and short distance cars, I love them. The only difference is that if Apple would have designed the Smart, it would cost as much as BMW.
What if the tables were turned? If Toyota can make the iphone so unappealing, then how much better would the design of a Toyota be if Apple redesigned it?
Just because you know how to design a computer user interface doesn't mean that you also know how to design a car. Cars are much more complex than computers -- all cars have computers built in, but no computer has a car built in.
Also, most of Apple's products look better than they are user friendly or work well. Their keyboards and mice are horrible, for example - every Microsoft or Logitech keyboard or mice blows the Apple competition out of the water when it comes to ergonomics. And ergonomics is something that's VERY important in a car. Apple very obviously sucks at that.
If you want a car that looks and feels like something that could have been designed by Apple, buy a Smart (Diesel). They're great and affordable city and short distance cars, I love them. The only difference is that if Apple would have designed the Smart, it would cost as much as BMW.
vwsoul
Sep 16, 12:20 PM
I do the ordering for Macs for my company, i ordered a 17" MBP for our new art director early sept and it arrived about a less than a week later. I ordered a new 15" MBP yesterday and the shipping date was Sept 20.
However, i just read this forum and cancelled the order thinking perhaps i rather not take the risk and wait for the new macbooks, hopefully they do come out on the 19th or 25th.
However, i just read this forum and cancelled the order thinking perhaps i rather not take the risk and wait for the new macbooks, hopefully they do come out on the 19th or 25th.
adbe
Apr 5, 02:40 PM
While I agree in a sense, it's commonly known that there's no way to plug every hole, so you're scooping out water from a sinking ship with a cup. Every iOS device has been jailbroken since release, many several times using several exploits. There will never be a day when a software company will be smarter than the hacking community... software companies can't afford to buy them all :-)
The hacking community isn't any smarter than the people at Apple. The tools used by the jailbreak community, and by Charlie Miller are standard tools that Apple developers have access to as well. For some reason Apple don't seem to be making great use of those tools.
MS started running fuzzing tools and auditing for buffer overflows aggressively around the time of XP SP2. It's taken some years but the payoff has been huge and obvious.
Apple need to up their game. iOS and OSX are seriously in need of major security improvements. If/when Apple quit treating security as MSs problem, jail breaking will become extremely hard. That's a good thing.
Now, will the jail break community just bugger off to Android? Most likely. Are there enough of them that Apple will care? I couldn't say. If there are, then maybe that'll be a useful lesson for Apple, and a bit more effort will be put into allowing users to tweak their phone natively.
The hacking community isn't any smarter than the people at Apple. The tools used by the jailbreak community, and by Charlie Miller are standard tools that Apple developers have access to as well. For some reason Apple don't seem to be making great use of those tools.
MS started running fuzzing tools and auditing for buffer overflows aggressively around the time of XP SP2. It's taken some years but the payoff has been huge and obvious.
Apple need to up their game. iOS and OSX are seriously in need of major security improvements. If/when Apple quit treating security as MSs problem, jail breaking will become extremely hard. That's a good thing.
Now, will the jail break community just bugger off to Android? Most likely. Are there enough of them that Apple will care? I couldn't say. If there are, then maybe that'll be a useful lesson for Apple, and a bit more effort will be put into allowing users to tweak their phone natively.
macenforcer
Aug 7, 09:55 PM
actually crucial already has your ram, apple's basically using an intel 5000 motherboard:
http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.asp?Mfr%2BProductline=Intel%2B+Motherboards&mfr=Intel&tabid=AM&model=S5000XVN&submit=Go
Nice. So this is it huh?
RAM 2 x 1GB (http://www.crucial.com/store/MPartspecs.Asp?mtbpoid=EE744046A5CA7304&WSMD=S5000XVN&WSPN=CT2KIT12872AF667)
http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.asp?Mfr%2BProductline=Intel%2B+Motherboards&mfr=Intel&tabid=AM&model=S5000XVN&submit=Go
Nice. So this is it huh?
RAM 2 x 1GB (http://www.crucial.com/store/MPartspecs.Asp?mtbpoid=EE744046A5CA7304&WSMD=S5000XVN&WSPN=CT2KIT12872AF667)
Anonymous Freak
May 6, 12:17 AM
Image (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/06/apple-to-move-from-intel-to-arm-processors-in-future-laptops/)
Article Link: Apple to Move from Intel to ARM Processors in Future Laptops? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/06/apple-to-move-from-intel-to-arm-processors-in-future-laptops/)
Yeah, but making the prediction "Apple is going to continue their long-standing practice of alternating between GPU vendors by switching to the other one!" is a heck of a lot easier to make than "Apple is going to throw away tons of user goodwill by screwing them through yet another architecture change!"
Just last week, there was a rumor that Apple would have their custom ARM chips fabbed by Intel. That strikes me as a *LOT* more believable than Apple switching away from Intel now.
So I just bought a new 4 core Sandy Bridge iMac tonight and now this news breaks. Is ARM actually building anything in any way shape or form that competes with the Intel X86 stuff right now or is this just vaporware at this point?
At this point, pure rumor, not even vaporware, as vaporware implies the company has actually announced something.
ARM does have chips that can compete at the very lowest end of x86, such as with the chips presently running Netbooks. But it doesn't have anything even remotely competitive with the mainstream chips. (To use names: They compete with Atom, not with Core.)
Article Link: Apple to Move from Intel to ARM Processors in Future Laptops? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/06/apple-to-move-from-intel-to-arm-processors-in-future-laptops/)
Yeah, but making the prediction "Apple is going to continue their long-standing practice of alternating between GPU vendors by switching to the other one!" is a heck of a lot easier to make than "Apple is going to throw away tons of user goodwill by screwing them through yet another architecture change!"
Just last week, there was a rumor that Apple would have their custom ARM chips fabbed by Intel. That strikes me as a *LOT* more believable than Apple switching away from Intel now.
So I just bought a new 4 core Sandy Bridge iMac tonight and now this news breaks. Is ARM actually building anything in any way shape or form that competes with the Intel X86 stuff right now or is this just vaporware at this point?
At this point, pure rumor, not even vaporware, as vaporware implies the company has actually announced something.
ARM does have chips that can compete at the very lowest end of x86, such as with the chips presently running Netbooks. But it doesn't have anything even remotely competitive with the mainstream chips. (To use names: They compete with Atom, not with Core.)
Celtic-moniker
May 6, 02:21 AM
Ahhhh Macrumors.
Every time I see a new rumour IOS devices, there's usually a 7 or 8 members that complain that 'This is MAC rumours, not IPHONE rumours'.
Well kids, Here's a whopper of a rumour for you members that keep complaining. Regardless of the fact that it's totally and utterly full of crap, it's about MAC, and it's a rumour. So you can all go and roll around in your sty with glee.
Enjoy.
For the rest of you. Man... this is utter crap.
Every time I see a new rumour IOS devices, there's usually a 7 or 8 members that complain that 'This is MAC rumours, not IPHONE rumours'.
Well kids, Here's a whopper of a rumour for you members that keep complaining. Regardless of the fact that it's totally and utterly full of crap, it's about MAC, and it's a rumour. So you can all go and roll around in your sty with glee.
Enjoy.
For the rest of you. Man... this is utter crap.
grapes911
May 2, 08:02 PM
I understand the benefits of the SI system. I honestly think it's a better system and we should use it. That being said, I don't like change. Heck, many people don't like change. I understand our system. I know when I've driven about 10 miles. I'd struggle guessing when I've driven 10 kilometers. Why change now?
And fyi, we actually use United States customary units, which are very close to imperial units.
And fyi, we actually use United States customary units, which are very close to imperial units.
Thunderhawks
Apr 5, 04:05 PM
Godwins Law "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"
Yes, Germans still tie their shoes by making little "knotsies/nazis"and the real reason Hitler committed suicide was that he got his gas bill.
It won't be long before somebody posts the Hitler and the Dallas Cowboys clip as Hitler and the iphone.
Geez!
Yes, Germans still tie their shoes by making little "knotsies/nazis"and the real reason Hitler committed suicide was that he got his gas bill.
It won't be long before somebody posts the Hitler and the Dallas Cowboys clip as Hitler and the iphone.
Geez!
b!temark
May 4, 03:43 PM
It's good to see the debate on the best delivery mechanism for large software releases such as this; there are clearly benefits for Apple to push it through the infrastructure they already have in place.
In my opinion, this is just another nail in the coffin for Apple resellers. Not content with giving single-digit margins on hardware, Apple is now actively removing another method of generating revenue. Software has better reseller margins (~15-20%) than hardware, but Apple's progress with the App store has seen key applications (iWork, iLife) on there for a substantial discount.
There are no reseller/affiliate arrangements for the App store, and resellers can't compete with their discount offerings (as Apple set both wholesale and retail pricing). As a result, resellers business will be affected, and continue to be affected if they continue down this path.
</rant>
*Disclaimer: I'm an Apple reseller
In my opinion, this is just another nail in the coffin for Apple resellers. Not content with giving single-digit margins on hardware, Apple is now actively removing another method of generating revenue. Software has better reseller margins (~15-20%) than hardware, but Apple's progress with the App store has seen key applications (iWork, iLife) on there for a substantial discount.
There are no reseller/affiliate arrangements for the App store, and resellers can't compete with their discount offerings (as Apple set both wholesale and retail pricing). As a result, resellers business will be affected, and continue to be affected if they continue down this path.
</rant>
*Disclaimer: I'm an Apple reseller
GoodWatch
Apr 5, 01:53 PM
"Toyota had agreed to do so to "maintain their good relationship with Apple," "
Toyota has a relationship with Apple, good or bad? Why? I don't see the connection.
The upcoming iPrius ;)
Toyota has a relationship with Apple, good or bad? Why? I don't see the connection.
The upcoming iPrius ;)
Don't panic
May 6, 10:30 PM
we don't enter otHer Rooms without exploting.
we delegate the exploring.
we had just explored that closet ("that's how we got the golden ... rooster)
so it's safe to leave.
now We are in another room. ucf join us by himself. then when it's our turn again FIRST ucf explores, THEN we move. the next round he moves, then we explore.
at the end of the round we are one turn ahead.
easy.
we delegate the exploring.
we had just explored that closet ("that's how we got the golden ... rooster)
so it's safe to leave.
now We are in another room. ucf join us by himself. then when it's our turn again FIRST ucf explores, THEN we move. the next round he moves, then we explore.
at the end of the round we are one turn ahead.
easy.
gugy
Aug 7, 03:15 PM
on the Macrumors live feed Steve said new announcements coming in the week or next week. Any comments?
Elijahg
Apr 23, 06:45 PM
Instead of pixel based images that are just bigger, why not simply ship vector based icons/wallpapers ?
KDE supported SVG as a format for wallpapers and icons something like 10 years ago... That way, it doesn't matter what the display resolution is, the icon always looks sharp and non-pixelated.
I'd rather Apple work on making SVG the standard graphics format for graphics ressources than just bumping up the pixel count (and the file size!).
Heck, if they don't like SVG (which is just a bunch of XML), they could go with one of the other vector based image formats or come up with one of their own.
Translating a photo to a vector based format would be completely pointless and would end up massive. Take for example the Snow Leopard Prowl JPEG. It's 1.2MB, and converting to BMP or TIFF (both describe each pixel individually, i.e. lossless) makes it 12mb, 10 times the size. Converting it to the much less efficient SVG, makes it insanely massive; 225mb or 187.5 times bigger to be exact.
Computer generated imagery can be converted to a vector format more efficiently, as long as the source is available. The computer knows that for example, there is a gradient starting at X,Y and ending at X,Y with colour RGB at the start, and colour RGB at the end. Thus eliminating the need to keep detail about each pixel individually. This is great for things such as icons and certain web images, but for images with lots of detail, it quickly becomes much less efficient than even the highest quality JPEG. For real photos, it's pointless to vectorize. You'd just end up pixellating the image when scaled over it's original size anyway. So in other words, it's unlikely we'll see vector graphics for most icons and most certainly not for desktop backgrounds.
I agree with others about Apple needing to beef up the GPUs if they want retina displays in their Macs. They always seem to put last-generation cards into them... I'm sure it wouldn't keep them away from iOS development for [i]too[/] long to add the latest, even as BTO. Valve has really helped gaming on the Mac, bringing great new releases like Left 4 Dead 2 and Portal 2 at the same time as Windows. At least it seems Apple have had a kick up their ass from Valve pointing out the inefficiencies in OpenGL. Maybe that's what's made them hire a few gaming-type developers...? C'mon Apple!
KDE supported SVG as a format for wallpapers and icons something like 10 years ago... That way, it doesn't matter what the display resolution is, the icon always looks sharp and non-pixelated.
I'd rather Apple work on making SVG the standard graphics format for graphics ressources than just bumping up the pixel count (and the file size!).
Heck, if they don't like SVG (which is just a bunch of XML), they could go with one of the other vector based image formats or come up with one of their own.
Translating a photo to a vector based format would be completely pointless and would end up massive. Take for example the Snow Leopard Prowl JPEG. It's 1.2MB, and converting to BMP or TIFF (both describe each pixel individually, i.e. lossless) makes it 12mb, 10 times the size. Converting it to the much less efficient SVG, makes it insanely massive; 225mb or 187.5 times bigger to be exact.
Computer generated imagery can be converted to a vector format more efficiently, as long as the source is available. The computer knows that for example, there is a gradient starting at X,Y and ending at X,Y with colour RGB at the start, and colour RGB at the end. Thus eliminating the need to keep detail about each pixel individually. This is great for things such as icons and certain web images, but for images with lots of detail, it quickly becomes much less efficient than even the highest quality JPEG. For real photos, it's pointless to vectorize. You'd just end up pixellating the image when scaled over it's original size anyway. So in other words, it's unlikely we'll see vector graphics for most icons and most certainly not for desktop backgrounds.
I agree with others about Apple needing to beef up the GPUs if they want retina displays in their Macs. They always seem to put last-generation cards into them... I'm sure it wouldn't keep them away from iOS development for [i]too[/] long to add the latest, even as BTO. Valve has really helped gaming on the Mac, bringing great new releases like Left 4 Dead 2 and Portal 2 at the same time as Windows. At least it seems Apple have had a kick up their ass from Valve pointing out the inefficiencies in OpenGL. Maybe that's what's made them hire a few gaming-type developers...? C'mon Apple!
ticman
Nov 5, 06:20 PM
Thanks to Tstreete and Jade for sharing information about the TomTom car kit and "other" places that it can be purchased at a discount. Also thanks for researching other vendors. Also, whoever posted info on the Arkon Friction Mount--also thanks as that may be a good option to avoid window mounting.
I am waiting for Tstreete to do his "acid" test and hopefully report back.
Couple of questions:
Assume you mounted on windshield. How was "view" while driving. Could you see the iphone and maps easily? Might a dashboard mount be better as it would be closer?
Also, how do you connect the mount to your radio system? Sorry if stupid question but haven't seen anything on it other than you need audio cable. Is it hardwired or a plugin somewhere near the radio. From reading the above posts it appears that spoken directions come thru radio speakers as would music BUT phone calls come through iphone/tomtom speakers. Correct?
If I have bluetooth via the steering wheel can that be incorporated with the car kit? not sure i would want to as it was a pain to use when i had it set up in the first place. I also had a BlueAnt bluetooth that I used with my BB Storm but it will not sync my contact list while using the iphone. Might I be able to use this feature? again might just be easier to use iphone voice dialing.
Thanks all for helpful information. I too agree that we each make our own decision on whether or not to by the tomtom dock. It depends on what we are trying to accomplish. Bashing the price point is really counterproductive as we each have the option to buy it or not. oops didn't mean to get on a soapbox here.
Thanks again,
Mike
I am waiting for Tstreete to do his "acid" test and hopefully report back.
Couple of questions:
Assume you mounted on windshield. How was "view" while driving. Could you see the iphone and maps easily? Might a dashboard mount be better as it would be closer?
Also, how do you connect the mount to your radio system? Sorry if stupid question but haven't seen anything on it other than you need audio cable. Is it hardwired or a plugin somewhere near the radio. From reading the above posts it appears that spoken directions come thru radio speakers as would music BUT phone calls come through iphone/tomtom speakers. Correct?
If I have bluetooth via the steering wheel can that be incorporated with the car kit? not sure i would want to as it was a pain to use when i had it set up in the first place. I also had a BlueAnt bluetooth that I used with my BB Storm but it will not sync my contact list while using the iphone. Might I be able to use this feature? again might just be easier to use iphone voice dialing.
Thanks all for helpful information. I too agree that we each make our own decision on whether or not to by the tomtom dock. It depends on what we are trying to accomplish. Bashing the price point is really counterproductive as we each have the option to buy it or not. oops didn't mean to get on a soapbox here.
Thanks again,
Mike
GoodWatch
Apr 25, 09:01 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I don't get the big deal about it. If you want to be anonymous, get off fb, twitter, macrumors, etc. Then cancel all Internet plans you have and your cellular plan. Then no one will ever know where you are unless you tell them.
I don't think that is the point here. Apple, arguably the greatest and most customer-centric company with the world's best smart phone, the best OS and magical appliances (at least, that is what I'm being told here over and over again) collects location data without your prior knowledge or consent. If you become a member of MacRumors it is your own, deliberate, decision. But I already can see where this is going. Cue the drone-like Apple defenders, I hear them coming ;)
I don't get the big deal about it. If you want to be anonymous, get off fb, twitter, macrumors, etc. Then cancel all Internet plans you have and your cellular plan. Then no one will ever know where you are unless you tell them.
I don't think that is the point here. Apple, arguably the greatest and most customer-centric company with the world's best smart phone, the best OS and magical appliances (at least, that is what I'm being told here over and over again) collects location data without your prior knowledge or consent. If you become a member of MacRumors it is your own, deliberate, decision. But I already can see where this is going. Cue the drone-like Apple defenders, I hear them coming ;)
MacSA
Jul 22, 08:48 AM
Surely they can't continue to justify a Core Solo.
I hope not, it seems even Apple are embarassed by them, they only have the dual core models out on the shop floors.
I hope not, it seems even Apple are embarassed by them, they only have the dual core models out on the shop floors.
baleensavage
Aug 7, 01:56 PM
All I can say is Apple better be coming out with a mid-range tower. Upping the baseline of the MacPro to $2500, what is that. Sure it looks like a sweet computer, but what about small businesses or starving artists who cant afford that. Now we're stuck with the all-in-ones.
jnc
May 8, 04:55 AM
It's naive to assume that Apple won't use MobileMe data in the future to serve you ads.
the moment I see an ad on mobileme is the moment i stop using it.... it's a "perk"
Given the [lack of acceptable] performance of the current service, all of these things are just going to be painful to use. If they can devote some more bandwidth to them, I could see it being a hit.
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/02/22/aerial-footage-of-apples-north-carolina-data-center/ maybe?
the moment I see an ad on mobileme is the moment i stop using it.... it's a "perk"
Given the [lack of acceptable] performance of the current service, all of these things are just going to be painful to use. If they can devote some more bandwidth to them, I could see it being a hit.
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/02/22/aerial-footage-of-apples-north-carolina-data-center/ maybe?
Reach
Sep 16, 07:59 AM
Now THAT's what I would like:
"Since the release of the 15 inch MacBook Pro in January, speculation on the forthcoming Apple laptops is spreading throughout the net. Meanwhile, MacosXrumors has received a very unexpected report, providing information about one of the forthcoming MacBook Pros.
The sources that can be qualified as �very reliable� (yes you read it well), are claiming that Apple plans to keep similar display size for its entry level Mac Book Pro by releasing what sources called an �ultra-thin 12 inch Mac Book Pro�."
Source: www.macosxrumors.com
I would buy one on the same day.
Thats some optimistic reading mister. Not VERY reliable, just reliable. And the report is not connected to the newest rumor, it's something they heard about earlier this year and they're unable to confirm that it applies to the 25th. Oh well, maybe you read another article than me?
"Since the release of the 15 inch MacBook Pro in January, speculation on the forthcoming Apple laptops is spreading throughout the net. Meanwhile, MacosXrumors has received a very unexpected report, providing information about one of the forthcoming MacBook Pros.
The sources that can be qualified as �very reliable� (yes you read it well), are claiming that Apple plans to keep similar display size for its entry level Mac Book Pro by releasing what sources called an �ultra-thin 12 inch Mac Book Pro�."
Source: www.macosxrumors.com
I would buy one on the same day.
Thats some optimistic reading mister. Not VERY reliable, just reliable. And the report is not connected to the newest rumor, it's something they heard about earlier this year and they're unable to confirm that it applies to the 25th. Oh well, maybe you read another article than me?
navguy
Jan 6, 06:10 PM
after a week of experimenting ...
no rattle
good bluetooth connection
landscape position is delicate, but holding fine - no movement on bumps (i've tested center position on back and shifted toward bottom in landscape; both work well)
GPS lock is interesting ... 1. definitely takes mount GPS 20-30 seconds from cold start; 2. fast lock is no doubt iPhone assisted GPS initially; 3. there is a moment 30 seconds from cold start when it switches over to mount GPS once lock is achieved (a noticable lag moment - but gotta be watching close)
while i don't have complete facts, i do think the satnavs use the mount most of the time, except from cold start when GPS lock is a bit slower then phone's assisted GPS
speaker works fine - although i'd like to be able to change the inital volume (too loud) w/in the free app
no use of AUX
one add'l thing i've found is that phone boots the mount bluetooth for ear piece - no multi connect option as far as i can tell (iPhone 'feature'?)
otherwise, enjoying the integrated features of the mount so far ...
no rattle
good bluetooth connection
landscape position is delicate, but holding fine - no movement on bumps (i've tested center position on back and shifted toward bottom in landscape; both work well)
GPS lock is interesting ... 1. definitely takes mount GPS 20-30 seconds from cold start; 2. fast lock is no doubt iPhone assisted GPS initially; 3. there is a moment 30 seconds from cold start when it switches over to mount GPS once lock is achieved (a noticable lag moment - but gotta be watching close)
while i don't have complete facts, i do think the satnavs use the mount most of the time, except from cold start when GPS lock is a bit slower then phone's assisted GPS
speaker works fine - although i'd like to be able to change the inital volume (too loud) w/in the free app
no use of AUX
one add'l thing i've found is that phone boots the mount bluetooth for ear piece - no multi connect option as far as i can tell (iPhone 'feature'?)
otherwise, enjoying the integrated features of the mount so far ...
ValSalva
May 7, 12:04 PM
Could Apple be tired of offering support for MobileMe? It must be an expensive pain in the butt costing more than they make from selling it. Maybe if it were free they would drop much or all of the support leaving it to an online manual or something. It could simplify things for Apple leaving them to concentrate on more profitable areas.
rhsgolfer33
Apr 20, 06:19 PM
Capital gains allows you to choose the timeline and the price to a point. If Capital Gains is special because of time-linked shifts in pricing, why isn't freelance income.
In my mind, income is income.
You certainly can't choose the price in a capital gains situation - that is definitely a market determination; sure, you could sell for less than market it, but that would be pretty stupid and of no benefit.
Capital gains isn't special because of price shifts over time, its special because the government is trying to spur investment - in addition to raising revenue, the tax code is largely a tool to get people to behave in a certain manner. The thought is that giving people a preferential rate on gains from investment encourages people to 1) invest in our economy 2) save for retirement. Whether it works or not is debated by economists and we could probably argue about it all day.
I feel like I'm just repeating myself. I've already addressed that capital gains is not necessarily income.
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
In my mind, income is income.
You certainly can't choose the price in a capital gains situation - that is definitely a market determination; sure, you could sell for less than market it, but that would be pretty stupid and of no benefit.
Capital gains isn't special because of price shifts over time, its special because the government is trying to spur investment - in addition to raising revenue, the tax code is largely a tool to get people to behave in a certain manner. The thought is that giving people a preferential rate on gains from investment encourages people to 1) invest in our economy 2) save for retirement. Whether it works or not is debated by economists and we could probably argue about it all day.
I feel like I'm just repeating myself. I've already addressed that capital gains is not necessarily income.
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
darrens
Aug 4, 08:34 PM
How many times does it have to be repeated? Adobe came out immediately after the Intel transition was announced that they would have an Apple UB version released simultaneously with the release of CS3.
They didn't want to slow development of CS3 for the Mac. CS2 was just released and a UB version would have taken significant effort for a very small market share. Since the only benefit would be to intel mac users which didn't even exist at the time.
Soon, probably first quarter a UB version of CS3 will appear about the sametime that the mac intel user base reaches a relavent market size.
The company that really deserves criticism is intuit. They recently released quicken 2007 and it was not UB. They were releasing a new product and they chose to ignore intel Mac users. Makes you wonder if they are going to stay in the mac market at all. Maybe in the future they will just recommend running parallel and windows, to use quicken on an intel mac.
Who cares for Quicken - it's not performance critical. It probably wasn't worth the effort given the gains probaby wouldn't even be noticeable.
I'd think that all Apple's Pro apps market to the same small intel mac userbase, and they're done. They weren't cross platform so I'd think they weren't easy to port.
We all know Adobe's reasons - but still, two years is a long time.
They didn't want to slow development of CS3 for the Mac. CS2 was just released and a UB version would have taken significant effort for a very small market share. Since the only benefit would be to intel mac users which didn't even exist at the time.
Soon, probably first quarter a UB version of CS3 will appear about the sametime that the mac intel user base reaches a relavent market size.
The company that really deserves criticism is intuit. They recently released quicken 2007 and it was not UB. They were releasing a new product and they chose to ignore intel Mac users. Makes you wonder if they are going to stay in the mac market at all. Maybe in the future they will just recommend running parallel and windows, to use quicken on an intel mac.
Who cares for Quicken - it's not performance critical. It probably wasn't worth the effort given the gains probaby wouldn't even be noticeable.
I'd think that all Apple's Pro apps market to the same small intel mac userbase, and they're done. They weren't cross platform so I'd think they weren't easy to port.
We all know Adobe's reasons - but still, two years is a long time.