MattSepeta
Apr 27, 04:19 PM
am I the only one to think that separate restroom from men and women are an obsolete relic of the past?
put stalls in. that should be enough for privacy. full separate facility don't make any sense logically, technically and economically.
Interesting take, but I can see in 1080p the impending sexual harassment lawsuits.
put stalls in. that should be enough for privacy. full separate facility don't make any sense logically, technically and economically.
Interesting take, but I can see in 1080p the impending sexual harassment lawsuits.
Lord Blackadder
Aug 10, 01:10 PM
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
Eidorian
Nov 16, 03:10 PM
It could entirely be the case that simply Apple is planning on buying more ATI video cards. This could be for use in iTV, or even dedicated graphics (please please please) in the lower end machines: MacBook/Mini.
just a thought, but possible I s'pose.ATI/NVidia have ever so slightly better integrated solutions then Intel.
just a thought, but possible I s'pose.ATI/NVidia have ever so slightly better integrated solutions then Intel.
vizkiz
Apr 16, 03:48 PM
thats a lot of ports. :eek:
Just one port, for the dock connector...
Just one port, for the dock connector...
Tyler76
Oct 2, 03:21 AM
this is one of the worst titles for a story I have read. It also sounds like whoever wrote the story has no knowledge of anything that's been happening in architecture for about a century.
Clean, modern design? Must be influenced by the iPhone! :rolleyes:
They are referring to iPhone, the main topic.
Clean, modern design? Must be influenced by the iPhone! :rolleyes:
They are referring to iPhone, the main topic.
pdjudd
May 2, 11:54 AM
"Bugs". That's so funny. Like it wasn't something indented by Big Brother, make that Apple. We truly do have a new evil empire now.
I presume you have hard proof of this unfounded claim I hope.
I presume you have hard proof of this unfounded claim I hope.
html
Apr 15, 10:57 PM
Seeing as that it doesn't have any place for the antenna (like the black area towards the top of the 3G iPad), i'm very skeptical with this picture.
First thing that occurred to me, too. These are fake.:(
First thing that occurred to me, too. These are fake.:(
skunk
Apr 27, 12:58 PM
When did I say anything about what people are "entitled" to be???You implied it very clearly in the post Mord was replying to.
jettredmont
Jul 21, 08:38 PM
Show me another phone that can drop calls from just the position of one finger. Nokia have their problems at the moment, but their reception has always been rock solid.
See one post directly above yours: the Nokia N1. Both points refuted with one example!
The point, again, is that the signal drop through touching the "right" spot with a finger maxes out significantly lower than the signal drop through dense body attenuation, as you get when your hand or head is blocking the signal. They are different things, but the more significant one is the one Apple is showing here.
This is just how antennas work. You can degrade a signal by detuning it, but you can stop the signal dead by attenuation.
See one post directly above yours: the Nokia N1. Both points refuted with one example!
The point, again, is that the signal drop through touching the "right" spot with a finger maxes out significantly lower than the signal drop through dense body attenuation, as you get when your hand or head is blocking the signal. They are different things, but the more significant one is the one Apple is showing here.
This is just how antennas work. You can degrade a signal by detuning it, but you can stop the signal dead by attenuation.
crees!
Oct 10, 04:28 PM
Just bring it! That's all. Bring it!
Christian247
Apr 15, 01:26 PM
"Christian Likes This!"
maflynn
Apr 13, 06:24 AM
It has always been the same with the mac. Just go to the finder and look for shared computers.
OR
Taskbar: 'Go To Server/Computer'
OR
ssh/ftp > prostuff-not required
I know and either the OSX is able to connect to the windows PC or gives me errors when I try to access the folder. doing this in windows works fine. I used to use Thursby DAVE for my networking needs in OSX before apple started to provide a more robust (though problematic) set of networking tools. When I used that app, I had little problems having OSX access window's files.
Report bugs. Are you comparing b/w OSX <-> Windows and Windows <-> Windows?
I am comparing OSX to Windows vs. Windows to Windows because 99% of my networking needs is accessing files on a windows machine, whether its on a home pc, or an enterprise server, or workstation. I'm not sure what bugs I could report to apple, other then stating its slow.
You are confusing stuff.
I don't think so, perhaps my post was not worded as clearly as it could have been. My point was that networking with windows to windows is easier and windows has an advantage there. given that the companies I've dealt with, they're mostly a windows shop. My point there then is using windows to access the resources is easier, faster and has less headaches.
OR
Taskbar: 'Go To Server/Computer'
OR
ssh/ftp > prostuff-not required
I know and either the OSX is able to connect to the windows PC or gives me errors when I try to access the folder. doing this in windows works fine. I used to use Thursby DAVE for my networking needs in OSX before apple started to provide a more robust (though problematic) set of networking tools. When I used that app, I had little problems having OSX access window's files.
Report bugs. Are you comparing b/w OSX <-> Windows and Windows <-> Windows?
I am comparing OSX to Windows vs. Windows to Windows because 99% of my networking needs is accessing files on a windows machine, whether its on a home pc, or an enterprise server, or workstation. I'm not sure what bugs I could report to apple, other then stating its slow.
You are confusing stuff.
I don't think so, perhaps my post was not worded as clearly as it could have been. My point was that networking with windows to windows is easier and windows has an advantage there. given that the companies I've dealt with, they're mostly a windows shop. My point there then is using windows to access the resources is easier, faster and has less headaches.
Kwill
May 4, 04:04 PM
If you asked a parent, they might call it intuitive. If you asked a musician, they might call it inspiring. To a doctor, it's groundbreaking. To a CEO, it's powerful. To a teacher, it's the future. If you asked a child, she might call it magic. And if you asked us, we'd say it's just getting started.
To a user in a bright environment, it's a glare.
To a user in a bright environment, it's a glare.
TeppefallGuy
Aug 2, 12:50 PM
Apple�s response is linked as a PDF. Norwegian text and partially censored with a big black marker.
http://www.nettavisen.no/it/article699846.ece
Nettavisen
"We will not give up, we believe that this is an important consumer question and that the product lock-in they (Apple) have is unreasonable. The Ombudsman believes that locking music to a certain brand of player - is a problem that affects many people. Most people have cell phones that can take many songs, but all the music I have bought from iTunes I can�t listen to via my cell phone, she says."
(direct translation and no cleanup so it�s a bit rough)
-- TeppefallGuy Newsroom --
http://www.nettavisen.no/it/article699846.ece
Nettavisen
"We will not give up, we believe that this is an important consumer question and that the product lock-in they (Apple) have is unreasonable. The Ombudsman believes that locking music to a certain brand of player - is a problem that affects many people. Most people have cell phones that can take many songs, but all the music I have bought from iTunes I can�t listen to via my cell phone, she says."
(direct translation and no cleanup so it�s a bit rough)
-- TeppefallGuy Newsroom --
173080
Oct 7, 08:09 PM
Wonder what the stairway leads to?
Heaven. Oh wait... :D
Heaven. Oh wait... :D
Mac-Addict
Oct 3, 12:53 PM
I definalty will be angry if the iPhone doesnt come out but at the same time i wouldnt be shocked.. but steve jobs giving it up? pfft no way hes still got a few years left in him :P unlike billy boy..
systole
Mar 28, 07:39 PM
Isn't the design awards just a fancy carrot in disguise?
Personally, I think that the biggest detriment to developers is control. If you find an app on their website, the developer controls the shopping environment, and licensee terms. By submitting their app, developers loose control first, profit second.
Personally, I think that the biggest detriment to developers is control. If you find an app on their website, the developer controls the shopping environment, and licensee terms. By submitting their app, developers loose control first, profit second.
ianogden
Oct 11, 09:32 AM
I think this might be ready at MWSF. If they release MBP's, iPhones, and vPods before MWSF, what the heck are they gonna surprise us with there? Nothing.
I think you are forgetting about the TOP SECRET feaures of Leopard, iWork 07, iLife 07 and the actual release of the iTV with a new name.
ha!
I think you are forgetting about the TOP SECRET feaures of Leopard, iWork 07, iLife 07 and the actual release of the iTV with a new name.
ha!
Gelfin
Apr 15, 03:25 PM
History, while interesting, has always struck me as unimportant in educating Children for essential workforce skills. Leave history for Colleges or elective courses.
Because understanding the events of the nightly news as a part of the ongoing process of human civilization unfolding, the result of a complex web of chain reactions spanning millennia, instead of a perpetual, meaningless, stroboscopic spectacle of now, is of no value whatsoever. In fact, wasting time with peripheral awareness only distracts children from their training to serve as maximally efficient labor resources for their forty or fifty useful adult years before we stash them away to wait for death.
Ever stop to think where your values come from, and who benefits from them? That's probably not an essential workforce skill either.
Because understanding the events of the nightly news as a part of the ongoing process of human civilization unfolding, the result of a complex web of chain reactions spanning millennia, instead of a perpetual, meaningless, stroboscopic spectacle of now, is of no value whatsoever. In fact, wasting time with peripheral awareness only distracts children from their training to serve as maximally efficient labor resources for their forty or fifty useful adult years before we stash them away to wait for death.
Ever stop to think where your values come from, and who benefits from them? That's probably not an essential workforce skill either.
SuperCachetes
Apr 17, 12:30 PM
They're not in the records?
Come on, guy. Does it really matter if somebody were gay? I thought people of a liberal mindset are supposed to be "colorblind" or what have you, yet all of a sudden their sexuality, which has nothing to do with their achievements, should be made an important part of history?
How hypocritical.
Treating people equally isn't mutually exclusive of acknowledging what makes us unique. You seem incapable of either. Good luck with that, guy.
Come on, guy. Does it really matter if somebody were gay? I thought people of a liberal mindset are supposed to be "colorblind" or what have you, yet all of a sudden their sexuality, which has nothing to do with their achievements, should be made an important part of history?
How hypocritical.
Treating people equally isn't mutually exclusive of acknowledging what makes us unique. You seem incapable of either. Good luck with that, guy.
Prom1
Sep 8, 12:30 PM
So much complaints about Kanye West.
If you've never listened to different artists in the HipHop/Rap world since 1979; you shouldnt comment about a) attitude of a performer (on stage) b) whether or not their performance was appropriate for a musical announcement of a product or service.
b) is just self explanatory! Musical engagement that announces big artist contractual aggreements of their wares for sale on the iTMS service. Also announcing products that has worldwide appeal to all walks of people and their choices of music!
a) Hip-Hop arrived in the 1990's, but Rap was around since 1979 (just before RUNDMC) - as a pure content not mixed with funk (Whodini).
RAP - is a definition of a lifestyle, highly competive, never succumbing to your competition, and always making moves. Somebody mentioned that the audience didnt appreciate nor is West's listenership; of course but them being shocked is mostly at the cursing; which has been around in music since day one - Rap included but not alone.
I've passed by Lawyers, Doctors, even a Judge (I know because as a youth I got schooled by her) listening to Kanye West, LL Cool J, Queen Latifah. Why? Because it gives them a motivative sense of power, a sense of "I'm above the rest" that most other genre's of music doesnt provide. Rock N Roll comes really close, but from what I've heard, I cannot pick 10 artists/groups in all their albums that brings it like Rap/Hip-Hop.
Apple has been, well fighting the power since day one! Most people forget that. Think Different may not be Apple's slogan anymore, but its still part of their existence. They dont follow the status quo.
I enjoyed the first GarageBand announcement, even though I dont prefer the music of god I forgot his name. Still all music artists are creative; except those 1 hit wonders.
If you've never listened to different artists in the HipHop/Rap world since 1979; you shouldnt comment about a) attitude of a performer (on stage) b) whether or not their performance was appropriate for a musical announcement of a product or service.
b) is just self explanatory! Musical engagement that announces big artist contractual aggreements of their wares for sale on the iTMS service. Also announcing products that has worldwide appeal to all walks of people and their choices of music!
a) Hip-Hop arrived in the 1990's, but Rap was around since 1979 (just before RUNDMC) - as a pure content not mixed with funk (Whodini).
RAP - is a definition of a lifestyle, highly competive, never succumbing to your competition, and always making moves. Somebody mentioned that the audience didnt appreciate nor is West's listenership; of course but them being shocked is mostly at the cursing; which has been around in music since day one - Rap included but not alone.
I've passed by Lawyers, Doctors, even a Judge (I know because as a youth I got schooled by her) listening to Kanye West, LL Cool J, Queen Latifah. Why? Because it gives them a motivative sense of power, a sense of "I'm above the rest" that most other genre's of music doesnt provide. Rock N Roll comes really close, but from what I've heard, I cannot pick 10 artists/groups in all their albums that brings it like Rap/Hip-Hop.
Apple has been, well fighting the power since day one! Most people forget that. Think Different may not be Apple's slogan anymore, but its still part of their existence. They dont follow the status quo.
I enjoyed the first GarageBand announcement, even though I dont prefer the music of god I forgot his name. Still all music artists are creative; except those 1 hit wonders.
juanster
Jul 21, 10:47 AM
Apple should spend the money spent on pointing fingers at others and no a bumper is not a fix. It only happens to 1% of the users? Greeeeat. That's 1% more than it should. So get to work and stop trying to look at others failures that are similar to yours.
What's apple trying to say? That they are failing At fixing something just better?
What's apple trying to say? That they are failing At fixing something just better?
b0r3dguy
Apr 26, 01:43 AM
Screen size looks just fine. Large devices like the EVO with its 4.3" screen is TOO large. I hope this will come out sooner instead of later.
jbanger
Apr 9, 12:18 AM
280390
sony nex5 double lens kit
not as impressive as some of the other recent camera purchases, but i'm happy nevertheless
i've been eyeing this off for a couple of months now and by chance noticed a major price discount on a major electronic chain's website yesterday morning
jumped in the car and went straight down and they had to honour the price which was well below cost :D
best part was the dude that sold it to me rang his wife as i was leaving telling her to come in and buy one as it was cheaper than what he could get it for himself, lol, and then reported the website misprint
sony nex5 double lens kit
not as impressive as some of the other recent camera purchases, but i'm happy nevertheless
i've been eyeing this off for a couple of months now and by chance noticed a major price discount on a major electronic chain's website yesterday morning
jumped in the car and went straight down and they had to honour the price which was well below cost :D
best part was the dude that sold it to me rang his wife as i was leaving telling her to come in and buy one as it was cheaper than what he could get it for himself, lol, and then reported the website misprint
No comments:
Post a Comment