amin
Sep 6, 08:42 AM
Those are some really nice specs, I am sorry if this has been answered before but do we know what Core 2 Duo they are? Conroe or Merom :confused:
The 1.83, 2.0, 2.16, and 2.33GHz clock speeds show that it is Merom, not Conroe. Conroe would be 1.86, 2.13 (2MB L2 cache), 2.40, 2.66 (4MB L2 cache), and 2.93 GHz (Core 2 Extreme)
Since the 24" model is at least prosumer, it would have been nice to see that one get a Conroe (Extreme even).
The 1.83, 2.0, 2.16, and 2.33GHz clock speeds show that it is Merom, not Conroe. Conroe would be 1.86, 2.13 (2MB L2 cache), 2.40, 2.66 (4MB L2 cache), and 2.93 GHz (Core 2 Extreme)
Since the 24" model is at least prosumer, it would have been nice to see that one get a Conroe (Extreme even).
patrickoehlinge
Mar 12, 06:01 AM
Austrian Store is down as well.
Take note, that Austria is NOT among those countries (US, UK, Germany,...) who are supposed to get iPad's in April.
Just compare the German and Austrian iPad site
http://www.apple.com/de/ipad/
http://www.apple.com/at/ipad/
So why WHY WWHHHYYYY are they updating the Austrian Store as well ???
Take note, that Austria is NOT among those countries (US, UK, Germany,...) who are supposed to get iPad's in April.
Just compare the German and Austrian iPad site
http://www.apple.com/de/ipad/
http://www.apple.com/at/ipad/
So why WHY WWHHHYYYY are they updating the Austrian Store as well ???
skier777
Mar 18, 07:16 PM
My 32GB ssd ipod mini is still going strong. These things last pretty well, so even if they discontinue them, buy one on ebay or something and it might last you until something else comes along.
SimonTheSoundMa
Nov 23, 05:23 PM
Just buy the CDs. Better quality, you have a physical CD, and as an example, you can get the blue album for �5 from high street stores (�8.99 on Amazon who always seem to be expensive for music and DVDs these days), on iTunes it is �17.99. :rolleyes:
reckless_0001
Mar 25, 05:18 PM
Yes, it does.
For whom doesn't understand what we are talkin' about: There is a way to enable 4~5 fingers gesture function which is allowed only for developers. Purchase Xcode($4.99) from Mac App Store, install it, connect the iPad to the USB port and Xcode will recognize your iPad and there is a button asks you to use this iPad for development purpose. Click it and it will ask your developer ID but you can simply click cancel, it will anyway continue the procedure to enable the function. After that, go to the preference - general on you iPad, you will get to see the option for the 4~5 fingers gesture. I personally think, it is worth more than $5.
Dude, Just set up a free Apple Developer account then download it for free from ADC. :)
EDIT: My bad. Guess it's not free, I'm pretty sure I had an account before.
For whom doesn't understand what we are talkin' about: There is a way to enable 4~5 fingers gesture function which is allowed only for developers. Purchase Xcode($4.99) from Mac App Store, install it, connect the iPad to the USB port and Xcode will recognize your iPad and there is a button asks you to use this iPad for development purpose. Click it and it will ask your developer ID but you can simply click cancel, it will anyway continue the procedure to enable the function. After that, go to the preference - general on you iPad, you will get to see the option for the 4~5 fingers gesture. I personally think, it is worth more than $5.
Dude, Just set up a free Apple Developer account then download it for free from ADC. :)
EDIT: My bad. Guess it's not free, I'm pretty sure I had an account before.
jimN
Nov 8, 08:08 AM
I was just about to post this. The UK store appears down for me at the moment. This is based on the edu price (the UK edu store is up for me).
I'm teetering the edge of buying the black one. If that price was for a 1x1GB memory config I'd be a lot more tempted.
I think I can wait until the MBP 13.3 that will be announced in January (alongside the touchscreen ipod). :D
The edu price for 2gb is an additional 112, how far off consumer prices is that (I know a gig for my lappy will set me back 90 but I'm not up on prices for other people's memory).
I'm teetering the edge of buying the black one. If that price was for a 1x1GB memory config I'd be a lot more tempted.
I think I can wait until the MBP 13.3 that will be announced in January (alongside the touchscreen ipod). :D
The edu price for 2gb is an additional 112, how far off consumer prices is that (I know a gig for my lappy will set me back 90 but I'm not up on prices for other people's memory).
lamina
Sep 14, 08:49 PM
Did that guy just seriously fly around with a jetpack?
roadbloc
Apr 17, 04:58 PM
I don't know why you would expect them to not also sell its big brother, the hottest toy / gadget to be found? It's for kids, you know?
I thought Toys R Us sold cheap plastic toys for kids. I'm obviously mistaken.
I thought Toys R Us sold cheap plastic toys for kids. I'm obviously mistaken.
Blacklabel34
May 4, 10:13 PM
I sense a lot of unhappy iPad2 owners and happy ipad1 owners;)
(if it's true, key word, "IF")
(if it's true, key word, "IF")
flottenheimer
Mar 14, 02:40 PM
As I've stated before, No Way does Apple realease the updated MBPs before the iPad is released!
Yes, I know that they are two different categories, but the MBPs would definitely steal a lot of the iPad's thunder...
If you're right, I might have to come and kill ya'!
I can't wait anymore.
And why do you think a silent MacBook Pro update would steal any of the "iPad thunder"? It's quite a boring update we're waiting for. A faster processor, a step up in HD sizes and maybe a faster (or slower) graphics card. That's all. No one - 'cept those of us waiting for the updated Book - cares / will notice.
Yes, I know that they are two different categories, but the MBPs would definitely steal a lot of the iPad's thunder...
If you're right, I might have to come and kill ya'!
I can't wait anymore.
And why do you think a silent MacBook Pro update would steal any of the "iPad thunder"? It's quite a boring update we're waiting for. A faster processor, a step up in HD sizes and maybe a faster (or slower) graphics card. That's all. No one - 'cept those of us waiting for the updated Book - cares / will notice.
tivoboy
Mar 25, 02:58 PM
Can anyone who has done the update confirm whether or not PING is ON by default or not?
Apple Picker
Mar 28, 01:38 PM
It is still useless to make it available in other store if they can not supply enough for peoples demand.
Apple store, Target, Walmart and Best Buy to name a few is enough to carry Apple products. Just make sure you have TONS of stock on each outlet and consumers are satisfied.
Apple store, Target, Walmart and Best Buy to name a few is enough to carry Apple products. Just make sure you have TONS of stock on each outlet and consumers are satisfied.
MacSA
Jan 11, 03:58 PM
There is something in the air....what could that mean?
Wireless..............something
Wireless..............something
Paix247
Jan 11, 01:19 PM
Yes! Something interesting to discuss on a slow Friday afternoon.
PLEASE be a 12" MacBook Pro for $1799 or less! :D
PLEASE be a 12" MacBook Pro for $1799 or less! :D
paeza
Nov 7, 06:43 AM
Hope it comes out tomorrow
fivepoint
Mar 10, 06:22 PM
While Democrats and Republicans bicker back and forth about whether to 'cut' 6 billion or 60 billion, there are a few lone voices in the legislature that actually realize the problem, and are actually willing to talk about it. Rand Paul is one of these voices and he gave a great speech yesterday which I think addresses the problems far more clearly than you'll get from any Elephant or Donkey on the hill. Take a moment and read it through. Many of you don't realize just how bad the problem is, but it's not necessarily your fault. There aren't many leaders out there that are willing to be so blunt and honest about the situation and to openly admit that neither side is trying hard enough to fix it.
Listen Democrats, listen Republicans... It's NOT Enough! 6 billion isn't enough, 60 billion isn't enough, heck, even 600 billion isn't enough. We've got to cut entitlements, we've got to cut military, nothing is sacred. We must work harder, we must cut more, we must reconsider the scope of government and put ourselves back on a path towards fiscal sanity.
Watch It:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMqcLQzD-aA
Read It:
We are discussing and debating two different alternatives, one from the other side of the aisle and one from our side, about what we should do about the budget deficit.
We have projected a $1.65 trillion deficit in the next year.
I think both alternatives are inadequate and do not significantly alter or change our course. On the Democrat side, we have a proposal to cut about $5 billion to $6 billion for the rest of the year. To put that in perspective, we borrow $4 billion a day.
So the other side is offering up cuts equal to one day’s borrowing.
I think it’s insignificant and it will not alter the coming and looming debt crisis that we face.
Now, on our side of the aisle, I think we have done more, the cuts are more significant, but they also pale in comparison to the problem.
If we were to adopt the president’s approach, we would have $1.65 trillion deficit in one year. If we were to adopt our approach, we’re going to have a $1.55 trillion deficit in one year. I think both approaches do not significantly alter or delay the crisis that’s coming.
Now, it’s interesting when we talk about cuts, everybody seems to be giddy around here, saying this is the first time we have talked about cuts.
Well, it is better and it sounds good, but guess what? We’re not even really cutting spending. What we’re talking about is cutting the rate of increase of spending. The base line of spending is going to go up 7.3 % according to the CBO.
We’re talking about reducing that increase to 6.7% increase. We’re talking about cutting the rate of increase of government. The problem is it’s not enough.
Our deficit is growing by leaps and bounds. Our national debt is $14 trillion. Our national debt is now equal to our entire economy. Our gross domestic product equals our national debt.
The president, I think, is tone deaf on this.
We had an election, and in the election, the people said we’re concerned about out-of-control spending, we’re concerned about massive deficits, we’re concerned about passing this debt on to our kids and our grandkids.
The president recently proposed a 10-year budget, a 10-year plan for spending. He proposes that we spend $46 trillion. That means they aren’t getting it.
You have – in Washington, official Washington is not getting what the people are saying, and they’re not getting how profound the problems are.
Spending $46 trillion?
The president’s plan will add $13 trillion to the debt, and the Republicans say ‘oh, well ours is a lot better.’ Theirs will add $12 trillion to the debt.
I think it’s out of control, and neither plan will do anything to significantly alter things.
We’re spending $10 billion a day.
In order to reform things, in order to change things around here, we will have to come to grips with the idea of what should government be doing, what are the constitutional functions of government, what were the enumerated powers of the Constitution, what powers did the Constitution give to the federal government, and then examine what we’re actually doing. What are we spending money on that’s not constitutional or shouldn’t be done here or should be left to the states and the people respectively?
Once upon a time, our side believed that education was a function of the states and the localities. It’s not mentioned in the Constitution that the federal government should have anything to do with education.
Does that mean we’re opposed to education? No, we just think it should be done at a state and a local level.
Ronald Reagan was a champion of eliminating the Department of Education. It was part of the Republican Party platform for 20 years. But then we got in charge after the year 2000, and we doubled the size of the Department of Education.
If you are serious about balancing the budget, if you are serious about the debt, you have to look at taking departments like the Department of Education and sending it back to the states and the localities.
You have to look at programs that are growing by leaps and bounds like Medicaid and food stamps, cap them, block-grant them and send them back to the states. The states can manage these things better. The more close they are to the people, the better managed they will be.
The other compromise that needs to occur – and this is something our side needs to compromise on.
Our side has blindly said that the military should get anything it wants, and it’s a blank check.
What do you want? Here it is. We have increased military spending by 120% since 2001. We have doubled military spending.
Now, I’m for a strong national defense. I believe that it is a constitutional function of the federal government to provide for our national defense. I think it is the pre-eminent power, the pre-eminent enumerated power, the thing we should be doing here. But even that being said, we cannot every eight years double the Defense Department, double the military spending.
It’s also ultimately the compromise.
Within the space after few years, everyone here will come to an agreement, not because we want to but because we’re forced to by the events and by the drama of the debt crisis. It will come. It’s come to other nations.
When it comes to us, the compromise that both sides of the aisle will have to work out is, the other side of the aisle will have to admit we cannot have enormous domestic spending, and our side of the aisle will have to admit that we can’t give a blank check to the military.
We will also have to look at entitlements. Everyone’s afraid to say how we reform entitlements, but there are two inescapable facts with entitlements: We’re living longer, and there is a lot of people that were born after World War II that are getting ready to retire. These are inescapable demographic facts. We have to address them. If we simply do nothing, if we do not address the entitlements, within a decade, entitlements will account for the entire budget and interest. There will be no money left for anything.
So right now, the argument is about all these other programs. There will be no money left for any of these programs if we do nothing.
It’s going to take both sides of the aisle grappling with this and admitting that the rules and eligibility will have to change for Social Security, and likely for Medicare.
If you do it now, you can do it gradually. If you start now, you can gradually let the age rise for Medicare and Social Security for those 55 and under. If you do it gradually. I think young people have already acknowledged this is going to happen.
You ask young people anywhere across America, ‘do you think you’re going to have Social Security when you retire? Do you think you’re going to get it at 67?’
Most young people acknowledge that it’s broken, it’s broken so badly that the only way we fix it and the only way it can continue is we have to look at the eligibility.
But so many people have said ‘oh, we can’t talk about entitlement. You will be unelected, you will be unelectable if you talk about entitlement reform.’
The president still makes this mistake. He will not lead us. He will not talk and give a leadership role to entitlement reform. Someone must do it. We must stand up and be bold because the longer these problems fester, the longer we allow them to accumulate, the bigger the problems become. The more dramatic the answers must be.
If you look at Greece and these other nations that have faced debt crises, their problem came to a head all of a sudden and they changed the age on Social Security like that.
If we want to do it gradually and let people plan for their future, you need to start now before we enter into a crisis. My problem with the discussion and the debate at this point is that I don’t think either side recognizes the enormity of the problem or the imminence of the problem.
Even people who would be considered to be those of the mainstream – the former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan says 50% of chance that there will be some kind of monetary problems, significant monetary problems, even to the point of crisis in the next few years.
Many people have said Japan is locked in crisis, that crisis is coming because of the debt that they’ve accumulated.
When that comes to America, do we want to have government by crisis?
Already we can’t even pass a budget. We can’t pass appropriations bills. Our bills do not even go to the committees anymore. They just come to the floor and we put a patchwork quilt on them and there’s a chance this ends up being two more weeks. It is not the way you should run government.
If you want to have a significant plan for changing things, send things through the committee. If you want to have a realistic way of running government, have appropriations bills.
If you want to be someone who believes in good, responsible government, for goodness sakes, pass a budget. We didn’t pass a budget last year.
This chart shows how big the problem is. I wish I had a magnifying glass because that’s the only way you could see the other side’s proposal: $6 billion in cuts. It’s one day’s borrowing. It’s not even one day’s spending that they’re talking about. It’s insignificant, it’s inconsequential, and it will do nothing to delay or alter the looming debt crisis.
Look at the other proposal from our side.
It’s bigger – you can actually see it without a magnifying glass – but look how it is dwarfed by one year’s problem.
I recently proposed $500 billion in cuts and when I went home and spoke to the people of my state, spoke to those from the Tea Party, they said, $500 billion is not enough and they’re right.
$500 billion is a third of one year’s problem.
Up here that’s way too bold, but it’s not even enough.
But we have to counterbalance and understand the alternatives here.
If we do nothing, all of the programs that people are so fond of, extolling and saying will be gone.
So I implore the American public and those here to look at this problem and say to Congress, we’re not doing enough; you must cut more.
Listen Democrats, listen Republicans... It's NOT Enough! 6 billion isn't enough, 60 billion isn't enough, heck, even 600 billion isn't enough. We've got to cut entitlements, we've got to cut military, nothing is sacred. We must work harder, we must cut more, we must reconsider the scope of government and put ourselves back on a path towards fiscal sanity.
Watch It:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMqcLQzD-aA
Read It:
We are discussing and debating two different alternatives, one from the other side of the aisle and one from our side, about what we should do about the budget deficit.
We have projected a $1.65 trillion deficit in the next year.
I think both alternatives are inadequate and do not significantly alter or change our course. On the Democrat side, we have a proposal to cut about $5 billion to $6 billion for the rest of the year. To put that in perspective, we borrow $4 billion a day.
So the other side is offering up cuts equal to one day’s borrowing.
I think it’s insignificant and it will not alter the coming and looming debt crisis that we face.
Now, on our side of the aisle, I think we have done more, the cuts are more significant, but they also pale in comparison to the problem.
If we were to adopt the president’s approach, we would have $1.65 trillion deficit in one year. If we were to adopt our approach, we’re going to have a $1.55 trillion deficit in one year. I think both approaches do not significantly alter or delay the crisis that’s coming.
Now, it’s interesting when we talk about cuts, everybody seems to be giddy around here, saying this is the first time we have talked about cuts.
Well, it is better and it sounds good, but guess what? We’re not even really cutting spending. What we’re talking about is cutting the rate of increase of spending. The base line of spending is going to go up 7.3 % according to the CBO.
We’re talking about reducing that increase to 6.7% increase. We’re talking about cutting the rate of increase of government. The problem is it’s not enough.
Our deficit is growing by leaps and bounds. Our national debt is $14 trillion. Our national debt is now equal to our entire economy. Our gross domestic product equals our national debt.
The president, I think, is tone deaf on this.
We had an election, and in the election, the people said we’re concerned about out-of-control spending, we’re concerned about massive deficits, we’re concerned about passing this debt on to our kids and our grandkids.
The president recently proposed a 10-year budget, a 10-year plan for spending. He proposes that we spend $46 trillion. That means they aren’t getting it.
You have – in Washington, official Washington is not getting what the people are saying, and they’re not getting how profound the problems are.
Spending $46 trillion?
The president’s plan will add $13 trillion to the debt, and the Republicans say ‘oh, well ours is a lot better.’ Theirs will add $12 trillion to the debt.
I think it’s out of control, and neither plan will do anything to significantly alter things.
We’re spending $10 billion a day.
In order to reform things, in order to change things around here, we will have to come to grips with the idea of what should government be doing, what are the constitutional functions of government, what were the enumerated powers of the Constitution, what powers did the Constitution give to the federal government, and then examine what we’re actually doing. What are we spending money on that’s not constitutional or shouldn’t be done here or should be left to the states and the people respectively?
Once upon a time, our side believed that education was a function of the states and the localities. It’s not mentioned in the Constitution that the federal government should have anything to do with education.
Does that mean we’re opposed to education? No, we just think it should be done at a state and a local level.
Ronald Reagan was a champion of eliminating the Department of Education. It was part of the Republican Party platform for 20 years. But then we got in charge after the year 2000, and we doubled the size of the Department of Education.
If you are serious about balancing the budget, if you are serious about the debt, you have to look at taking departments like the Department of Education and sending it back to the states and the localities.
You have to look at programs that are growing by leaps and bounds like Medicaid and food stamps, cap them, block-grant them and send them back to the states. The states can manage these things better. The more close they are to the people, the better managed they will be.
The other compromise that needs to occur – and this is something our side needs to compromise on.
Our side has blindly said that the military should get anything it wants, and it’s a blank check.
What do you want? Here it is. We have increased military spending by 120% since 2001. We have doubled military spending.
Now, I’m for a strong national defense. I believe that it is a constitutional function of the federal government to provide for our national defense. I think it is the pre-eminent power, the pre-eminent enumerated power, the thing we should be doing here. But even that being said, we cannot every eight years double the Defense Department, double the military spending.
It’s also ultimately the compromise.
Within the space after few years, everyone here will come to an agreement, not because we want to but because we’re forced to by the events and by the drama of the debt crisis. It will come. It’s come to other nations.
When it comes to us, the compromise that both sides of the aisle will have to work out is, the other side of the aisle will have to admit we cannot have enormous domestic spending, and our side of the aisle will have to admit that we can’t give a blank check to the military.
We will also have to look at entitlements. Everyone’s afraid to say how we reform entitlements, but there are two inescapable facts with entitlements: We’re living longer, and there is a lot of people that were born after World War II that are getting ready to retire. These are inescapable demographic facts. We have to address them. If we simply do nothing, if we do not address the entitlements, within a decade, entitlements will account for the entire budget and interest. There will be no money left for anything.
So right now, the argument is about all these other programs. There will be no money left for any of these programs if we do nothing.
It’s going to take both sides of the aisle grappling with this and admitting that the rules and eligibility will have to change for Social Security, and likely for Medicare.
If you do it now, you can do it gradually. If you start now, you can gradually let the age rise for Medicare and Social Security for those 55 and under. If you do it gradually. I think young people have already acknowledged this is going to happen.
You ask young people anywhere across America, ‘do you think you’re going to have Social Security when you retire? Do you think you’re going to get it at 67?’
Most young people acknowledge that it’s broken, it’s broken so badly that the only way we fix it and the only way it can continue is we have to look at the eligibility.
But so many people have said ‘oh, we can’t talk about entitlement. You will be unelected, you will be unelectable if you talk about entitlement reform.’
The president still makes this mistake. He will not lead us. He will not talk and give a leadership role to entitlement reform. Someone must do it. We must stand up and be bold because the longer these problems fester, the longer we allow them to accumulate, the bigger the problems become. The more dramatic the answers must be.
If you look at Greece and these other nations that have faced debt crises, their problem came to a head all of a sudden and they changed the age on Social Security like that.
If we want to do it gradually and let people plan for their future, you need to start now before we enter into a crisis. My problem with the discussion and the debate at this point is that I don’t think either side recognizes the enormity of the problem or the imminence of the problem.
Even people who would be considered to be those of the mainstream – the former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan says 50% of chance that there will be some kind of monetary problems, significant monetary problems, even to the point of crisis in the next few years.
Many people have said Japan is locked in crisis, that crisis is coming because of the debt that they’ve accumulated.
When that comes to America, do we want to have government by crisis?
Already we can’t even pass a budget. We can’t pass appropriations bills. Our bills do not even go to the committees anymore. They just come to the floor and we put a patchwork quilt on them and there’s a chance this ends up being two more weeks. It is not the way you should run government.
If you want to have a significant plan for changing things, send things through the committee. If you want to have a realistic way of running government, have appropriations bills.
If you want to be someone who believes in good, responsible government, for goodness sakes, pass a budget. We didn’t pass a budget last year.
This chart shows how big the problem is. I wish I had a magnifying glass because that’s the only way you could see the other side’s proposal: $6 billion in cuts. It’s one day’s borrowing. It’s not even one day’s spending that they’re talking about. It’s insignificant, it’s inconsequential, and it will do nothing to delay or alter the looming debt crisis.
Look at the other proposal from our side.
It’s bigger – you can actually see it without a magnifying glass – but look how it is dwarfed by one year’s problem.
I recently proposed $500 billion in cuts and when I went home and spoke to the people of my state, spoke to those from the Tea Party, they said, $500 billion is not enough and they’re right.
$500 billion is a third of one year’s problem.
Up here that’s way too bold, but it’s not even enough.
But we have to counterbalance and understand the alternatives here.
If we do nothing, all of the programs that people are so fond of, extolling and saying will be gone.
So I implore the American public and those here to look at this problem and say to Congress, we’re not doing enough; you must cut more.
bigmc6000
Aug 2, 04:26 PM
In response to the advertisements my @$$! Figures they'd try to go after something that isn't written into the OS since we all know how hard that is. So big deal - put out a firmware update for the AirPort Extreme card and it's fixed - Next please!!
Napsju
Nov 8, 06:07 AM
The Dutch store (www.apple.com/nlstore) is down!!
milo
Oct 16, 11:24 AM
Before getting slapped... I guess if youre a billionaire you can shove earbuds into a strangers ear, but here in Real World USA the results would not be pretty. Do that with your girlfriend, I dont think ANYONE would want a stranger theyve known for 1 minute coming up to them and putting crap into their ear.
And you think most people would want strangers trying to send them songs and pictures?
Along the same lines, anyone else remember the episode of The Office where Jim used "earbud sharing" with Pam? Gotta love tasteful product placement.
For months on end we've been bombarded with Zune-friendly "news" articles calling it an "iPod killer". Even before Microsoft had a name for it, before they had any sort of design for it, while it was still vaporware, the media kept hammering home, "iPod killer" while seeming to drool over the prospect.
I guess you've been reading different articles than I have. Since they've announced details and pictures I've mostly been seeing articles along the lines of "What a Turd".
And you think most people would want strangers trying to send them songs and pictures?
Along the same lines, anyone else remember the episode of The Office where Jim used "earbud sharing" with Pam? Gotta love tasteful product placement.
For months on end we've been bombarded with Zune-friendly "news" articles calling it an "iPod killer". Even before Microsoft had a name for it, before they had any sort of design for it, while it was still vaporware, the media kept hammering home, "iPod killer" while seeming to drool over the prospect.
I guess you've been reading different articles than I have. Since they've announced details and pictures I've mostly been seeing articles along the lines of "What a Turd".
benthewraith
Aug 18, 12:35 PM
And apparently now they admit that it was bull-****.
http://www.tuaw.com/2006/08/18/secureworks-admits-to-falsifying-macbook-wireless-hack/
;)
Busted. Boy do I hate to be those guys. :rolleyes:
http://www.tuaw.com/2006/08/18/secureworks-admits-to-falsifying-macbook-wireless-hack/
;)
Busted. Boy do I hate to be those guys. :rolleyes:
balamw
Jul 23, 05:55 PM
The new iPod is going to Play Movies, TV, Music, Nintendo games, eBooks, and have a big touch screen....will it have a flip out knife and spoon too? :p
No need. You'll have the IV for the continuous Kool Aid drip applied subcutaneously at the Apple store when you pick up your new iPod with Kitchen Sink.
B
No need. You'll have the IV for the continuous Kool Aid drip applied subcutaneously at the Apple store when you pick up your new iPod with Kitchen Sink.
B
JasperJanssen
Apr 27, 04:41 AM
When you're married, it's a partnership, and it's no longer a case of "your money" and "her money", but a case of "OUR" money. Once responsibilities are out the way, then personal purchases can be looked at, but unless you're in a job where you have a LOT of disposable income far in excess of what's required to pay the mortgage and many bills, then yes it's only right you make sure you have the money to go out and buy a gadget which, most of the time, only you will use.
I'm fortunate that my wife enjoys using technology, but I still wouldn't go out on payday and just buy a new gadget without at least letting her know I was doing it, and if I spend money on something, it's only fair she does the same ... which means for whatever you spend, you need to double it and again it's only after looking at bills and responsibilities that you can do so.
That's a really dangerous way of looking at it. It's much better to have three sets of money -- our money, my money, and your money. Preferably in separate bank accounts. In a situation like you sketch, usually one or the other spouse ends up doing most of the purchases with the communal chest, and that can lead to conflict when the other one wants to get something for himself.
Kids have pocket money, which they can spend as they see fit -- adults should have at least some money that is unquestionably theirs as well. It's a lot easier to agree, once, that M and F's personal entertainment budgets are $n per month, than it is to agree that this september, we'll get a couch, and then maybe in january we'll get an ipad, etc... Budgetting and saving apply on that level as well as the communal property level.
I'm fortunate that my wife enjoys using technology, but I still wouldn't go out on payday and just buy a new gadget without at least letting her know I was doing it, and if I spend money on something, it's only fair she does the same ... which means for whatever you spend, you need to double it and again it's only after looking at bills and responsibilities that you can do so.
That's a really dangerous way of looking at it. It's much better to have three sets of money -- our money, my money, and your money. Preferably in separate bank accounts. In a situation like you sketch, usually one or the other spouse ends up doing most of the purchases with the communal chest, and that can lead to conflict when the other one wants to get something for himself.
Kids have pocket money, which they can spend as they see fit -- adults should have at least some money that is unquestionably theirs as well. It's a lot easier to agree, once, that M and F's personal entertainment budgets are $n per month, than it is to agree that this september, we'll get a couch, and then maybe in january we'll get an ipad, etc... Budgetting and saving apply on that level as well as the communal property level.
oban14
Apr 17, 12:06 AM
Still waiting for amazon.com to carry it.
mohaukachi
Aug 24, 12:51 PM
know what i find disturbing. this gets front page on cnn.com with a big picture and gloom and doom headline while dell gets a... oh by the way... dell recalled 4.1 million a few weekes ago but greased our palms so we wouldnt make a big stink about it. seems like a damn vendetta to me.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق