Best Trend Tattoos Design

Wanted to add to this thread the "interesting" picture...
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/2006/09/sept12pic.jpg
Source: http://www.tuaw.com/2006/09/10/banner-for-september-12th-event/

Looks fake.

Is fake.

Discussion of fake iPod picture. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=232341)

NO ONE holds the phone by the TINY little black glass area next to the screen

You're right. My Bumper is held on by Magic.

They should just lower the price to like $50 so it doesn't get too polluted and overloaded with traffic.

There are already GNU/Linux based cellphones. And what about the iPhone implies that it would be open in a way that, say, an average Nokia isn't? I appreciate they ported GNU/Linux to the iPod, but for the most part the reason similar things haven't happened on more regular cellphones has been an issue of the amount of work involved, with it being somewhat harder to write a GSM stack from scratch and port a kernel than it is to simply port an off-the-shelf kernel. (And I guess there's the additional issue that there are six zillion cellphones using about one quillion completely incompatible hardware platforms, whereas there are only a handful of MP3 players and only one that's achieved marketshare heaven.)

Oh, sure. But GNU/Linux could slowly introduce a standardized set of cell phone hardware platforms to build from, just like Intel and AMD and ATI (now a part of AMD, of course) and NVidia produce reference platform hardware that then anyone can make a compatible motherboard/daughter card from, what needs to happen is to have one particularly successful and particularly popular cell phone interface, and then (potentially) everyone would be clamoring to sell it to their customers.

Now, the difference between cell phones and computers is in the history. Cell phones achieved popularity and mass market penetration before a unifying hardware platform or OS platform came into being; whereas computers didn't achieve that kind of success until afterward. So really the dynamic and all the sequencing here is different.

I'm with you -X-

Doesn't the iMac use the same intel chip as the MBP? Why all the hoohah about an impending MBP release, when it might also mean an upgrade for the iMac - which hasn't been bumped since it's announcement in Jan?

Now before I'm lambarsted because the iMac is not a 'pro' machine, I am a professional graphic designer and I am in the market for one.

Bring on the merom iMac! :cool:

Chuck.

Well I have a 17" Intel Imac and would sell it in a heart beat for a merom conroe setup if a better video-card was involved. X1800 or something to that extent.

The clock speed alone from my 1.8ghz yonah to a 2.3ghz meron or a 2.4ghz conroe would be over 60% speed increase. That is not including the over 20% increase from architecture change. We would be talking about a 80% to 100% increase speed on most apps when you consider clock speed increase and architecture change. :eek:

Mind you it must have a videocard change as I am looking to never buy a pc gaming rig again. I currently have a A64 3000+ OCED at 2.4ghz with a x800xl and a gig of ram. If the Imac is twice as fast as my current gaming machine then I am sold. If not then Mac Pro would be the machine for me.

I no longer want to spend $1500 on a mac $1500 on a gaming pc. When I can get a faster mac at $2500 and at the same time dual-boot that machine and get a gaming rid simultaneously. Lower price all together and a faster machine.

Of course if the Imac has a better video-card then it I only need to spend $1600. :)

Here's to new living room hardware... and I'm actually in the market. Fingers crossed.

Do you think there are any negative consequences to this? If I were starting a business and seeking investors, it would sure be a lot harder to get investors when the capital gains rate is 35% rather than 15%. That business would never materialize. Nobody's going to complain about it though because no one can see what could have been. The people who would have worked there can't complain the way an autoworker or public school teacher can complain. It's okay, it's not like we need jobs or anything. Let's just raise taxes enough on the top 1% of earners to employ everyone looking for a job. We can have them built a high speed rail network across the country. The only snag is our country would collapse before finishing one route. We would have a scattering of tracks as a reminder of our incompetence.

There's also positives that come along with this as well. If higher capital gains were able to support things like universal healthcare and better education, then more individuals would not only be able to innovate, but also take the risk on themselves because failure wouldn't mean dying as a pauper on the streets.

Our current tax system only encourages rewarding those who already have plenty. It does nothing for the small business owner that might lose his shirt if the business fails. We live in a land of extremes; you're either extremely wealthy or teetering on the brink of insolvency. That isn't the recipe for a successful society.

You're also operating from a false premise. Investors would continue to invest in whatever had the best returns. When you raise taxes across the board, all alternatives have the same tax exposure, which means the previously best option will remain the best option.

Unless you're seriously suggesting that a 35% (or higher) tax rate is really going to cause all billionaires to sit on their money and earn a lower return, just to stick it to Uncle Sam.

Many of this board's comments are great examples why our founding fathers, with great wisdom, chose to form our country with a republic for its government rather than a direct democracy.