Best Trend Tattoos Design

I must say i just found this sight through google and had to join because of this post. I am a math teacher and the correct answer is 2

48/2(9+3) is a different equation than 48/2 * (9+3)

using Pemdas or the correct order of operations in the first problem
we first add whats in the parentheses (9+3)= 12
second step we multiply 2(12) =24
final step 48/24 = 2

the people who are getting 288

are adding (9+3) =12
then they are skipping an order of operations and going straight to division 48/2 =24
24 * 12 = 288
I feel sorry for your students because you are teaching them incorrect things

No matter what you do you have to make an assumption as to what "/" means. Nobody over the age of 10 should be using that notation for this exact reason.

Therefore, assume that author wanted to use "_" but couldn't as this is a forum not suited to equation writing and work from there. I believe the logical conclusion is 288, but that is not the same as saying the answer is 288.

umm what the hell are you talking bout. / means divide plan and simple. No assumption are being made.
In higher level class you go dot see that - with dots above and below it in anything more than maybe text books and even then it is not that common.

Reason for it is the / is much clearer and less likely to be interpreted another operation (subtraction) by mistake. the / is very clear.
honestly I can not think of the last time I used something other than the / for division. I might of been in Jr high so close to 15 years ago. I know I sure as hell never used anything but the / in my upper level math class (cal and beyond)

It would be cool for them to keep the yonah in the low-end MacBook. That way with the price drop they could get back to a $999 entry-level notebook.

Merom definitely in the Black Macbook though, if this is true.

Why would they keep a 32-bit processor in the macbook when they're pushing 64-bit with Lepoard?

Who said in another room? Sure if you want to operate it as a remote server, but workstations can very much benefit from being rack mountable.

I have a friend that shoots stills while being tethered to his Mac Pro. It is on a rolling standard rackmount cart but takes up a huge amount of space on it because it is too tall to lay on its side.

When he's done he rolls the cart into his edit room.

I know of other people who use Mac Pro on film shoots to offload video files from cameras and make backups, on the set. They arrive with carts and roll them around as needed. They say the same thing, "I wish it was rackmountable".

You are right, I fold. I know nothing about 19" racks (1.80 meters tall and 150 kg. in weight), and nothing about conditioned server rooms with dual power feeds at all. Flight cases with equipment I also know nothing about. I'm sorry I'm doubting your knowledge and insight.

it doesn't matter if you have a 64-bit processor and OS, you have to have 4Gb of RAM to run in 64-bit.

This is completely ridiculous. While one of the benefits of 64 bit chips is that it makes it easier to have >4 gig of RAM (and it's possible to get past that barrier with 32 bit chips as well), you are still "running in 64 bit" when using a 64 bit chip and OS.

DO you guys think the Mac MINI will get a speed bump anytime soon? A friend of mine, shes looking to come over to the Mac side and the MINI seems perfect for her needs but something faster would be nice then the current.

By years end I would say so. By Jan 2007 at the latest. We need to see the iMac get a bump first. That may occur at Paris in September.

Yet another sign Apple is going to kill the Mac Pro.

You'll see! With Final Cut Pro on it's deathbed there is no way the Mac Pro is sticking around!

/s

doubtful, this is a key switcher market... it would be crazy to axe the very thing that will continue to switch the PC builders/gamers over the next 5 years... this is a key ingredient to apple taking the industry over with time.

My so soon, I'm already excited to start waiting for the powerbook which will finally get an "ARM 5" processor :).

So I guess we'll all just send you our AT&T Internet Bills when we go over their newly implemented data usage caps? :eek:

:rolleyes:

You don't have to use the 'preferred' way to get it - you can also use the not preferred way to get it (Assuming that the preferred implies that there is a choice of how to get it)

Redundant power supplies are generally not a standard feature for most x86 servers sold. It isn't a must (requirement); it is an optional feature need if want to sell to the relatively small subset of the market that wants them. (e.g, none of Google's, Microsoft's ,etc search/cloud servers have dual power supplies and they number in the many, many thousands. )

Citation needed.

Even our Active-Active cluster boxes have redundant power supplies plugged into seperate electrical circuits and wired to independant UPSes, never mind our Active-Passive cluster solutions...

The fact is, most data centers do go for maximum redundancies without single points of failure on the hardware side.

When you have a massively parallele solution with custom software that is built to run on non-redundant hardware like Google built with their search engine, yeah, you can afford to skimp on hardware. They don't care if 1 node out of their 10000 fails, and the software doesn't see the impact. But that 1 specialised custom application is not an industry standard and is far from the norm in building data centers.

Massachusetts#39; Ted Kennedy

---

---

---

---

---

---