torbjoern
Apr 28, 10:35 AM
In CT we are taxed I believe 50 cents on every gallon. The problem is that as gas prices rise people buy less of it and the taxes dry up.
3.00�3.50 USD per gallon (only in taxes!) would be more appropriate, don't you think? :D
No-one's going to tell me that petrol is expensive in the U.S.
3.00�3.50 USD per gallon (only in taxes!) would be more appropriate, don't you think? :D
No-one's going to tell me that petrol is expensive in the U.S.
robinp
Nov 6, 01:25 AM
My old flatmate was invited by O2 to take part in a trial of this technology in a nokia phone here in london. The phone had the ability to be an Oyster card (pay for public transport), an instant pay barclay card and to read a series of tags which he was given. Not sure what they were really useful for to be honest, but I guess you could set it up to change settings depending on location.
I think the trial was a success, so it doesn't surprise me that this would be incorporated in the iPhone.
I think the trial was a success, so it doesn't surprise me that this would be incorporated in the iPhone.
wirelessmacuser
Oct 11, 07:45 PM
i dont know if it was posted yet but god please put out an iphone with a physical keyboard.
http://images.mobilefun.co.uk/graphics/misc/Blogs/iPhone/iphone-pro-large.jpg
Apple would benefit greatly by offering this form factor, in addition to its current model. Exactly what BlackBerry users rely on, the response would be fantastic.
That said, sadly Apple seems to have a true death grip on its narrow minded position of restricting the iPhone to one model only.
http://images.mobilefun.co.uk/graphics/misc/Blogs/iPhone/iphone-pro-large.jpg
Apple would benefit greatly by offering this form factor, in addition to its current model. Exactly what BlackBerry users rely on, the response would be fantastic.
That said, sadly Apple seems to have a true death grip on its narrow minded position of restricting the iPhone to one model only.
SevenInchScrew
Jul 24, 01:17 PM
Did you notice the new smaller power brick actually has a fan now? That's what's making most of the sound :/
Old one did as well. My current Elite is pretty quiet, and when sitting on the dashboard, not playing a game, if it is real quiet in my house, you can hear the PSU more than the Xbox.
Old one did as well. My current Elite is pretty quiet, and when sitting on the dashboard, not playing a game, if it is real quiet in my house, you can hear the PSU more than the Xbox.
more...
firestarter
May 4, 12:55 AM
How do you know that that Sony prototype didn't come about as a result from work at UDC (funded by DARPA)?
I don't know. Does the US military usually sell its tech to the Japanese?
Seems to me that it's a technology lots of people are working on in parallel.
Consumer forces made flight widespread. Military forces make flight feasible. Hitler's minions didn't invent the jet engine and solid booster to deliver packages and orbit weather sensors.
Nice example. Frank Whittle (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljetengine.htm) received the first jet engine patent in 1930. He had been in the Air Force, but they wouldn't sponsor his research - so the development was privately funded and finally demonstrated in 1937.
Intercontental flight was made widespread after we decided to work on carring warheads across the ocean vs ppl. In 1940's who woulda funded a massive manhatten project to see if we can make it heat up some water...theoretically.
I think you're confusing fission and fusion.
The need for computer networks to survive a nuclear war now enable's us to read eachother's posts and take advantage of the consumerism on top of this web page.
Darpanet, indeed. But the web itself was developed in peacetime by a man researching at a (non military) Swiss research establishment (http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/about/web-en.html).
Many technological advancements are so costly and far-fetched that no reasonable "business" would risk investing a lot of money in it. That's when paranoid governments pick up the tab. I don't think you understand that it's real easy to spend $499 on an iPod with tons of "Apps" on it and say...oh yah, this is like real easy to make because Chinese ppl take 50 cents worth of material and put it together. But before all this was possible, some of the smallest components in that iPhone and the most basic of all "Apps" took a "visionary" with a massivly risky budget to make one blink on some $5 million vaccuum box for the first time in history!
The first commercial transistors were developed for telecoms by AT&T / Texas instruments (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor).
The integrated circuit was invented in peace time, and it's mass production was spurred as much by the Apollo program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit) as for defence.
Interestingly, defence and space are very conservative in their use of technology and CPUs. The increase in CPU power over time has clearly been motivated by commercial market forces (non military).
Yes, I don't deny that defence money does finance innovation. But that's not the same as implying that innovation wouldn't take place if it wasn't for War. That's clearly nonsense - there's plenty of civil and commercial market forces that also spur development, and the examples you've cited demonstrate a few. War is not an essential for human or technological development, although it may speed it along a little from time to time.
I don't know. Does the US military usually sell its tech to the Japanese?
Seems to me that it's a technology lots of people are working on in parallel.
Consumer forces made flight widespread. Military forces make flight feasible. Hitler's minions didn't invent the jet engine and solid booster to deliver packages and orbit weather sensors.
Nice example. Frank Whittle (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljetengine.htm) received the first jet engine patent in 1930. He had been in the Air Force, but they wouldn't sponsor his research - so the development was privately funded and finally demonstrated in 1937.
Intercontental flight was made widespread after we decided to work on carring warheads across the ocean vs ppl. In 1940's who woulda funded a massive manhatten project to see if we can make it heat up some water...theoretically.
I think you're confusing fission and fusion.
The need for computer networks to survive a nuclear war now enable's us to read eachother's posts and take advantage of the consumerism on top of this web page.
Darpanet, indeed. But the web itself was developed in peacetime by a man researching at a (non military) Swiss research establishment (http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/about/web-en.html).
Many technological advancements are so costly and far-fetched that no reasonable "business" would risk investing a lot of money in it. That's when paranoid governments pick up the tab. I don't think you understand that it's real easy to spend $499 on an iPod with tons of "Apps" on it and say...oh yah, this is like real easy to make because Chinese ppl take 50 cents worth of material and put it together. But before all this was possible, some of the smallest components in that iPhone and the most basic of all "Apps" took a "visionary" with a massivly risky budget to make one blink on some $5 million vaccuum box for the first time in history!
The first commercial transistors were developed for telecoms by AT&T / Texas instruments (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor).
The integrated circuit was invented in peace time, and it's mass production was spurred as much by the Apollo program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit) as for defence.
Interestingly, defence and space are very conservative in their use of technology and CPUs. The increase in CPU power over time has clearly been motivated by commercial market forces (non military).
Yes, I don't deny that defence money does finance innovation. But that's not the same as implying that innovation wouldn't take place if it wasn't for War. That's clearly nonsense - there's plenty of civil and commercial market forces that also spur development, and the examples you've cited demonstrate a few. War is not an essential for human or technological development, although it may speed it along a little from time to time.
bloodycape
Nov 13, 01:37 AM
Just wondering how Japan perceives Apple as a company - if anyone knows. I know they don't like Microsoft (as in Xbox). I can't imagine they sell many Apple computers over there. Ipods a different story?
Last I remember, Japan and Korea tend to show loyalty to Japanese companies, hence Sony playstation doing well in Japan. I also remember reading that iPod is #3 in like Japan, a #4 in Korea or something.
Last I remember, Japan and Korea tend to show loyalty to Japanese companies, hence Sony playstation doing well in Japan. I also remember reading that iPod is #3 in like Japan, a #4 in Korea or something.
more...
SevenInchScrew
Jul 24, 09:29 AM
^ nice but too expensive.
100-150 euro more for it is a lot. Retailers are already throwing deals together such as free game, or at least cheaper game plus extra controllers.
I got the new machine with extra black controller, Pure & Lego Batman + newly released ToyStory 3 free.
Yea, that was the older 360 Elite Spring Bundle that MS was selling. The reason they threw Pure and Lego Batman in is because those games are old. Both came out in 2008. I already own all the Lego games anyway. The other Elite bundle they were selling recently came with Halo 3: ODST and Forza 3, two games that I already own as well. So, the standard bundles that MS has been selling haven't been much use to me.
The way I see it, with this bundle I'm getting the new $300 "S" console with an extra $60 controller and the $60 game for $380 (I had Amazon credit). So, I'm getting $40 off what it would have cost just for those items if I bought them separately, and that doesn't even take into account the unique color and graphics of the console and controllers. For a huge Halo fan, like myself, that counts for something. I think it is a good deal.
100-150 euro more for it is a lot. Retailers are already throwing deals together such as free game, or at least cheaper game plus extra controllers.
I got the new machine with extra black controller, Pure & Lego Batman + newly released ToyStory 3 free.
Yea, that was the older 360 Elite Spring Bundle that MS was selling. The reason they threw Pure and Lego Batman in is because those games are old. Both came out in 2008. I already own all the Lego games anyway. The other Elite bundle they were selling recently came with Halo 3: ODST and Forza 3, two games that I already own as well. So, the standard bundles that MS has been selling haven't been much use to me.
The way I see it, with this bundle I'm getting the new $300 "S" console with an extra $60 controller and the $60 game for $380 (I had Amazon credit). So, I'm getting $40 off what it would have cost just for those items if I bought them separately, and that doesn't even take into account the unique color and graphics of the console and controllers. For a huge Halo fan, like myself, that counts for something. I think it is a good deal.
yg17
Feb 22, 12:21 PM
So basically you pay like this for your phone now:
1. Minutes
2. Data on broadband
3. Power for microcell
ATT should pay you for this.
The calls still go through the AT&T network. How do you think a call gets from the Microcell to the person you're calling?
1. Minutes
2. Data on broadband
3. Power for microcell
ATT should pay you for this.
The calls still go through the AT&T network. How do you think a call gets from the Microcell to the person you're calling?
more...
DewGuy1999
Apr 23, 02:11 PM
$3.949 for regular, less than an hour later the price was a penny cheaper.
Psilocybin
Apr 22, 11:15 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Haha. The hd3000 actually is horrible. And I have proof to back that up if you'd like me to make a YouTube account. It's a joke
Haha. The hd3000 actually is horrible. And I have proof to back that up if you'd like me to make a YouTube account. It's a joke
more...
NSeven
Apr 18, 05:31 AM
This could be a sneeky attack from microsoft.. no one will take down Apple's POWER !!
Knowimagination
Mar 5, 12:52 AM
if BB won't let me buy one on launch day then I will probably be in line at the Knox St store
more...
iPhoneCollector
Feb 18, 11:01 AM
It does not look like the NE picture was actually of SJ at all.
And what it it was him. Does having a hand mean that one has only six weeks to live?
And what it it was him. Does having a hand mean that one has only six weeks to live?
illegalprelude
Apr 24, 05:57 PM
I believe both the current versions of Avid Media Composer and Adobe Premiere Pro can edit 3D.
Lethal
Ohh, Good call about Adobe Premiere Pro. It certainly can and seems the most price friendly option.
The current FCS can edit 3D with the Dashwood stereo 3d toolkit plugin!
Sweet mother, $1,500 plugin! :eek:
What are people's thoughts on Sony Vegas Pro? I could run either parallels or bootcamp and my iMac more then fits the bill for these programs (27" iMac 2.93 i7, 12GB of Ram, 1GB ATI Radeon HD 5750)
Seems like a much cheaper avenue? Though I can probably find a good deal on Adobe Premiere Pro
For both the pro's and consumers who are thinking about 3D, here is a great video from Adobe:
http://tv.adobe.com/watch/davtechtable/3d-stereoscopic-editing-with-premierepro-cs5-winosx/
Lethal
Ohh, Good call about Adobe Premiere Pro. It certainly can and seems the most price friendly option.
The current FCS can edit 3D with the Dashwood stereo 3d toolkit plugin!
Sweet mother, $1,500 plugin! :eek:
What are people's thoughts on Sony Vegas Pro? I could run either parallels or bootcamp and my iMac more then fits the bill for these programs (27" iMac 2.93 i7, 12GB of Ram, 1GB ATI Radeon HD 5750)
Seems like a much cheaper avenue? Though I can probably find a good deal on Adobe Premiere Pro
For both the pro's and consumers who are thinking about 3D, here is a great video from Adobe:
http://tv.adobe.com/watch/davtechtable/3d-stereoscopic-editing-with-premierepro-cs5-winosx/
more...
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 12, 03:50 PM
WTF? Why does the MS Office updater force me to quit chrome ????
Silverlight probably.
Silverlight probably.
scott523
Sep 25, 10:01 AM
how many of us actually care much about aperture...?
Nope not me. :rolleyes:
I'm locking my eyes onto a possible new MacBook. :D
Nope not me. :rolleyes:
I'm locking my eyes onto a possible new MacBook. :D
more...
sarge
Mar 25, 10:45 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
It isn't that they miscalculated the rise of digital, as miscalculations happen in business, it is the silly decision they made that resulted in the company divesting itself of businesses that had a future. The point is you can miscalculate a bit when it comes to how rapid you core tech will become useless but your planning should recognize that is going to happen and that you need to grow in a different direction. Instead Kodak shrunk itself down around a dying business.
.
Exactly, for those folks who think Kodak was just a film company you're totally off base. They had the diversity but not the vision to adjust to the transition and ended up wholesale auctioning their future. Kinda what we're doing as a country right now.
It isn't that they miscalculated the rise of digital, as miscalculations happen in business, it is the silly decision they made that resulted in the company divesting itself of businesses that had a future. The point is you can miscalculate a bit when it comes to how rapid you core tech will become useless but your planning should recognize that is going to happen and that you need to grow in a different direction. Instead Kodak shrunk itself down around a dying business.
.
Exactly, for those folks who think Kodak was just a film company you're totally off base. They had the diversity but not the vision to adjust to the transition and ended up wholesale auctioning their future. Kinda what we're doing as a country right now.
TwoSocEmBoppers
Feb 24, 09:59 AM
Wait. You live in The People's Republic of Massachusetts and you are astounded by this level of government nanny-ism?
Hahaha well originally from Southern California. Just going to school out here.
Hahaha well originally from Southern California. Just going to school out here.
matticus008
Nov 21, 04:57 PM
Hook up that chip, and then just keep overclocking the thing... you don't have to worry about it overheating and melting, it'll just give you more battery life.
Maybe this is a joke? The processor will still heat up in the beginning to a given temperature, and if it crosses the safe upper limit, it will be damaged. This technology will take the generated heat and convert it to electricity--it won't make the processor generate less heat.
Wouldn't using the "extra" electricity to power fans to decrease heat lead to less "extra" electricity???? :rolleyes: I hope they really think this through - and I'm sure they will. Of course powering fans isn't the only use for electricity.
Of course it will. But if you're producing 110% power at 102% consumption, that's still an 8% gain. The trick is to ensure that the benefit outweighs the cost (both in price and in additional power drain to power the system) by a large margin. This is the sort of thing that improves with time.
This could be very cool if it works. Just slap one of these between your processor and heat sink and get 30% more battery life. Or on desktops force cool your system without liquid.
You won't get 30% of your electricity back. You'll get up to 30% of the power lost through heat which is accessible to the chip (that is, the portion not lost from convection cooling of the case) and above ambient temperatures. If you're in a warm room, for instance, you'll have much lower performance, since it requires the differential to work. Of course, maybe the information available isn't wholly accurate, but that's my understanding based on the description.
Maybe this is a joke? The processor will still heat up in the beginning to a given temperature, and if it crosses the safe upper limit, it will be damaged. This technology will take the generated heat and convert it to electricity--it won't make the processor generate less heat.
Wouldn't using the "extra" electricity to power fans to decrease heat lead to less "extra" electricity???? :rolleyes: I hope they really think this through - and I'm sure they will. Of course powering fans isn't the only use for electricity.
Of course it will. But if you're producing 110% power at 102% consumption, that's still an 8% gain. The trick is to ensure that the benefit outweighs the cost (both in price and in additional power drain to power the system) by a large margin. This is the sort of thing that improves with time.
This could be very cool if it works. Just slap one of these between your processor and heat sink and get 30% more battery life. Or on desktops force cool your system without liquid.
You won't get 30% of your electricity back. You'll get up to 30% of the power lost through heat which is accessible to the chip (that is, the portion not lost from convection cooling of the case) and above ambient temperatures. If you're in a warm room, for instance, you'll have much lower performance, since it requires the differential to work. Of course, maybe the information available isn't wholly accurate, but that's my understanding based on the description.
liavman
Mar 25, 09:00 PM
Here is some interesting data...
Kodak has 1.62B in cash and 1.24B in debt for a net spoils of 380 million
Gross Profit per year is 1.95Billion with an EBITDA of 732 Million. The accounting reported earnings are negative, so it is all about some charges, not real money going forward.
Kodak's current market cap is 914.20. It went up 20% after this news, so it is currently 1.1 Billion.
If Apple is really interested in Kodak's intellectual property, it seems to be cheaper to buy the company out right than licensing the intellectual property.
Apple should simply buy them out paying the shareholders 50% premium for around 1.7 Billion cash and be done with it. Keep the intellectual property portfolio, collect some yearly money from Samsung and others which Kodak has already won. May be even from RIM if the ruling will be in Kodak's favor. But that is not a gating factor for the decision. The major issue to resolve is what to do with their current 18000 employees!! That is like 1.5 B to 2 B a year in expense. May be Apple will have use for 1000 of those people at best. Apple will have to spin off any manufacturing and sales of what Kodak currently does today into a separate company while keeping the intellectual property.
Having said all this, something does not look right. Why are the earnings negative for a company with a revenue of 7 Billion, Gross profit of 2 Billion and EBITDA of of 3/4th of a billion, and why is the market cap so low for such a company. I know its future is bleak which begs the question. Why is it still even in business. If its future strategy is going to be just a patent holding company and not any useful economic activity out of those 18000 people, Apple can do a much better job of being that patent holding company.
Kodak has 1.62B in cash and 1.24B in debt for a net spoils of 380 million
Gross Profit per year is 1.95Billion with an EBITDA of 732 Million. The accounting reported earnings are negative, so it is all about some charges, not real money going forward.
Kodak's current market cap is 914.20. It went up 20% after this news, so it is currently 1.1 Billion.
If Apple is really interested in Kodak's intellectual property, it seems to be cheaper to buy the company out right than licensing the intellectual property.
Apple should simply buy them out paying the shareholders 50% premium for around 1.7 Billion cash and be done with it. Keep the intellectual property portfolio, collect some yearly money from Samsung and others which Kodak has already won. May be even from RIM if the ruling will be in Kodak's favor. But that is not a gating factor for the decision. The major issue to resolve is what to do with their current 18000 employees!! That is like 1.5 B to 2 B a year in expense. May be Apple will have use for 1000 of those people at best. Apple will have to spin off any manufacturing and sales of what Kodak currently does today into a separate company while keeping the intellectual property.
Having said all this, something does not look right. Why are the earnings negative for a company with a revenue of 7 Billion, Gross profit of 2 Billion and EBITDA of of 3/4th of a billion, and why is the market cap so low for such a company. I know its future is bleak which begs the question. Why is it still even in business. If its future strategy is going to be just a patent holding company and not any useful economic activity out of those 18000 people, Apple can do a much better job of being that patent holding company.
Abstract
Jan 20, 07:04 AM
If I click on it, it links to "itchyscalp.com.au".
SandynJosh
Apr 13, 02:44 AM
The 3G graph just shows how ignorant people are when choosing between ATT and Verizon.
ATT has the fastest 3G network
ATT has GSM, the standard chipset around the globe
Dropped calls and data plan are not the same thing
All this equals that people are ignorant
Maybe more people live in areas where Verizon has better coverage. There's a map for that, you know.
ATT has the fastest 3G network
ATT has GSM, the standard chipset around the globe
Dropped calls and data plan are not the same thing
All this equals that people are ignorant
Maybe more people live in areas where Verizon has better coverage. There's a map for that, you know.
ZipZap
Apr 25, 04:09 AM
Lower price.
topperdog
Mar 24, 11:23 AM
Airtunes has been awful since all the latest updates Apple has made. Fix the issues Apple created before adding more to the mix. Dropouts are Airtunes only quality now. Good idea, but it doesn't work very well at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment