godette
Apr 27, 10:35 PM
Hello everyone. I use mail to receive two gmail accounts - let's call them A and B. For some reason, mail that's sent to address A ends up in the mailbox for B. Is there any way to fix this? Should I just delete both accounts and set them up again from scratch? And also, why does mail keep asking for my hotmail password even though I keep ticking the 'remember' box? Thanks everyone
ciTiger
Apr 28, 09:18 PM
To bad it takes years to get to the bottom of this things...
Lawyers get rich and things get pushed further and further away...
Lawyers get rich and things get pushed further and further away...
Dreadnought
Feb 7, 11:51 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)
@ ORANGESVTGUY: please lower your folding output, you'll be overtaking me within the next 5 days... (GRMBL!! And some censored cursing: $@&#^%!!!!)
@ ORANGESVTGUY: please lower your folding output, you'll be overtaking me within the next 5 days... (GRMBL!! And some censored cursing: $@&#^%!!!!)
nevcrabbe
Oct 18, 10:59 PM
... but in Northampton MA in body, and awaiting 10.5.1 (1?) from Amazon for $109 (=�3 at today's rates).
Time Machine will always be Tardis to me.....
Go England (Sarth Efrica indeed....)
Nev.
Time Machine will always be Tardis to me.....
Go England (Sarth Efrica indeed....)
Nev.
more...
kbright1892
Apr 7, 10:16 PM
Veyron SS
filmantopia
Mar 31, 01:08 PM
As a professional photographer this thing is (and always will be) an "App Store" toy - nothing more.
The iPad will never have the horse power to do what pros need.
So true. I will also stand with you that humanity has reached its technological peak, and there is nothing left to be invented. All we have to do now is lean back and smile at our incredible achievements.
Those fools who waste their time using their imaginations... Better to just appreciate all that currently exists and discourage others who try to imagine better possibilities. Amiright?
Sure, in the 80s we were the ones that said the personal computer, upon its release, was nothing more than a toy, despite it absurd popularity. So, okay, we were wrong then, but I assure you, not this time! Not this time!!
The iPad will never have the horse power to do what pros need.
So true. I will also stand with you that humanity has reached its technological peak, and there is nothing left to be invented. All we have to do now is lean back and smile at our incredible achievements.
Those fools who waste their time using their imaginations... Better to just appreciate all that currently exists and discourage others who try to imagine better possibilities. Amiright?
Sure, in the 80s we were the ones that said the personal computer, upon its release, was nothing more than a toy, despite it absurd popularity. So, okay, we were wrong then, but I assure you, not this time! Not this time!!
more...
ranviper
Feb 15, 12:19 PM
Amazing set of icons! Could you tell me where to get them?:)
Litho System indeed.
http://iconfactory.com/freeware/preview/lit0
Litho System indeed.
http://iconfactory.com/freeware/preview/lit0
hookem12387
Jun 22, 10:56 PM
Games for sale:
All prices shipped:
Mass Effect: $30
Oblivion (edition with all the bonus packs: $25 SOLD
Willing to take offers on mass effect
All prices shipped:
Mass Effect: $30
Oblivion (edition with all the bonus packs: $25 SOLD
Willing to take offers on mass effect
more...
peapody
Dec 25, 03:31 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5004/5290840511_9545941f54.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/heyjuliette/5290840511/)
Lau
Nov 9, 02:35 PM
I just got iMsafe. It backs up to an iPod, Firewire drive etc and it has been excellent. It just seems really good. Looks nice, dead simple, works well. And that's it.
Bit like macs, s'pose :)
Bit like macs, s'pose :)
more...
Apple Hero
Dec 4, 03:51 PM
None of these are Holiday related.
Huntn
Mar 3, 03:13 PM
You indicated that the rich weren't paying their 'fair share.' I responded by pointing out that the top 50% of wage earners pay 95% of the tax burden. That is completely separate (although obviously relative and related) from the tax 'rate' which they pay.
Then adjust it down and make the top 60% of wage earners pay 90% of the burden.
Let me get this straight... your definition of 'fair' is that people who make the right decisions in life, who invest in the right ideas, who don't waste their money on immediate pursuits so they can benefit in the long-term, who work hard and earn success, and yes... have a little luck should have their money confiscated by the state? By mob rule? Since you've determined that 'they don't need it', that translates to them not 'deserving' it and you being able to steal it from them via taxation?
Yes it is completely fair. What is your definition of steal? We could call taxation stealing. We could call exporting a million jobs out of the country stealing couldn't we? We could call breaking the union so executives, executives who all ready have a lot of money, can have more of labor's pay stealing.
This has been one of my long term themes. You live in a society for a reason. That reason is mutual benefit. Because you are smart (or lucky) and make the right decisions, and you end up with all most more money than you can spend or put another way, so much money to life like a King, should you? Oh, sure some people after living that way for years, start feeling guilty, and start a charity to ease their guilty conscious.
But my point is from a moral standpoint, how much money does an individual and his immediate family need to live a comfortable life? In this case of the successful business person, they should be at the top of the income scale. But I have proposed that scale be capped and a 90% income tax rate at a high level, say over $1 million a year is completely fair. "Damn it's so unfair. I only have $1M per year to live on, when I could have $10M, $20M, $50M, bastards!" Obviously you think it's fair if you are allowed to live in excess while others do without or do even you have a cap? ;)
Now you can muster up all of your capitalistic indignity and tell me why it's not fair. Which brings us back to my original premise. How much do you need to live on and still be considered a 'moral' person? What is your definition of moral, being a glutton? That is what the excessively rich are.
BTW, I don't hold anything against them, I don't envy them as I live what I consider to be a very comfortable life in the range of 150k per year income. But I am in the minority. A whole lot of people scrape by in this country. There is 'smart' and then there is 'opportunity'. Right now large multi-national corporations are doing there best to take away 'opportunity' from average citizens so they can increase their profits. Not only do they not give a damn about society, they have absolutely no national loyalty. Call them carpet baggers.
So in conclusion, I don't think excessive wealth is moral and I have no problem with the Federal government setting the top tax bracket at 90%. Call me a suedo-socialist. :)
I really like that quote where the Brit said it was easier being rich in the U.S. because instead of envying the fat cats, many Americans want to be like them. The inference being that they are cheering them on in hopes of one day being fabulously rich when in reality that is not going to happen for most of us, but we still support federal policies that hurt average people like lemmings heading off the cliff.
Then adjust it down and make the top 60% of wage earners pay 90% of the burden.
Let me get this straight... your definition of 'fair' is that people who make the right decisions in life, who invest in the right ideas, who don't waste their money on immediate pursuits so they can benefit in the long-term, who work hard and earn success, and yes... have a little luck should have their money confiscated by the state? By mob rule? Since you've determined that 'they don't need it', that translates to them not 'deserving' it and you being able to steal it from them via taxation?
Yes it is completely fair. What is your definition of steal? We could call taxation stealing. We could call exporting a million jobs out of the country stealing couldn't we? We could call breaking the union so executives, executives who all ready have a lot of money, can have more of labor's pay stealing.
This has been one of my long term themes. You live in a society for a reason. That reason is mutual benefit. Because you are smart (or lucky) and make the right decisions, and you end up with all most more money than you can spend or put another way, so much money to life like a King, should you? Oh, sure some people after living that way for years, start feeling guilty, and start a charity to ease their guilty conscious.
But my point is from a moral standpoint, how much money does an individual and his immediate family need to live a comfortable life? In this case of the successful business person, they should be at the top of the income scale. But I have proposed that scale be capped and a 90% income tax rate at a high level, say over $1 million a year is completely fair. "Damn it's so unfair. I only have $1M per year to live on, when I could have $10M, $20M, $50M, bastards!" Obviously you think it's fair if you are allowed to live in excess while others do without or do even you have a cap? ;)
Now you can muster up all of your capitalistic indignity and tell me why it's not fair. Which brings us back to my original premise. How much do you need to live on and still be considered a 'moral' person? What is your definition of moral, being a glutton? That is what the excessively rich are.
BTW, I don't hold anything against them, I don't envy them as I live what I consider to be a very comfortable life in the range of 150k per year income. But I am in the minority. A whole lot of people scrape by in this country. There is 'smart' and then there is 'opportunity'. Right now large multi-national corporations are doing there best to take away 'opportunity' from average citizens so they can increase their profits. Not only do they not give a damn about society, they have absolutely no national loyalty. Call them carpet baggers.
So in conclusion, I don't think excessive wealth is moral and I have no problem with the Federal government setting the top tax bracket at 90%. Call me a suedo-socialist. :)
I really like that quote where the Brit said it was easier being rich in the U.S. because instead of envying the fat cats, many Americans want to be like them. The inference being that they are cheering them on in hopes of one day being fabulously rich when in reality that is not going to happen for most of us, but we still support federal policies that hurt average people like lemmings heading off the cliff.
more...
valiar
Oct 3, 09:43 PM
To recap all the comments above...
Pretty muc everyone who actually had to *use* Notes for work hates it.
The only people who seem to be praising it are the ones who are paid to maintain it. Notice how the Notes fanbois refer to it as a "product", "platform", "solution", etc - and yet provide not a single example where the features of the client itself would make the user more happy and productive.
Yes, I said the word: User!
It's the users that matter most.
And Notes client makes any user miserable.
It is slow, it uses non-standard interface elements, and it has a really steep learning curve (even for the 'engineer' types). I am not a big fan of Outlook, but even Outlook is light years ahead of Notes.
As for the Domino server itself... That thing is just as bad as the client.
Its raison d'etre seems to be simplification of development process.
And it might have made (some limited) sense in 1995.
Not anymore.
Everything, and I mean everything, that you can do with Domino, you can do with Ruby, PHP/MySQL/PostgreSQL, WebObjects, or Java.
You can do it in less time, using highly visual dev environments. You can also easily collaborate on the development process, and systematically create concise documentation. The finished product will run fast and solid, and it won't depend on proprietary (terrible) client software. You will just need a web browser.
Domino, on the other hand, is pure garbage. I remember working in a 20 person company back in '00 where we had a Domino server running on a dual 500MHz PIII server with 2 gigs of RAM - very expensive at the time. It was very hard on the poor machine. It was choking. And the only three things the server was used for were email, very basic scheduling, and a billable hour tracking app. Not that that server is any speed demon by modern standards... But a non-Domino system having the same functionality would not have created any measurable load on the server at all with only 20 users. Did I also mention the server was less than stable? And I still remember how SP6 for NT completely brought the damn thing down... Ouch.
Pretty muc everyone who actually had to *use* Notes for work hates it.
The only people who seem to be praising it are the ones who are paid to maintain it. Notice how the Notes fanbois refer to it as a "product", "platform", "solution", etc - and yet provide not a single example where the features of the client itself would make the user more happy and productive.
Yes, I said the word: User!
It's the users that matter most.
And Notes client makes any user miserable.
It is slow, it uses non-standard interface elements, and it has a really steep learning curve (even for the 'engineer' types). I am not a big fan of Outlook, but even Outlook is light years ahead of Notes.
As for the Domino server itself... That thing is just as bad as the client.
Its raison d'etre seems to be simplification of development process.
And it might have made (some limited) sense in 1995.
Not anymore.
Everything, and I mean everything, that you can do with Domino, you can do with Ruby, PHP/MySQL/PostgreSQL, WebObjects, or Java.
You can do it in less time, using highly visual dev environments. You can also easily collaborate on the development process, and systematically create concise documentation. The finished product will run fast and solid, and it won't depend on proprietary (terrible) client software. You will just need a web browser.
Domino, on the other hand, is pure garbage. I remember working in a 20 person company back in '00 where we had a Domino server running on a dual 500MHz PIII server with 2 gigs of RAM - very expensive at the time. It was very hard on the poor machine. It was choking. And the only three things the server was used for were email, very basic scheduling, and a billable hour tracking app. Not that that server is any speed demon by modern standards... But a non-Domino system having the same functionality would not have created any measurable load on the server at all with only 20 users. Did I also mention the server was less than stable? And I still remember how SP6 for NT completely brought the damn thing down... Ouch.
fa8362
Feb 6, 02:38 PM
An extensive thread already exists down the page:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1062348
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1062348
more...
martinX
Apr 21, 07:26 AM
What version do you have? Get Info on Final Cut Express, take a screenshot of that window and post it.
dkn00b
Apr 17, 02:43 PM
CLICK ME! (http://igordos.deviantart.com/#/d3e6iyf)
more...
MacMan86
Apr 27, 07:28 PM
I am trying to decide if you are serious. I suspect most people here understand what a cache is. I think most have a pretty good idea about cell tower triangulation. We are the people SJ is talking about. I'm not sure what the point about understanding technology is about - why do we NEED to know how a smartphone does what it does? It would be nice to understand what features can be turned off if we feel it is outside our comfort zone.
A user may not be bothered about his firewall, he wants it to do what it supposed to. Do you think that the average person would be happy that it sends a feed of the traffic back to the OEM to target the owner for advertising? I seem to remember Belkin had a similar issue some years ago and hurriedly rushed out a firmware update after it was caught.
I'm not talking about people here, on an technology-related internet forum - I'm talking about the people on the street who heard about this and could only imagine this story was about Apple tracking their users. Most people are not aware of the process involved in finding your location. It could definitely be said that they could benefit from being educated.
A user may not be bothered about his firewall, he wants it to do what it supposed to. Do you think that the average person would be happy that it sends a feed of the traffic back to the OEM to target the owner for advertising? I seem to remember Belkin had a similar issue some years ago and hurriedly rushed out a firmware update after it was caught.
I'm not talking about people here, on an technology-related internet forum - I'm talking about the people on the street who heard about this and could only imagine this story was about Apple tracking their users. Most people are not aware of the process involved in finding your location. It could definitely be said that they could benefit from being educated.
iRance
Feb 25, 09:18 AM
56 Years of Innovation :):apple:
Hisdem
Apr 14, 05:04 PM
I see! Seems like times are changing. And $45? :o I pay $80 to fill my I4 Fusion!!
teguh123
Apr 14, 05:20 AM
Is this code correct
@implementation Vehicle +(id) vehicleWithColor:(NSColor*)color {
id newInstance = [[[self class] alloc] init]; // PERFECT, the class is // dynamically identified
[newInstance setColor:color]; return [newInstance autorelease];
} @end
Why use [self class]
I thought self already points to the class on static methods (the ones with +)
@implementation Vehicle +(id) vehicleWithColor:(NSColor*)color {
id newInstance = [[[self class] alloc] init]; // PERFECT, the class is // dynamically identified
[newInstance setColor:color]; return [newInstance autorelease];
} @end
Why use [self class]
I thought self already points to the class on static methods (the ones with +)
StealthRider
Sep 24, 07:06 PM
No, your 'tar is "Chunky Barf Inducing"...a big ol' Chipotle burrito with (almost) everything on it is bliss. (Sorry, I'm starting to feel 3 days of no solid food).
Anyway...18 is 18...you can't really stop your son. If you have objections, voice them, otherwise, don't make it harder than it has to be.
Anyway...18 is 18...you can't really stop your son. If you have objections, voice them, otherwise, don't make it harder than it has to be.
kainjow
Dec 17, 04:26 PM
Yep me too, see http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=164522
Popeye206
Apr 27, 06:32 PM
We need finer control over location. All we get to decide is yes or no. We should be able to decide what an app is going to do with the info.
Example: I'd like my maps app to use my location ONLY to tell me where i am. NOT share my location.
These broad agreement terms are the reason i have never installed an application on facebook. the terms are like "allow this application to access all your files, post to your friends walls, share your info, access your friends' info, etc. By clicking agree, you are allowing it to become your new spam bot.
In this new era, clicking agree should not be legally binding. Every time I want to update safari or itunes or install any new program I need to read 120 pages of legal speak? I'd have to hire a lawyer full time for years to get thru it all. I challenge anyone to read and understand every agreement in every app on your computer. For all we know there is a clause in there that says they own your firstborn. This is not directed at apple, this applies to all companies and developers.
How about we NOT get carried away before someone steps in and regulates half the features out ALL SMART PHONES and just accept the fact that we now live in a two way communication world?
I think hitting "Allow" or "Deny" is fine.
Example: I'd like my maps app to use my location ONLY to tell me where i am. NOT share my location.
These broad agreement terms are the reason i have never installed an application on facebook. the terms are like "allow this application to access all your files, post to your friends walls, share your info, access your friends' info, etc. By clicking agree, you are allowing it to become your new spam bot.
In this new era, clicking agree should not be legally binding. Every time I want to update safari or itunes or install any new program I need to read 120 pages of legal speak? I'd have to hire a lawyer full time for years to get thru it all. I challenge anyone to read and understand every agreement in every app on your computer. For all we know there is a clause in there that says they own your firstborn. This is not directed at apple, this applies to all companies and developers.
How about we NOT get carried away before someone steps in and regulates half the features out ALL SMART PHONES and just accept the fact that we now live in a two way communication world?
I think hitting "Allow" or "Deny" is fine.
Str8edgepunker
Apr 23, 09:21 PM
Wall-E?
That's the first one that comes to mind anyway.
Oh yeah, and: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Environmental_films
That's the first one that comes to mind anyway.
Oh yeah, and: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Environmental_films
No comments:
Post a Comment