GilGrissom
Jul 25, 10:27 AM
This is great but I do have a question..
Since it's bluetooth and Apple says it works within 30 ft.What happens if you're in a starbucks and other people have bluetooth turned on ?
Will they be able to "hack" your Mighty Mouse?
I pressume it's no different from every other bluetooth device, other bluetooth mice, mobile phones, headsets etc etc.
There is bound to be a way, but not common place. The usual code pairing should do the trick like every other Tom, Dick and Harry (or even Alvin, Simon and Theodore!) BT device.
Since it's bluetooth and Apple says it works within 30 ft.What happens if you're in a starbucks and other people have bluetooth turned on ?
Will they be able to "hack" your Mighty Mouse?
I pressume it's no different from every other bluetooth device, other bluetooth mice, mobile phones, headsets etc etc.
There is bound to be a way, but not common place. The usual code pairing should do the trick like every other Tom, Dick and Harry (or even Alvin, Simon and Theodore!) BT device.
Yamcha
Mar 31, 12:07 PM
That looks really ugly, and that is coming from a web designer :P.. I liked the original look, but It's not something I'm too concerned about, since its just a calendar app.. I can manage..
But I do hope to see something better in the final release..
But I do hope to see something better in the final release..
macshark
Oct 23, 12:16 PM
If Microsoft makes it more difficult for Mac/Linux users to run virtual copies of Vista, maybe Vise will be developed faster than Wine...
crackbookpro
Apr 14, 07:50 AM
Apple knew they were releasing the White iPhone for months(probably close to a year if not more) now... it's all strategic marketing, sales, & planning. There might have never been a problem within the white plastic that analysts exclaimed... It's all about sales now for Apple, they are so over the professional consumer. You guys think the double-sided glass on the iPhone 4 was from a pure design-point are utterly mistaken by dominance(s) of Apple's new businees model within the last couple years.
Apple is making products to sell... when... they used to make the best products for the professional consumer. I don't knock them at all... they are doing what any business would do with a cabinet full of board members & shareholders - make money... more money.
Apple's got us this year... the big iPhone update is waiting on LTE, and even more so AT&T's involvement. It truly may not be till 2012...
Apple is making products to sell... when... they used to make the best products for the professional consumer. I don't knock them at all... they are doing what any business would do with a cabinet full of board members & shareholders - make money... more money.
Apple's got us this year... the big iPhone update is waiting on LTE, and even more so AT&T's involvement. It truly may not be till 2012...
blackpond
Apr 13, 04:25 PM
What will Apple offer that other manufactures can't?
A robust and thriving App Store.
The App Store will legitimize the Apple TV set.
I would go so far as to suggest the reason we don't have an App Store on the current Apple TV is because Apple is saving it as the compelling reason to buy an entire TV set.
Apple doesn't have to provide the reasons to buy the Apple TV set. Developers will do that for them. In the hundreds of thousands.
Pretty soon you won't be switching channels. You'll be switching apps.
My 2 cents.
A robust and thriving App Store.
The App Store will legitimize the Apple TV set.
I would go so far as to suggest the reason we don't have an App Store on the current Apple TV is because Apple is saving it as the compelling reason to buy an entire TV set.
Apple doesn't have to provide the reasons to buy the Apple TV set. Developers will do that for them. In the hundreds of thousands.
Pretty soon you won't be switching channels. You'll be switching apps.
My 2 cents.
helmsc
Jul 24, 09:43 PM
I can see many first time user scratching their heads on this kind of design.
Like me...I don't have an iPod ...yet.
Like me...I don't have an iPod ...yet.
vnle
Jan 26, 03:24 PM
You're welcome. Might have to order another one before the 31st. :D
I went back to newegg after getting one to do just that but, sadly, they were sold out :(
EDIT: Rooskibar03 beat me to it:p Any idea if they'll have it back in stock before the 31st? There's 5 more days ... :o
I went back to newegg after getting one to do just that but, sadly, they were sold out :(
EDIT: Rooskibar03 beat me to it:p Any idea if they'll have it back in stock before the 31st? There's 5 more days ... :o
aafuss1
Jul 25, 10:33 AM
Microsoft has a Wireless Laser Mouse 6000-that works on PC's and is laser too-unlike Apple that won't support those trying to get the the wireless Mighty Mouse to work on a PC. And my fav-Logitech has the G7 that works quite fine on Macs.
s15119
Apr 26, 02:40 PM
duh. Did anyone really think Apple would do something without charging?
DeathChill
Apr 23, 01:34 PM
If you don't have an iPhone... you may have LTE :D
If you don't have the only device that supports LTE, the Thunderbolt, you don't have LTE. :D
Oh, also, if you have a device that makes it through a day you definitely don't have LTE. :D
If you don't have the only device that supports LTE, the Thunderbolt, you don't have LTE. :D
Oh, also, if you have a device that makes it through a day you definitely don't have LTE. :D
rmhop81
Apr 26, 01:13 PM
Uh no...
You need to follow the thread. The poster was using his 2 TB drive as his cloud using a 5$ software.
i'm following the thread....the guy pays for 2TB drives to store his music on. music that he probably never paid for considering he has 2TB worth. your point?
You need to follow the thread. The poster was using his 2 TB drive as his cloud using a 5$ software.
i'm following the thread....the guy pays for 2TB drives to store his music on. music that he probably never paid for considering he has 2TB worth. your point?
Keleko
Apr 6, 06:03 PM
The Cherokee Memorial Park in Hopkinsville, KY, is where Chief Whitepath and Fly Smith, a clan leader, are buried. This site was one of the ration stops along the Trail of Tears.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5149/5595980609_3086a27a2c_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/22077805@N07/5595980609/in/photostream/)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5149/5595980609_3086a27a2c_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/22077805@N07/5595980609/in/photostream/)
nobunaga209
Feb 1, 05:04 PM
More goodies for the CBR; HID kit, gear indicator, and black fuel cap.
http://www.d2moto.com/images/product/large/8803_1_.jpg
http://i.ebayimg.com/06/!CBl0hcg!Wk~$(KGrHqZ,!hQE0fktnbWbBNIT,DSNOg~~0_12.JPG
http://i.ebayimg.com/06/!CESUw8!EGk~$(KGrHqJ,!lgEz+2LF49pBNR,m,IWBw~~0_12.JPG
http://www.d2moto.com/images/product/large/8803_1_.jpg
http://i.ebayimg.com/06/!CBl0hcg!Wk~$(KGrHqZ,!hQE0fktnbWbBNIT,DSNOg~~0_12.JPG
http://i.ebayimg.com/06/!CESUw8!EGk~$(KGrHqJ,!lgEz+2LF49pBNR,m,IWBw~~0_12.JPG
hayesk
Mar 31, 08:43 PM
I thought that the inverse scrolling was a bug, but in Lion Dev Preview 2 it is still there :eek:
It's done on purpose because we've been used to backwards scrolling all these years. Why should a mouse's scroll wheel control the scroll bar, and not the page you want to scroll? When you think about it, it's kind of silly to add that extra layer of abstraction when you don't need it.
Now it's been corrected - it takes almost no time to get used to it. Embrace it, and you'll be ok.
It's done on purpose because we've been used to backwards scrolling all these years. Why should a mouse's scroll wheel control the scroll bar, and not the page you want to scroll? When you think about it, it's kind of silly to add that extra layer of abstraction when you don't need it.
Now it's been corrected - it takes almost no time to get used to it. Embrace it, and you'll be ok.
twoodcc
Oct 20, 07:40 PM
too bad they dont have a midrange tower with an i5 or i7
yeah for real. but that iMac sure does seem nice
yeah for real. but that iMac sure does seem nice
arn
Aug 15, 10:38 AM
The images will return shortly. I overloaded the guides server with that.
arn
arn
gr8whtd0pe
Jan 29, 09:43 PM
Took the plunge finally and bought a 16gb iPad and Apple case for my cruise next weekend. Might sell it as soon as I get back since the 2's will be out soon... We'll see.
Loving it so far.
Loving it so far.
paul4339
Apr 22, 02:10 AM
...
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
Suing one of your biggest customers isn't?
P.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
Suing one of your biggest customers isn't?
P.
KnightWRX
Dec 30, 10:43 PM
Under normal circumstances, you're more or less right.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
macman312
Apr 12, 07:11 PM
While this is possible I don't think it will be true. Firstly Apple is one to keep to traditions and ever since 2007 the release/announcement a new iphone in june/july and a new ipod range in september. So apple please keep to your traditions of ANNOUNCING a new iphone you don't have to release it till JUly/september but just so the teleco companies can prepare and get a list of people who would like one please announce it at the WWDC :apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::D:D:D:D:cool::cool::D:D:apple::apple :
dethmaShine
Apr 16, 10:59 AM
Where did I claim any of those things ? :confused:
*sigh*, at this point, I'll just ignore your comments, do the same for mine.
Then what were you trying to prove?
All the browsers do it. ChromeOS is just a browser for a normal consumer.
What were you actually trying to prove? What was your point? Sure you can ignore my comments if you dont have an answer. Fair enough.
*sigh*, at this point, I'll just ignore your comments, do the same for mine.
Then what were you trying to prove?
All the browsers do it. ChromeOS is just a browser for a normal consumer.
What were you actually trying to prove? What was your point? Sure you can ignore my comments if you dont have an answer. Fair enough.
maxdarche
Mar 29, 08:56 AM
http://cgi.ebay.com/WWDC-2011-Apple-Worldwide-Developers-Conference-Ticket-/180646305042?pt=US_Tickets_all_in_one&hash=item2a0f5bdd12#ht_500wt_1156
still on sale.. who wants one?
still on sale.. who wants one?
PghLondon
Apr 28, 12:06 PM
Question should be, why does it matter how many android devices there are? There is still a one to one relationship, one customer buys-one device. Its android smartphones vs Apple Smartphones.
No. No. No.
Comparing Android vs. iOS : fine
But why the arbitrary distinction of "phones". It's an OS that can be run on multiple devices. Do you compare Mac laptop share vs. Windows laptop share? (In any meaningful context, that is)?
No. No. No.
Comparing Android vs. iOS : fine
But why the arbitrary distinction of "phones". It's an OS that can be run on multiple devices. Do you compare Mac laptop share vs. Windows laptop share? (In any meaningful context, that is)?
Surely
Jan 27, 05:40 PM
To add to my post-workout recovery drink:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HQMqZSk3L._AA300_PIbundle-1,TopRight,0,0AA300_SH20_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41H0Rwu8BvL._AA300_PIbundle-1,TopRight,0,0AA300_SH20_.jpg
My post-workout recovery drink:
http://www.jonnyrash.com/img/sandbox/organic-valley-chocolate-milk.jpg
After researching, I discovered that chocolate milk has the same carb to protein ratio that expensive recovery drink mixes have (such as the P90X Recovery Drink). So, instead of spending around $60/month, I've elected to go with the chocolate milk, and to add a few supplements that are important for muscle recovery (which are found in those expensive drinks). Any excuse to drink chocolate milk is a good one.
SMRT
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HQMqZSk3L._AA300_PIbundle-1,TopRight,0,0AA300_SH20_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41H0Rwu8BvL._AA300_PIbundle-1,TopRight,0,0AA300_SH20_.jpg
My post-workout recovery drink:
http://www.jonnyrash.com/img/sandbox/organic-valley-chocolate-milk.jpg
After researching, I discovered that chocolate milk has the same carb to protein ratio that expensive recovery drink mixes have (such as the P90X Recovery Drink). So, instead of spending around $60/month, I've elected to go with the chocolate milk, and to add a few supplements that are important for muscle recovery (which are found in those expensive drinks). Any excuse to drink chocolate milk is a good one.
SMRT
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий