79 posts • joined Monday 10th May 2010 12:40 GMT
Never mind the price of the lower end model, spec it up a bit and that's when you see the real divergence.
You pay another 100 pounds to get GPS (and 3G) and a further 80 pounds to get another 16GB of storage. And chances are you'll want to do that.
16GB is pittance, and it's a pain in the arse getting data on and off IOS devices unless you like waiting for hours while your Dropbox syncs, instead of minutes if the Internet didn't have to get involved.
Many Android tabs come with GPS as standard, can be expanded cheaply using a card slot and support USB OTG because it's really bloody useful. It's a pity reviewers of these products didn't knock a few points off their reviews for that.
Never mind, you can always email that 2GB MKV to yourself. Makes sense.
If you're the type who's always complaining that beer cans are too big to hold in your hand comfortably, the iPhone is right for you.
Most important change in the next iPhone
I don't give a damn about anything else: it's just got to be the thinner than the iPhone 5.
But if you really want to spoil us how about letting App publishers push ads into the lockscreen? That would be really cool.
Wrong way to sell the story.
I'm pretty sure this is good news for the bloke race.
Australia's already fixed the weather by bringing in a Carbon Tax. As soon as you get off the plane you can feel the weather is exactly right, the way God (the one worshipped by Kevin Rudd) intended it.
I hope this is good news to all of you who are terrified by the drumbeat of articles like this.
Apple plans to create a central file store and grant read and write access to external drive storage.
It will be introduced to commerate 10 years since the death of Steve Jobs, in IOS15.
Here's how it will be reported by Wired:
Re: Not the Met Office's fault.
It's all over.
What a disaster this Labour government has been on every level.
Australia's Carbon Tax
It's also unpopular because:
only the most gullible believe making energy more expensive will directly improve the weather.
only the most gullible believe money from such a tax will result in the invention of an alternative energy source.
everyone understands making energy more expensive will worsen one's standard of living.
Plus, the sheer level of bluffing bullshit sprouted by those introducing has been breathtaking.
What a ripping yarn.
Grubby business tactics
This is like bragging your team is unbeatable when you've had your thug mates kneecap the opposition and hold their families at gunpoint.
Science is settled, except when it's bad news
Any idiot can see temperatures have plummetted across Australia since Gillard introduced the Carbon Tax.
My only concern is that it will start to heat up again after the winter.
Do not argue
Remember if you're at all skeptical about the reasoning here you're what's classed as a "denier" and smart people won't invite you to their dinner parties. You'll have to cook for yourself.
For the last few years I've been getting around 60 messages per day from one bot network. All the domains are registered by Moniker and Enom; they must register at least 100 a day.
Rarely watches and Viagra, this one does stuff like Raspberry Ketone, travel deals, loan advances and discount coupons. About ten different themes, spread across multiple slight variations. Every day without fail they come in around the time the USA gets out of bed.
Surely whoever's behind this insanity understands that this isn't marketing it's an attack that will take down an email address. But the same emails keep coming. Day after day after day.
Can't go wrong with Microsoft. Consistently excellent products.
No-one ever got fired for buying Microsoft.
Re: Its and it's
Who give's a shit?
So if the planet is warming why would "some" melt and not others? Still doesn't support the hypothesis that we need to exterminate 80% of the human race in order to get CO2 levels just right.
Finally some bad news. Now we can get on with punishing ourselves.
For those wondering where the "deniers" are WUWT broke this story yesterday:
Deniers, ye shall burn in Hell for eternity
We must heed the prophecy. End of Days is upon us.
Those amongst us who have sinned. Those amongst us who given birth to the beast that is the baby human. Ye shall burn in Hell for eternity.
For none is more guilty than the woman who brings upon the Earth the pestilence that is the human being. Who by its biological nature breathes out the very poison that is killing our planet.
Carbon, my friends, is the evil by which the Earth shall be delivered to the Devil. And ye who create it with your motor vehicles and your electric lights, ye shall be punished.
I urge you to repent before all is lost.
The only path to salvation is through flagellation in the form of taxation.
We must pay more. More for everything. And worry. Worry about everything.
It is the word of our prophets.
Maybe it's happening glacially.
Or the exact opposite.
I've been studying the works of a German social engineer from the mid Twentieth Century - a forward thinking, yet deeply misunderstood vegetarian - who asserted that humankind should isolate genetic markers favourable to its survival and carry only those forward.
The genetic marker he had in mind is in fact the same gene common to 99% of the Green intellectual movement, one that manifests itself in a lighter shade of skin tone.
If were to simply weed out those who don't carry this Green intellectual gene - some 80% of the world's population - we would immediately solve the biggest crisis facing the human race, the overproduction of CO2.
I believe this could be the Final Solution.
I agree with the environmentalists. The only way to prevent the catastrophic temperature rise is to immediately abate C02 production. And the only way to do this with any chance of being effective is to cull at least 80% of the excess humans on the planet.
The hard part is deciding which to get rid of first. Who contributes least? Who do we continue having to prop up? Let's round them up, and gas the lot of them.
That's what you're getting at isn't it?
Re: Global Warming is real.
Unless, of course, it doesn't extrapolate linearly:
If you're really worried about the future, suicide is still the safest option.
Re: Re: Will be interesting to see how the "mainstream" news media report this
It'll be even more interesting to see whether the Guardian etc print any kind of retraction for using a fake document in their smear.
If you need any further proof that there's an aggressive conspiracy that's manipulating the media to silence dissent on this issue, you need only follow the progress of this story:
Re: Re: Re: AGW denier propaganda
"6) Temperatures fall over several decades"
Very few so-called "skeptics" argue that temperatures haven't risen. But there is a significant school of thought that they won't continue to rise, for varying reasons. That's the thing with science, especially one as wooly as this: it's never settled.
Of course none of this matters, because the real issue is how we react to it. That's where the mountains of bullshit start, and no matter how much you want the sky to be falling you should still have the integrity to say no to the rampant profiteering that's been exploiting this scaremongering.
Taxing carbon will not suddenly invent cheap power. The incentive is already there for other reasons.
Re: Re: Y2Kyoto
""A survey of 3146 earth scientists asked the question "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?" (Doran 2009). More than 90% of participants had Ph.D.s, and 7% had master’s degrees. Overall, 82% of the scientists answered yes. "
Indeed, most so-called "skeptics" - including Anthony Watts - would also answer "yes."
Lie gets halfway around the world
Heartland says at least one document is a fake:
Watts responds calmly:
Watts, McIntyre and other reputable scientists who are trying to move this subject forward would do well to distance themselves from conservative "think tanks" and slimy leftist creepfests like DeSmog Blog and their ilk.
Any scientist who doesn't consider themself instinctively a "skeptic" on any aspect of their chosen field should give up science and go work in the media or PR. And leave the fear peddling to the Guardian.
Re: Re: Not actually much money relatively.
Raising the cost of fossil fuel use raises the cost of living. Every part of living. Or put another way reduces the standard of living, contracts the economy and increases hardship.
It's fine to fantasize that making power more expensive will somehow make more expensive power more viable, but the goal should be making power cheaper.
If you think we're using a lot of C02 producing energy right now, just wait until the emerging industrial world, most of which lies in the tropics - and which has explosive population growth - demands air conditioning and the other trappings we enjoy right now.
Yes, there is a solution - if there is indeed a problem - and it's not changing our power source. It's culling 80% of the world's population. Starting with the most useless unproductive ones. Now which ones would that be?
Certainly save some money in aid wouldn't it?
Don't you fossil fuel funded deniers understand this is exactly how Climate Change works?
I'll stop worrying when we have the same weather every day for twenty five years.
Apple is the new Pokemon
Gotta collect 'em all, right fanbois?
- World's OLDEST human DNA found in leg bone – but that's not the only boning going on...
- Lightning strikes USB bosses: Next-gen jacks will be REVERSIBLE
- Pics Brit inventors' GRAVITY POWERED LIGHT ships out after just 1 year
- Storagebod Oh no, RBS has gone titsup again... but is it JUST BAD LUCK?
- Microsoft teams up with Feds, Interpol in ZeroAccess botnet zombie hunt