14 posts • joined 4 Oct 2012
Re: Coyote Ugly
Within a minute of posting I have 1 thumbs down.
It must be a slow day in the Apple Stores for the Lifestyle guru/Experience management/image consultant sales assistants.
Jees, that's one ugly looking piece of kit.
On the plus side the "iWaterCool" feature will be easy to install; A vase with a bunch of daffodils rammed down the middle would surfice.
Re: This could be the most visionary piece of forward planning ever.
So, why don't we replace the next general election with a pilot TV show called "Big Brother's Big Brother"?
I'm happy to accept suggestions for inclusion/evictions rules (preferably more of the former and less of the later)
Re: This could be the most visionary piece of forward planning ever.
...but in this space, no one could hear them whine.
That alone has to be worth the (historic) tax spend.
My only concern is how long it would take to re-stock the facility for their next 3 month stay.
This could be the most visionary piece of forward planning ever.
So, it can completely isolate 600 people for 3 months?
Remind me; How many MPs do we have at Westminster?
Re: How to have your cake and eat it.
Here's a question for you;
If the UK recovered all of the taxes due by companies using Ireland as an umbrella tax haven, would it have covered the £5 billion we gave Ireland last year?
Personally, I'd rather have the UK lend Ireland more money, so that they can build strong foundations for sustainable growth, than have them providing a tax dodge for multi-nationals.
What they have now isn't sustainable, as another desperate country will ultimately undercut them, and these businesses will switch location.
How to have your cake and eat it.
Ireland can't have it both ways.
If they want to operate their tax system as they are, then they can't expect any other country to lend them money to bail them out, and should repay their existing loans immediately.
At present the Irish Deputy PM seems to want to run a business which undercuts all of it's competitors, and then asks the competition to give him cash to pay his staff.
Colour me cynical....
...but this sounds like the same BS that I heard the last time employers were lobbying the gubberment of the day to relax work permit requirements to fill a supposed skills shortage.
The UK has an abundance of IT talent, in all areas, at all levels.
My belief is that too many bean counters think they understand the breadth and depth of our contribution within a corporate structure based upon watching a few episodes of The IT Crowd.
Really? You don't think that they'll be listening too?
So, having bought a smart TV with voice activation and the ability to Skype the family when I'm working away you think I'm going to gaffa tape my toys just so Intel can make money?
Forget it. I'll just refuse to use this s*** and if it creeps onto my consumer electronics I see an invasion of privacy prosecution on the horizon.
Possibly Intel could be added to the sex offenders register, because if my young kids can't run around naked in their own living room without being videoed, the world has become a seriously f***** up place.
Apologies, but this kind of thing makes my p*** boil.
@jai "I dunno, I'd imagine Google exec's aren't entirely happy about this news."
Personally, I think they'll be ecstatic.
My evidence is purely anecdotal, but here goes...
For Christmas my kids (both under 11 years old) wanted tablets. I took them around the shops and let them play with everything in sight. It became obvious that the 10 inch format just didn't appeal to them, and the alternatives ran Android. I think it's safe to assume that they didn't care which O/S their toys ran.
I have a Nexus 7, my wife a Galaxy Tab II. So, after playing with them both, and when it came time to write the lists for Santa I was a bit surprised to find that both my kids asked for the Samsung devices.
Two months down the line; The hardware has been bought from Samsung, but all of their apps have come from the Play Store.
Sounds like a marriage made in heaven to me.
Had cake, now want to eat someone elses.
NOTE: This comment only applies to in contract un-locking. Once you're out of contract, fill ya boots.
So, you've opted for a heavily subsidised piece of hardware (offering the company who bought it an opportunity to make a bit of wonga off YOU) and now you don't want to pay the price.
If you wanted the independance why didn't you buy a sim free unit at it's full retail price?
Only a simpleton freetard would down vote this, so go ahead, identify yourselves.
Don't know how to call this one.
I'm not an Apple fan (almost the complete opposite), most of my toys are android based, but I don't know how to call this one.
Top marks for honesty and public disclosure to Apple, but have they penalised these supplier?
It's going to hurt up and down the supply chain (and this is where it goes from pontification to complete disapproval); Have Apple returned the units and demanded a refund, as these companies have obviously violated Apple's supply policy?
But here's my problem; While it's easy to point out the failures of Apple to act upon this information, how many of the companies I'm buying from are enjoying the same benefits while turning a blind eye?
So, on the whole, I'm inclined to say it's a small win for Apple.
"I'll get my coat " icon because I'll probably get hit from supporters in all camps who have the attention span of a goldfish and didn't read all of the post.
Have a nice day!
Ah, it's all clear now
I've always wondered why Apple needs to charge more for average spec tech devices.
Oh, they look pretty and have a UI that my 6 year old learned to use marginally quicker than my Android toys but "Pub Poser Value" aside, I just couldn't see where the extra money was going.
Now that they are cutting back on R&D the answer is clear; Lawyers fees!
It's why Apple needs iCustomers to pay more.
Note: Before the rabid fanbois jump on this post; My home has Apple and Android phones/tabs, but since the arrival of the 'droids neither my wife or kids have bothered to recharge any of the Apple devices.
After careful and detailed consideration, a panel of experts at the University of Common Sense decided that the use of Space Dust to combat global warming was a bloody stupid idea.
Firstly, unless you buy into the "NASA/Bruce Willis will save the world" hypothesis, it is not currently an achievable option.
Secondly, if the solution causes more problems than it cures, we, the inhabitants of planet Earth, are stuck with it.
The panel of the UCS (AKA. My Local) propose an alternative solution; All buildings on Planet Earth should have their roofs painted white to compensate for the shrinking polar ice caps reflective capacity.
The benefits of this solution are threefold;
1 - The increased reflected energy will reduce global warming.
2 - The number of workers required to produce and apply the paint will reduce global unemployment (increasing governmental tax revenues and pulling us out of the global depression).
3 - If it turns out to be just another stupid idea, it's easy to fix.
Obviously, further research (and more beer) will be required to calculate the surface area and distribution of said “painting”.
Our paper on this subject (titled “Yer me best mate eva. Can ya giv us £1.5 billion to save the planet?”) will soon be distributed to the governments of the world.