nastebu
Mar 29, 04:07 PM
Sorry, there is no comparison. US agriculture does not have anywhere near the level of protectionism as Japanese agriculture. Nor does any US industry, with the exception of defense contractors.
And what makes you think a small farmer is somehow superior to DelMonte?
As for who subsidizes agriculture more, I'm unsure, but it's probably close. From the wikipedia article: "A Canadian report claimed that for every dollar U.S. farmers earn, 62 cents comes from some form of government, with total aid in 2009 from all levels of government adding up to $180.8 billion." What's the comparative level in Japan?
The small farmer vs. delMonte is an interesting question. It's a question of values. DelMonte produces cheaper, lower quality food. Small farmers produce more expensive, generally higher quality food. So which you subsidize is a question of social policy.
In Japan, there are lots of small farmers who have kept their farms, and a very strong bias to eat locally. This means that food is of better quality and supports local communities. In the US, massive supermarket chains have tended to dominate food retail, and since they rely on national distribution, food tends to be very processed and have an enormous carbon footprint. It also means lots of mcJobs instead of local businesses.
I prefer the small farmer.
And what makes you think a small farmer is somehow superior to DelMonte?
As for who subsidizes agriculture more, I'm unsure, but it's probably close. From the wikipedia article: "A Canadian report claimed that for every dollar U.S. farmers earn, 62 cents comes from some form of government, with total aid in 2009 from all levels of government adding up to $180.8 billion." What's the comparative level in Japan?
The small farmer vs. delMonte is an interesting question. It's a question of values. DelMonte produces cheaper, lower quality food. Small farmers produce more expensive, generally higher quality food. So which you subsidize is a question of social policy.
In Japan, there are lots of small farmers who have kept their farms, and a very strong bias to eat locally. This means that food is of better quality and supports local communities. In the US, massive supermarket chains have tended to dominate food retail, and since they rely on national distribution, food tends to be very processed and have an enormous carbon footprint. It also means lots of mcJobs instead of local businesses.
I prefer the small farmer.
Evergreen
Aug 7, 08:05 PM
Is it liquid cooled?
reiggin
May 6, 12:21 AM
This is the most ridiculous thing to appear on the MacRumors front page in quite some time.
wd89
Apr 23, 04:24 PM
I hope this means an increase in resolution of iTunes artwork. I know it's unrelated to the OS but one can hope!
21stcenturykid
Sep 16, 01:26 PM
Well i just gave in an ordered my MBP15" so i would get it before uni starts and well its going to ship on monday and delivered by wednesday UK store still has 24hrs shipping on all MBP's.
Still i cant wait for it to arrive. im like a 4 year old at christmas when i get a new mac :P
Still i cant wait for it to arrive. im like a 4 year old at christmas when i get a new mac :P
LegendKillerUK
Mar 27, 12:19 AM
If true...sounds like iPhone 3GS and iPad 1 owners are going to be shown the door.
Based on history the 3GS will still be in for updates along with the iPad. Performance on the other hand...
Based on history the 3GS will still be in for updates along with the iPad. Performance on the other hand...
justflie
Nov 26, 10:35 AM
Interesting I guess. But is there really a home/consumer market for this? I could see it working for artists and other professionals of that nature, but I know more than a few people that own PC tablets that hardly ever use them as such.
ucfgrad93
May 3, 10:12 PM
I think we should stick together and explore this first room.
rhinosrcool
Apr 20, 01:29 AM
iPhone 4 with 3.5" screen: 115.2mm x 58.6mm x 9.3mm
weight: 137 grams
HTC Thunderbolt with 4" screen: 122mm x 66mm x 13mm
weight: 164 grams
I am not sure about you, but on composite that HTC with a 4" screen is noticeably larger in every possible way over the iPhone 4.
Sure it is only 5% taller, but 12% wider and almost 50% thicker as well as 15% heavier.
Perhaps you don't know anything about Apple, but they take the size of their devices very seriously.
I also don't understand how some of you think it is possible to have a significantly larger screen without making the phone bigger. It is not like the current iPhone has a lot of space. Again it seems people just read a bigger number and think it must be better. If we left it up to other companies smartphones would all be twice as thick and weigh twice as much as they do now, while being massively unwieldy. Apple actually has an aesthetic set of benchmarks that are important to them as anything else. It is not only aesthetic either, but actually using the device and carrying it around, the size makes a big difference.
My 3.5" iPhone 4 screen is pretty amazing, especially considering the size and weight of the device. Much more impressive than any 4" screened device I have seen.
Edit: In case anyone is wondering the 4" Samsung Galaxy S specs: 122.4mm x 64.2mm x 9.9mm weight 118 grams. It weighs less, but the physical dimensions are larger in ever way.
Please! Make the damn phone bigger! Oh no, it may weigh a few more grams. Currently, the iphone4 is a tiny phone. For us adults, please increase the screen size, and probably, the width.
weight: 137 grams
HTC Thunderbolt with 4" screen: 122mm x 66mm x 13mm
weight: 164 grams
I am not sure about you, but on composite that HTC with a 4" screen is noticeably larger in every possible way over the iPhone 4.
Sure it is only 5% taller, but 12% wider and almost 50% thicker as well as 15% heavier.
Perhaps you don't know anything about Apple, but they take the size of their devices very seriously.
I also don't understand how some of you think it is possible to have a significantly larger screen without making the phone bigger. It is not like the current iPhone has a lot of space. Again it seems people just read a bigger number and think it must be better. If we left it up to other companies smartphones would all be twice as thick and weigh twice as much as they do now, while being massively unwieldy. Apple actually has an aesthetic set of benchmarks that are important to them as anything else. It is not only aesthetic either, but actually using the device and carrying it around, the size makes a big difference.
My 3.5" iPhone 4 screen is pretty amazing, especially considering the size and weight of the device. Much more impressive than any 4" screened device I have seen.
Edit: In case anyone is wondering the 4" Samsung Galaxy S specs: 122.4mm x 64.2mm x 9.9mm weight 118 grams. It weighs less, but the physical dimensions are larger in ever way.
Please! Make the damn phone bigger! Oh no, it may weigh a few more grams. Currently, the iphone4 is a tiny phone. For us adults, please increase the screen size, and probably, the width.
Dreamer2go
Apr 20, 12:34 AM
faster processor = good
the iphone 4's chassis looks very sexy already....... no need redesign, honestly.
hope for AWESOME battery life
iOS 5 =)
iOS 5 + iphone 5 compatibility = a sold to me!
the iphone 4's chassis looks very sexy already....... no need redesign, honestly.
hope for AWESOME battery life
iOS 5 =)
iOS 5 + iphone 5 compatibility = a sold to me!
Eddyisgreat
Apr 7, 10:26 AM
Unfortunately, most posters here think Apple always acts in the best interests of its customers. Kind of cute, actually.
If it's customers want products that aren't on the shelves (iPad 2 buyers)...I don't exactly understand how RIM being kicked out of the queue hurts these people.
RIM could have created a decent product and demanded capacity from the worlds screen makers. why didn't they?
If it's customers want products that aren't on the shelves (iPad 2 buyers)...I don't exactly understand how RIM being kicked out of the queue hurts these people.
RIM could have created a decent product and demanded capacity from the worlds screen makers. why didn't they?
ChrisA
Nov 22, 01:49 PM
Here is my prediction:
The number one characteristic of the first generation of Apple phones will be that they a "#$+@ expensive".
What does this mean? A concept they teach in business school is how to set a price to maximize profit. It's easy to see that if you price it to low you sell a zillion units but loose money and if priced to high you don't sell any so there is a sweet spot where the number of units sold times the per unit margin is maximized. In theory you can write an equation to model this then do some math to find it's maximum point. (remember: set the derivative to zero then solve for X from Calculus 101?) So much for theory. I doubt they will do that. I think Apple will price these higher then the theoretical "best" price. This way they sell far fewer units then they otherwise would. This let's them grow their service side of the iPhone business at a manageable rate. If Apple's business plan is sane they can't be going for a large share of the cell phone market
OK so in short they use a high price to throttle sales to a rate their service can support. I'm thinking this will be a $500 phone with a $99/month minimum contract. Basically you ain't going to get a free Apple iPhone with your $29.00/month 2 year contract.
Apple is partnering with an air-time provider so they will not get to keep much of the per-month fee, they will have to make money up front with hardware sales unless they can offer some non airtime monthly service like .mac
The number one characteristic of the first generation of Apple phones will be that they a "#$+@ expensive".
What does this mean? A concept they teach in business school is how to set a price to maximize profit. It's easy to see that if you price it to low you sell a zillion units but loose money and if priced to high you don't sell any so there is a sweet spot where the number of units sold times the per unit margin is maximized. In theory you can write an equation to model this then do some math to find it's maximum point. (remember: set the derivative to zero then solve for X from Calculus 101?) So much for theory. I doubt they will do that. I think Apple will price these higher then the theoretical "best" price. This way they sell far fewer units then they otherwise would. This let's them grow their service side of the iPhone business at a manageable rate. If Apple's business plan is sane they can't be going for a large share of the cell phone market
OK so in short they use a high price to throttle sales to a rate their service can support. I'm thinking this will be a $500 phone with a $99/month minimum contract. Basically you ain't going to get a free Apple iPhone with your $29.00/month 2 year contract.
Apple is partnering with an air-time provider so they will not get to keep much of the per-month fee, they will have to make money up front with hardware sales unless they can offer some non airtime monthly service like .mac
Chef Medeski
Jul 21, 11:40 PM
Apple can't not update at least the top-end MacBooks.
Wow, that only took 5 minutes for me to understand.
You mean Apple has to update.... you know that whole double negative thing
Wow, that only took 5 minutes for me to understand.
You mean Apple has to update.... you know that whole double negative thing
Northgrove
Mar 31, 05:13 AM
Dear Apple
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
If you're looking for minor UI updates, that's exactly what Lion is getting?
The scroll bars are changed to be more iOS-like, windows are resizable from any corner, the buttons (and checkboxes AFAIK) are changed to no longer be Aqua styled. Small changes, but the sum of them is pretty substantial: All remaining traces of Aqua should now be gone.
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
If you're looking for minor UI updates, that's exactly what Lion is getting?
The scroll bars are changed to be more iOS-like, windows are resizable from any corner, the buttons (and checkboxes AFAIK) are changed to no longer be Aqua styled. Small changes, but the sum of them is pretty substantial: All remaining traces of Aqua should now be gone.
Cboss
May 2, 07:55 PM
According to this article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_the_United_States#20th_century), the metric system was supposed to be almost fully implemented in the US by 2000, but because of a lack of enough public and government support through the 70s-90s the program essentially got shut down.
As an engineering student, I hope we will switch soon. The metric system makes so much more sense and is far easier to learn. Even for more common measurements (How many teaspoons/tablespoons in a cup again? Yards in a mile?), SI is a far superior system.
I think the biggest obstacle right now is the older generations who have grown up with imperial units and don't want to learn a new system. It should at least be taught equally in schools so a future switch won't cause as much resistance.
As an engineering student, I hope we will switch soon. The metric system makes so much more sense and is far easier to learn. Even for more common measurements (How many teaspoons/tablespoons in a cup again? Yards in a mile?), SI is a far superior system.
I think the biggest obstacle right now is the older generations who have grown up with imperial units and don't want to learn a new system. It should at least be taught equally in schools so a future switch won't cause as much resistance.
MacAddict1978
Apr 25, 10:46 AM
And they can get that data directly from the telecos without access to your phone. I highly doubt this database exists for that purpose when there are much more seamless/invisible ways to get the information. (Waits patiently for someone to down vote this reply since I mentioned the government getting information from the telcos...ignoring the fact I never took a position on it personally. So much for staying informed.)
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20056344-281.html
No... they use a third party company to hack the phone, and have been for the past year. It's funny this just not became newsworthy as the cops have been on this since the 3GS and have convicted people with the location data. Sorry about your alibis.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20056344-281.html
No... they use a third party company to hack the phone, and have been for the past year. It's funny this just not became newsworthy as the cops have been on this since the 3GS and have convicted people with the location data. Sorry about your alibis.
InsanelyApple
May 3, 04:51 PM
I don't know. I like the current system. The middle part of your pinky finger is about an inch. Your foot is about a foot. From your nose to the tip of your stretched arm is a yard.
The only way I know the metric system is 39 inches in a meter, centimeter is the width of a dime, and a kilometer is half a mile. I need something to help me visualize stuff like body parts. That is why the imperial system was developed.
Plus it is convenient if you don't have a ruler and you need to measure something, get your middle part of your pinky and start measuring. Real handy. :p
The only way I know the metric system is 39 inches in a meter, centimeter is the width of a dime, and a kilometer is half a mile. I need something to help me visualize stuff like body parts. That is why the imperial system was developed.
Plus it is convenient if you don't have a ruler and you need to measure something, get your middle part of your pinky and start measuring. Real handy. :p
RalfTheDog
Apr 7, 12:52 PM
it was a joke in reference to your snarky comment relax.
It might be a joke, but you did have a point. If you don't like the products Apple makes, buy something else. I don't like many choices Microsoft makes with their operating systems. I don't buy them.
It might be a joke, but you did have a point. If you don't like the products Apple makes, buy something else. I don't like many choices Microsoft makes with their operating systems. I don't buy them.
MacFly123
May 7, 07:15 PM
Mobileme is certainly worth more than free. Apple doesn't scrape your emails and other data to target adds at you a la Google.
I could see Apple making some features of Mobileme free. I don't think they're just going kill a revenue stream but they could offer a basic free Mobileme account which gives you.
A me.com email address with 5 aliases.
Sync features
"Find my damn iDevice"
Calendar, Contacts, Bookmark sync
Web page
Gallery
iWork.com
Then roll out Mobileme Pro
Make iDisk more like Drop Box.
Enhance the sync
Online Backup
Cloud Music (Lala style)
iWork.com Pro (adds collaborative editing)
Whatever other cool stuff they can deliver
Good thinking! I think that is very possible. Imagine though if MobileMe & iWork.com were free with non-intrusive iAds built in and cool new functionality with HTML5 and Gianduia (Apple's Flash killer). Throw into that the Lala iTunes cloud features and WOW we are talking lots of value here!
It may sound a little crazy, but if you think of the competition (Google & Microsoft) and what they are up to, it really starts to make sense moving these things to the cloud and getting iAd in there!
Interesting.........VERY INTERESTING! :eek::D
I could see Apple making some features of Mobileme free. I don't think they're just going kill a revenue stream but they could offer a basic free Mobileme account which gives you.
A me.com email address with 5 aliases.
Sync features
"Find my damn iDevice"
Calendar, Contacts, Bookmark sync
Web page
Gallery
iWork.com
Then roll out Mobileme Pro
Make iDisk more like Drop Box.
Enhance the sync
Online Backup
Cloud Music (Lala style)
iWork.com Pro (adds collaborative editing)
Whatever other cool stuff they can deliver
Good thinking! I think that is very possible. Imagine though if MobileMe & iWork.com were free with non-intrusive iAds built in and cool new functionality with HTML5 and Gianduia (Apple's Flash killer). Throw into that the Lala iTunes cloud features and WOW we are talking lots of value here!
It may sound a little crazy, but if you think of the competition (Google & Microsoft) and what they are up to, it really starts to make sense moving these things to the cloud and getting iAd in there!
Interesting.........VERY INTERESTING! :eek::D
puma1552
May 3, 02:49 AM
I'll preface by saying I'm an engineer, so I see the merits of the metric system.
However, the reason I think Americans have such a problem with it is because there is no analog for one foot. You go from decimeters (which nobody actually uses) straight to a meter.
It can be very difficult to get a feel for how tall someone who is 165 cm is.
However, the reason I think Americans have such a problem with it is because there is no analog for one foot. You go from decimeters (which nobody actually uses) straight to a meter.
It can be very difficult to get a feel for how tall someone who is 165 cm is.
digitalbiker
Sep 15, 08:59 PM
Just an observation. But, wouldnt it be quicker to just go to an apple store and purchase one rather than wait weeks to get one thru the mail. I know when MBP go to merom, i will be one of the first ones in the store. Maybe im wrong.
Good idea. I'll just hop in my vehicle and drive 600 miles to my nearest Apple Store. Hopefully they won't sell out before I get there.:rolleyes:
Good idea. I'll just hop in my vehicle and drive 600 miles to my nearest Apple Store. Hopefully they won't sell out before I get there.:rolleyes:
Adam-
Apr 20, 06:11 AM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone : Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
I am happy for this, this means when my upgrade happens, iPhone 6 will be a HUGE one :-)
Yeah Exaclty i was hoping that my iPhone4 wasn't going to become obsolete after only a few months of being on a 24 month contract! Apples good, but they do like to make my products feel slow and old :(
Damn their marketing and business sense!
I am happy for this, this means when my upgrade happens, iPhone 6 will be a HUGE one :-)
Yeah Exaclty i was hoping that my iPhone4 wasn't going to become obsolete after only a few months of being on a 24 month contract! Apples good, but they do like to make my products feel slow and old :(
Damn their marketing and business sense!
Ava's Meeshee
Apr 20, 08:28 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I think Apple needs to concentrate more on improving iOS rather than adding a faster processor. Tbh I'm pretty fed up of my iPhone 4 as the is just looks boringly simple. Not everybody wants the same old os on every device. I think it's the omnia 7 next for me so I can have a change.
That doesn't fit in with their UI principles so they won't. Once I too questioned why anyone should expect an OS to be inherently entertaining I had to agree that spending any time making the launch board delight you would be silly and pointless. And why on Earth should a phone have a "desktop"?
I think Apple needs to concentrate more on improving iOS rather than adding a faster processor. Tbh I'm pretty fed up of my iPhone 4 as the is just looks boringly simple. Not everybody wants the same old os on every device. I think it's the omnia 7 next for me so I can have a change.
That doesn't fit in with their UI principles so they won't. Once I too questioned why anyone should expect an OS to be inherently entertaining I had to agree that spending any time making the launch board delight you would be silly and pointless. And why on Earth should a phone have a "desktop"?
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
No comments:
Post a Comment