I do not consider the term "Core i" to be useful in comparing an Intel product either. "Core i" is just as much a marketing term as "retina display" it does not mean anything about the capability of the device in question. The fact that a chip is an i7 does not tell me anything about its capabilities compared to a "b9".
Next you will be telling me that the term "Corvette" means something about the performance of the car it is attached to relative to the performance of an "M3". No, if I want to compare the performance of a Chevrolet Corvette to the performance of a BMW M3, I have to actually look at the specs on those two cars. The fact that one is called a "Corvette" doesn't tell me anything about its performance and neither does the fact that the other is called an "M3". Now, I can guess something about the comparison between the two cars from the fact that one is from Chevrolet and the other from BMW, but the particular names don't mean anything (even though GM always makes a "Corvette" their highest performance car).
It still is not anything but pure market speak since no other company can use that term to describe their display. It doesn't mean anything except what Apple says it means. If next week they decide to change the definition and you miss the "announcement", how will you know? Can you give me any legal reason they could not do that?
I do not see that error at all. I see a lot of people saying that a 3-year-old's ability to learn the new interface is irrelevant because adults have more demanding uses for a computer and have years of learned expectations about how a computer will work that a 3-year-old does not.
Yeah, they can say that, but they could say that their display is better than "any display from Apple", which says EXACTLY the same thing. It still does not make the term "retina display" useful for comparing displays. All it means to say that something has a "retina display" is that it is an Apple product with the best display that Apple ships for that class of product. It tells you nothing about how that product compares to a product from another company.
You just hit on what "Retina Display" is. It is just like the name of a product. It tells you nothing about whether the product is better than another product with a different name. Which had a better display, one which had "retina display" or one which displays 600 dpi? Personally, I have no idea, since all the term "retina display" tells me is that Apple claims that I would be unable to tell the difference between their device with "retina display" and one with higher resolution. They may be correct, but I am not going to take their word for it.
The problem with steroids in sports is not that is gives some people a competitive advantage over those who don't use them. The problem with steroids in sports is that there are negative consequences to using them. The same is true here. There is only a problem with people using these cognitive enhancers if there is a long term negative side effect. Steroids are used in medicine in cases where the short-term benefits to health outweigh the long term negative consequences (which are generally relatively minimal since they are only used for short periods of time).
They trademarked the name, so if some other company uses the formula they will have to use some other term to refer to the result (say "Iris"), so is an "Iris" display better or worse than a "Retina" display? How can you tell? Only an Apple product can have a "retina display", even if another company uses the same formula to determine that their display meets the same standard they cannot call it a "retina display". That means that you cannot use the term "retina display" to compare a non-Apple display with an Apple display. Of course only the Apple device is a "retina display". Just because Apple uses some formula to determine whether a display meets the standard of "retina display" in their devices, does not mean that the term "retina display" is useful. How can I use the term to compare an Apple device to a device from another manufacturer?
And since no other company can use the term, the formula is utterly useless in comparing Apple products to those from other companies...which means that it is just a marketing term. The only way it would be anything other than a marketing term if other companies could apply it to any display that met the terms of the formula. Since that is not the case, it is nothing but a marketing term.
The term "retina display" is a marketing term that means "you won't see pixelation"
No, it means that Apple Computer believes that you won't see pixelation IF you view the display from the distance that they believe you will choose to view it from (not closer, not further away). The problem is, since it does not include an actual number and is proprietary to Apple, it is utterly useless in comparing to products offered by other vendors.
Do you have any idea how expensive those microscopes are? Let's just put it this way, the place I work now could replace their entire IT infrastructure for the cost of some of them (and even a cheap one costs as much as a pretty nice server). Further, it is unlikely that the IT department gets to decide if those microscopes get replaced.
I don't know about this particular microscope, but when I worked at a pharmaceutical company the PCs connected to microscopes were networked so that the data collected on them (usually using a camera attached to the microscope) could be saved to a network drive. In addition, it allowed for users to use their network logons to access the PC, which allowed a log to be kept of who collected what data on the microscope (something that is required if the data being collected will be submitted to a regulatory agency).
Except that all constructions of what happened suggest that Trayvon did not know that George had a gun until after the physical confrontation began (that's what the "concealed" part of concealed carry means).
1) She's not on trial, and therefore it can't be self-incriminating.
Yes, it can be. If I am called to testify in your trial and I testify that I saw you kill someone while I was robbing your house, that would be self-incrimination. It could be used to charge me with burglary (or whatever the particular charge would be for what I testified I was doing at the time). The fact that I am not currently charged with something does not mean that honestly answering the questions put to me are not self-incriminating. Your second point is relevant to the situation.
Which makes it sound to me like LO will probably be the better product for the end user, since they can take anything good that AOO developers come up with and incorporate it in LO if it is better than what the LO developers came up with.
That being said, AOO has a slightly better name and the backing of a larger foundation which may result in better developer support, so time will tell how it will work out.
Progressives are people who believe that life will be better when government appointed experts make all of the important decisions. Many times they team up with business owners who don't think they should have to compete to get your money.
There is a really simple answer to this problem. If you don't like the educational priorities selected by those who determine them in school curricula, teach your children yourself. While you still might have to meet these criteria, the amount of actual time spent doing so would be at your discretion.
There is nothing secret about the fact that the overwhelming majority of the mainstream press consider themselves liberals (just look at any poll of its members on the subject). However, the policies that they support are based on "established, traditional, orthodox and authoritarian" ideas that express a complete and utter bigotry.
There are still people who believe that. They are called progressives. Of course, they are just as wrong today as they were when they first started proposing that the answer to the inefficiencies in the world was for some government bureaucrat to decide who should be allowed to do what.
His suggestion was in a mythical situation where NYC politicians allowed the free market to determine the pricing for taxi services (and who could actually offer such a service0. Of course, they will never do that because that would require the government (and progressives in particular) to stop helping certain favored companies from making a profit at the expense of the common man.
Except of course that is not how it works under our current President. Since Obama has taken office he has proposed budgets which have been rejected soundly by Congress. The House passed a budget that was written in the House after the Republicans took control, but the Senate has not passed a budget since Obama took office, even though it is legally obligated to do so. The Senate only voted on Obama's budget proposal because the Republicans managed to force the issue, at which point Obama's budget got zero votes.
Perhaps it would help if those who claim to be liberals would actually follow the definition that you quoted. The person you are asking to find another word is only using the term that those he is applying it to apply to themselves (although you are correct that they are not really liberals by any reasonable definition of the word).
Of course they will seek to crucify the guy. The whole point of Global Warming Alarmism is to destroy industrialized economies. The people who really care about the environment will be truly happy if this is successful (even though they may be opposed to trying it because of unknowns).
I love these people saying there are too many unknowns to try this but at the same time claim to know exactly what impact increases in CO2 in the atmosphere will have.
Slashdot Mirror
I do not consider the term "Core i" to be useful in comparing an Intel product either. "Core i" is just as much a marketing term as "retina display" it does not mean anything about the capability of the device in question. The fact that a chip is an i7 does not tell me anything about its capabilities compared to a "b9".
Next you will be telling me that the term "Corvette" means something about the performance of the car it is attached to relative to the performance of an "M3". No, if I want to compare the performance of a Chevrolet Corvette to the performance of a BMW M3, I have to actually look at the specs on those two cars. The fact that one is called a "Corvette" doesn't tell me anything about its performance and neither does the fact that the other is called an "M3". Now, I can guess something about the comparison between the two cars from the fact that one is from Chevrolet and the other from BMW, but the particular names don't mean anything (even though GM always makes a "Corvette" their highest performance car).
It still is not anything but pure market speak since no other company can use that term to describe their display. It doesn't mean anything except what Apple says it means. If next week they decide to change the definition and you miss the "announcement", how will you know? Can you give me any legal reason they could not do that?
I do not see that error at all. I see a lot of people saying that a 3-year-old's ability to learn the new interface is irrelevant because adults have more demanding uses for a computer and have years of learned expectations about how a computer will work that a 3-year-old does not.
Yeah, they can say that, but they could say that their display is better than "any display from Apple", which says EXACTLY the same thing. It still does not make the term "retina display" useful for comparing displays. All it means to say that something has a "retina display" is that it is an Apple product with the best display that Apple ships for that class of product. It tells you nothing about how that product compares to a product from another company.
You just hit on what "Retina Display" is. It is just like the name of a product. It tells you nothing about whether the product is better than another product with a different name. Which had a better display, one which had "retina display" or one which displays 600 dpi? Personally, I have no idea, since all the term "retina display" tells me is that Apple claims that I would be unable to tell the difference between their device with "retina display" and one with higher resolution. They may be correct, but I am not going to take their word for it.
The problem with steroids in sports is not that is gives some people a competitive advantage over those who don't use them. The problem with steroids in sports is that there are negative consequences to using them. The same is true here. There is only a problem with people using these cognitive enhancers if there is a long term negative side effect. Steroids are used in medicine in cases where the short-term benefits to health outweigh the long term negative consequences (which are generally relatively minimal since they are only used for short periods of time).
They trademarked the name, so if some other company uses the formula they will have to use some other term to refer to the result (say "Iris"), so is an "Iris" display better or worse than a "Retina" display? How can you tell? Only an Apple product can have a "retina display", even if another company uses the same formula to determine that their display meets the same standard they cannot call it a "retina display". That means that you cannot use the term "retina display" to compare a non-Apple display with an Apple display. Of course only the Apple device is a "retina display". Just because Apple uses some formula to determine whether a display meets the standard of "retina display" in their devices, does not mean that the term "retina display" is useful. How can I use the term to compare an Apple device to a device from another manufacturer?
And since no other company can use the term, the formula is utterly useless in comparing Apple products to those from other companies...which means that it is just a marketing term. The only way it would be anything other than a marketing term if other companies could apply it to any display that met the terms of the formula. Since that is not the case, it is nothing but a marketing term.
The term "retina display" is a marketing term that means "you won't see pixelation"
No, it means that Apple Computer believes that you won't see pixelation IF you view the display from the distance that they believe you will choose to view it from (not closer, not further away). The problem is, since it does not include an actual number and is proprietary to Apple, it is utterly useless in comparing to products offered by other vendors.
Do you have any idea how expensive those microscopes are? Let's just put it this way, the place I work now could replace their entire IT infrastructure for the cost of some of them (and even a cheap one costs as much as a pretty nice server). Further, it is unlikely that the IT department gets to decide if those microscopes get replaced.
I don't know about this particular microscope, but when I worked at a pharmaceutical company the PCs connected to microscopes were networked so that the data collected on them (usually using a camera attached to the microscope) could be saved to a network drive. In addition, it allowed for users to use their network logons to access the PC, which allowed a log to be kept of who collected what data on the microscope (something that is required if the data being collected will be submitted to a regulatory agency).
but this is the NYTimes, so you can't just blow the article off.
Why not? This story was in the NYT so there is no reason to believe that the author actually talked to any of the people he quoted in the article.
Except that all constructions of what happened suggest that Trayvon did not know that George had a gun until after the physical confrontation began (that's what the "concealed" part of concealed carry means).
1) She's not on trial, and therefore it can't be self-incriminating.
Yes, it can be. If I am called to testify in your trial and I testify that I saw you kill someone while I was robbing your house, that would be self-incrimination. It could be used to charge me with burglary (or whatever the particular charge would be for what I testified I was doing at the time). The fact that I am not currently charged with something does not mean that honestly answering the questions put to me are not self-incriminating. Your second point is relevant to the situation.
Which makes it sound to me like LO will probably be the better product for the end user, since they can take anything good that AOO developers come up with and incorporate it in LO if it is better than what the LO developers came up with.
That being said, AOO has a slightly better name and the backing of a larger foundation which may result in better developer support, so time will tell how it will work out.
Progressives are people who believe that life will be better when government appointed experts make all of the important decisions. Many times they team up with business owners who don't think they should have to compete to get your money.
There is a really simple answer to this problem. If you don't like the educational priorities selected by those who determine them in school curricula, teach your children yourself. While you still might have to meet these criteria, the amount of actual time spent doing so would be at your discretion.
There is nothing secret about the fact that the overwhelming majority of the mainstream press consider themselves liberals (just look at any poll of its members on the subject). However, the policies that they support are based on "established, traditional, orthodox and authoritarian" ideas that express a complete and utter bigotry.
You make to OP's case. The French Revolution did not make things better for anyone and made things worse for most.
There are still people who believe that. They are called progressives. Of course, they are just as wrong today as they were when they first started proposing that the answer to the inefficiencies in the world was for some government bureaucrat to decide who should be allowed to do what.
His suggestion was in a mythical situation where NYC politicians allowed the free market to determine the pricing for taxi services (and who could actually offer such a service0. Of course, they will never do that because that would require the government (and progressives in particular) to stop helping certain favored companies from making a profit at the expense of the common man.
Except of course that is not how it works under our current President. Since Obama has taken office he has proposed budgets which have been rejected soundly by Congress. The House passed a budget that was written in the House after the Republicans took control, but the Senate has not passed a budget since Obama took office, even though it is legally obligated to do so. The Senate only voted on Obama's budget proposal because the Republicans managed to force the issue, at which point Obama's budget got zero votes.
Perhaps it would help if those who claim to be liberals would actually follow the definition that you quoted. The person you are asking to find another word is only using the term that those he is applying it to apply to themselves (although you are correct that they are not really liberals by any reasonable definition of the word).
The key thing about Libya is that Obama exercised authority as President that he declared unconstitutional when he was a Senator.
Of course they will seek to crucify the guy. The whole point of Global Warming Alarmism is to destroy industrialized economies. The people who really care about the environment will be truly happy if this is successful (even though they may be opposed to trying it because of unknowns).
I love these people saying there are too many unknowns to try this but at the same time claim to know exactly what impact increases in CO2 in the atmosphere will have.