Re:Organic vs processed (toxic) sugar.
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
But when you eat an apple, you don't simply ingest only liquid sugar. You wouldn't pour oil shale into your petrol tank and say it's the same as filling it with refined petrol, would you?
Have you seen some of Samsung's phones? At least one looks like a rip-off of the iPhone. I don't understand why they don't want to develop their own design identity.
Only if you eat sugar straight out of the bag as a snack, or drink your average soda, is sugar considered food. Calling it an ingredient or a nutrient makes more sense.
Of course, with processed foods, it's not just what they add, but also what they removed.
Re:Sugar is not only toxic but it's addictive.
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
Note: Coke is available with either cane sugar or HFCS. But perhaps there are greater differences in the recipes of each than just the type of sweetener used.
Re:Sugar is not only toxic but it's addictive.
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
No, because the compounds have been separated already.
Re:Organic vs processed (toxic) sugar.
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
And, more specifically, dosage over time.
Re:Organic vs processed (toxic) sugar.
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 2
The chemical doesn't change, but the way it is processed by the body is different. The way your body ends up receiving sugar via an apple or a HFCS soda seems to be just as important as the amount. We evolved to eat whole fruit, not to drink HFCS.
Re:Organic vs processed (toxic) sugar.
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
The word organic has more than one meanig. And to say that fructose is fructose seems to be missing the point. The source is important.
There is a difference between flickering at 60hz and motion at 60fps. We're talking about motion artifacts here, not the flicker of the entire light source.
Guess you haven't heard of the Mac Pro. Easier to tinker with than any PC I've ever encountered. Guess you haven't heard of the MacBook Pro, either. Take the bottom panel off and you have access to the RAM, HDD, optical drive, and battery, among other things.
You know, many people like the fact that the iMac has a built-in screen. It's not like they're shipping them with poor quality LCDs. Why would most people want a different screen?
Apple cares about their customers' freedom. Of course, that doesn't mean it's the main thing they're concerned with when designing products and services.
You're not seriously buying into the BS idea that Apple gave in to the opinions of some nerds, are you? Anyone who doesn't think Apple planned to allow 3rd party apps all along is clueless.
Slashdot Mirror
But when you eat an apple, you don't simply ingest only liquid sugar. You wouldn't pour oil shale into your petrol tank and say it's the same as filling it with refined petrol, would you?
GUI design is more about technology than marketing.
Have you seen some of Samsung's phones? At least one looks like a rip-off of the iPhone. I don't understand why they don't want to develop their own design identity.
Whole fruit tends to have more starches than processed foods. Pretty sure that was mentioned in the article.
Only if you eat sugar straight out of the bag as a snack, or drink your average soda, is sugar considered food. Calling it an ingredient or a nutrient makes more sense.
Of course, with processed foods, it's not just what they add, but also what they removed.
Note: Coke is available with either cane sugar or HFCS. But perhaps there are greater differences in the recipes of each than just the type of sweetener used.
No, because the compounds have been separated already.
And, more specifically, dosage over time.
The chemical doesn't change, but the way it is processed by the body is different. The way your body ends up receiving sugar via an apple or a HFCS soda seems to be just as important as the amount. We evolved to eat whole fruit, not to drink HFCS.
The word organic has more than one meanig. And to say that fructose is fructose seems to be missing the point. The source is important.
There is a difference between flickering at 60hz and motion at 60fps. We're talking about motion artifacts here, not the flicker of the entire light source.
I'm sure they also planned to have native 3rd party apps, too.
General consensus is that most people don't care about custom GUI themes.
What makes you think he is a narcissist? Aside from all the stories you've read on the internet?
Hope you're not equating marketing to user experience.
Guess you haven't heard of the Mac Pro. Easier to tinker with than any PC I've ever encountered. Guess you haven't heard of the MacBook Pro, either. Take the bottom panel off and you have access to the RAM, HDD, optical drive, and battery, among other things.
You know, many people like the fact that the iMac has a built-in screen. It's not like they're shipping them with poor quality LCDs. Why would most people want a different screen?
Under powered in what way? It's not designed to be a gaming machine.
Apple cares about their customers' freedom. Of course, that doesn't mean it's the main thing they're concerned with when designing products and services.
You're not seriously buying into the BS idea that Apple gave in to the opinions of some nerds, are you? Anyone who doesn't think Apple planned to allow 3rd party apps all along is clueless.
Who cares about custom themes? I'd really like to see a custom theme that actually looked better than the original.
Since when has Jobs tried to put kids in jail for jailbreaking the iPhone?
I'm not sure I get what you mean.
I doubt Jobs is blindly convinced Apple has better products. Their sale figures and customer satisfaction surveys prove they do.
Not even sure where the "offensive" part fits in.