Apple: We have no inventory of those non-pentalobular screws. We are honoring the warranty by being willing to fix the product, but we're not obligated to go out and get (heh) custom screws for this one customer. We fix the product with parts we have on hand - or the customer leaves of his own accord. No breach here.
Bifocals are just a general pain in the ass, even with progressives. Their one saving grace is that they're better than the alternative. Well, I guess it's the plural of "alternative" now. I'll still be sticking with progressives rather than these over-complicated devices.
IMO, and I suppose it depends on the glasses, but frankly - after several pairs over 3 years - I think progressives suck.
I don't understand why the only usable, focusable area is a funnel-shaped area in the middle of the lenses - I'm pretty sure I've paid for the entire area of both lenses.
(Actually, the cynical side of me - the part that also believes that changing the blood sugar range outside of which one is considered diabetic from 70-120 to 70-100 is mostly profit driven - understands quite well.)
And yet, my peripheral vision is now essentially useless - I have to look straight at whatever thing I want to look at, and then try to find the 1mm square that puts said thing into decent focus, by moving my head in various directions for several seconds.
Why doesn't "progressive" mean "gradual shift in focal length down the lens - across the ENTIRE width of the lens?"
I'm going to insist on straight-up bifocals next time. I may not get correction that's quite as accurate, but at least I'll be able to use the entire area of the lenses, and look a little less like I have some sort of neuromuscular disease (yeah yeah, insensitive clod, I know - no offense meant).
Which means, I suppose, that these electronic ones might actually work for me. But I wonder if the next generation could be something more along the line of progressives (ideally as I define it above).
Perhaps an accelerometer sensing the position of the head and gradually changing the focal length? Might bring my problem right back though....
It's not just you. I expect it's hard to design a connector with size and polarity restrictions, and which is keyed so that you can only insert it one way to avoid damage.
Might be hard to design a connector, but that's not the only solution. It shouldn't be that hard to develop a power source that can auto-polarize (tm).
This reminds me of the results of a survey. People were asked "If you found out that this $100 piece of software were only $50 across town, would you leave this store, drive across town and buy it cheaper?" The answer was almost always less. Others were asked "If you found out that this $1,000 computer were available for $950 across town, would you leave this store and by it cheaper?" Fewer than half said yes.
So why is the value of our time less for more expensive products? It seems people are fundamentally illogical. Yes, I know... I must be new here.
What does "The answer was almost always less" mean? You mean "yes," yes?
If the numbers you quote are accurate, there's no real logical flaw here. 50% savings is far more attractive than 5%, and the return on the inconvenience is far more worth it.
You could probably conduct these survey with different numbers - like orders of magnitude different - and get similar results.
Car, is that what they're calling Multi-ton Murder Machines these days?
Hmmm...
Can you drive a bullet? Take the kids to the mall with one? Cruise Main Street? Move across town?
Can you use a bullet for anything - and I mean ANYTHING - other than being a projectile weapon?
Perhaps not against specific targets, and sure, you can glue them to cardboard like macaroni and make a pretty picture, but beyond that you're deliberately being obtuse.
The ONLY reason for a bullet's existence is to be a projectile weapon. Can you say the same about a car?
Reform our tax structure to pay from the bottom up, instead of top down. Make my city pay to my state, who pays to the feds.
Or do more of the same for yourselves rich fuckers, eventually enough of us little guys will be pushed so far we won't care to make it better for ourselves. Our focus will be on how bad we can make it for you.
"Earn a dollar, pay a dime. Invest that dollar, pay 9 cents. No exceptions whatsoever."
I'm not a PC owner, not yet. I don't have a company paying my way for me and I'm not about to foot a $2,000 bill on my own. not yet and not with the current level of computers.
a few weeks after you buy a 'computer' some other model makes yours a POS. well, almost. how can anyone buy in that kind of market and retain sanity?
vendors are destroying the 'beauty' of the system. apple (I hate apple, btw) had it almost right when it controlled the hardware and software. the IBM Clone vendors are little children that run wild if not controlled. apple controlled them; IBM simply let them run even MORE wild.
IBM fucked this up. and I think its too late now, the market is SO fragmented its actually damaged. fanboys won't agree but who cares what they think; its the rest of us middle-guys who simply want something stable and something SUPPORTABLE for a few years. the throw-away model every few months is not do-able for me, for this pricepoint.
if there is ever a 3rd choice, I hope they learn from the 2 that 'came before'. apple model is too extreme but actually so is the PC model. a middle ground needs to be there, really; and is not. we have the walled garden and the wild wild west where vendors can fark up YOUR computer and mostly get away with it.
I'm still on the sidelines and not willing to fund this insanity until it levels out.
BlueParrot has decent noise-cancelling BlueTooth headsets. Originally designed for truckers. Mine is great, everyone I talk to says I sound like I'm a foot away, and battery life is good. My GFs headset - a newer version, B250 I think - works well, but battery life is a problem. Not sure why. IMO expensive but worth it.
If thats the case they must not have heard of devices like the Patriot Box Office which will stream a Blu-Ray iso from your computer. Devices like this are definitely cheaper than whatever they will be charging for the new burners when they come out.
Slashdot Mirror
To AC: Uh... nice....
To the OP: I don't think so. I believe his problem is in his mouth, not his larynx/trachea.
Nope.
Apple: We have no inventory of those non-pentalobular screws. We are honoring the warranty by being willing to fix the product, but we're not obligated to go out and get (heh) custom screws for this one customer. We fix the product with parts we have on hand - or the customer leaves of his own accord. No breach here.
iScrewU's
Betting he doesn't consider children "devices."
If you do - I hope YOU never have children......
Actually I thought the politicians were saying the media should tone down the rhetoric.
Or at least tone down their coverage of the politicians'... uh, well, "untoned down" I guess... rhetoric.
Bifocals are just a general pain in the ass, even with progressives. Their one saving grace is that they're better than the alternative. Well, I guess it's the plural of "alternative" now. I'll still be sticking with progressives rather than these over-complicated devices.
IMO, and I suppose it depends on the glasses, but frankly - after several pairs over 3 years - I think progressives suck.
I don't understand why the only usable, focusable area is a funnel-shaped area in the middle of the lenses - I'm pretty sure I've paid for the entire area of both lenses.
(Actually, the cynical side of me - the part that also believes that changing the blood sugar range outside of which one is considered diabetic from 70-120 to 70-100 is mostly profit driven - understands quite well.)
And yet, my peripheral vision is now essentially useless - I have to look straight at whatever thing I want to look at, and then try to find the 1mm square that puts said thing into decent focus, by moving my head in various directions for several seconds.
Why doesn't "progressive" mean "gradual shift in focal length down the lens - across the ENTIRE width of the lens?"
I'm going to insist on straight-up bifocals next time. I may not get correction that's quite as accurate, but at least I'll be able to use the entire area of the lenses, and look a little less like I have some sort of neuromuscular disease (yeah yeah, insensitive clod, I know - no offense meant).
Which means, I suppose, that these electronic ones might actually work for me. But I wonder if the next generation could be something more along the line of progressives (ideally as I define it above).
Perhaps an accelerometer sensing the position of the head and gradually changing the focal length? Might bring my problem right back though....
Hmm. I heard the joke as:
Q: How many Teamsters does it take to change a light bulb?
A: (in a Brooklyn accent) Two hunnert 'n fifty! Youz got a problem widdat?
It's not just you. I expect it's hard to design a connector with size and polarity restrictions, and which is keyed so that you can only insert it one way to avoid damage.
Might be hard to design a connector, but that's not the only solution. It shouldn't be that hard to develop a power source that can auto-polarize (tm).
Can you say "Whoosh?"
No, because they're just as likely to come up with inaccurate information as accurate.
I'd prefer my lawyer do their job and get the judge removed due to bias.
I'd prefer my lawyer do their job and convince the jury of my innocence regardless of the judge's bias.
I'd prefer the legal system to allow for the fact that judges are human as well, and have built-in safeguards to accommodate same.
In other words, in this particular case I'd prefer to trust in the system.
Flawed as it is - as you point out - it's a lot better than trusting in random chance. Which is what the jury doing their own research amounts to.
This reminds me of the results of a survey. People were asked "If you found out that this $100 piece of software were only $50 across town, would you leave this store, drive across town and buy it cheaper?" The answer was almost always less. Others were asked "If you found out that this $1,000 computer were available for $950 across town, would you leave this store and by it cheaper?" Fewer than half said yes.
So why is the value of our time less for more expensive products? It seems people are fundamentally illogical. Yes, I know... I must be new here.
What does "The answer was almost always less" mean? You mean "yes," yes?
If the numbers you quote are accurate, there's no real logical flaw here. 50% savings is far more attractive than 5%, and the return on the inconvenience is far more worth it.
You could probably conduct these survey with different numbers - like orders of magnitude different - and get similar results.
Car, is that what they're calling Multi-ton Murder Machines these days?
Hmmm...
Can you drive a bullet? Take the kids to the mall with one? Cruise Main Street? Move across town?
Can you use a bullet for anything - and I mean ANYTHING - other than being a projectile weapon?
Perhaps not against specific targets, and sure, you can glue them to cardboard like macaroni and make a pretty picture, but beyond that you're deliberately being obtuse.
The ONLY reason for a bullet's existence is to be a projectile weapon. Can you say the same about a car?
Dude, what are you, nuts?
That might result in lawyers getting less!!!
Or train them from an early age to do it correctly.
Kinda like Robert Heinlein's "Fair Witnesses."
Hmmm. Aren't military contracts also "lowest bidder" ?
And don't military programs experience all those negative effects you mentioned?
Nice idea, though - I once posited that if you switched Military and Education budgets for a year the effects could be pretty astounding....
It's not just people being stupid though, it's hard to drive and do other complex tasks at the same time.
If you ask me they should all the outlawed. People need to plan their routes ahead and if they get lost they need to stop and reexamine their maps.
If you ask me, human drivers should be outlawed.
Reform our tax structure to pay from the bottom up, instead of top down. Make my city pay to my state, who pays to the feds.
Or do more of the same for yourselves rich fuckers, eventually enough of us little guys will be pushed so far we won't care to make it better for ourselves. Our focus will be on how bad we can make it for you.
"Earn a dollar, pay a dime. Invest that dollar, pay 9 cents. No exceptions whatsoever."
I think it would be great if they altered the name to Liberache Office and *then* did a UI to match.
"Colonel go for laugh. No get" (tm MASH)
That might have been funny/ier if you'd spelled "Liberace" correctly. As it stands, it looks like a variation on headache.
Which might be funny but takes too much work.
Especially given your sig.
I just joined AT&T because I wanted to pay $15/200MB rather than $25.
According to what I saw on their website, if I go over 200MB, I get charged another $15, up to another 200MB.
So I don't think you're right, at least not with AT&T.
My SO and I keep our data counts down by using WiFi wherever we can - which is surprisingly easy, even away from our house....
Uh... WHAT inflight meal????
I'm not a PC owner, not yet. I don't have a company paying my way for me and I'm not about to foot a $2,000 bill on my own. not yet and not with the current level of computers.
a few weeks after you buy a 'computer' some other model makes yours a POS. well, almost. how can anyone buy in that kind of market and retain sanity?
vendors are destroying the 'beauty' of the system. apple (I hate apple, btw) had it almost right when it controlled the hardware and software. the IBM Clone vendors are little children that run wild if not controlled. apple controlled them; IBM simply let them run even MORE wild.
IBM fucked this up. and I think its too late now, the market is SO fragmented its actually damaged. fanboys won't agree but who cares what they think; its the rest of us middle-guys who simply want something stable and something SUPPORTABLE for a few years. the throw-away model every few months is not do-able for me, for this pricepoint.
if there is ever a 3rd choice, I hope they learn from the 2 that 'came before'. apple model is too extreme but actually so is the PC model. a middle ground needs to be there, really; and is not. we have the walled garden and the wild wild west where vendors can fark up YOUR computer and mostly get away with it.
I'm still on the sidelines and not willing to fund this insanity until it levels out.
Or until Linux comes along. Oh, wait....
BlueParrot has decent noise-cancelling BlueTooth headsets. Originally designed for truckers. Mine is great, everyone I talk to says I sound like I'm a foot away, and battery life is good. My GFs headset - a newer version, B250 I think - works well, but battery life is a problem. Not sure why. IMO expensive but worth it.
If thats the case they must not have heard of devices like the Patriot Box Office which will stream a Blu-Ray iso from your computer. Devices like this are definitely cheaper than whatever they will be charging for the new burners when they come out.
Uh, what?
Patriot Box Office page 4, near the bottom:
Once again, we had no luck when trying to play our Blu-ray ISO rips over the network as that format continues to be one of the most elusive.
Though the concept itself does appeal. And since this device is firmware updateable, your first sentence may become true in the future.
Since TiVo has fscked up for the last time AFAIC, I might just check this out... thanks!
This would be a lot funnier if it wasn't posted verbatim, in forum after forum, month after month.
Ditto the first reply.
Think up a new joke!
Ditto the first reply.
Google is cowering their ass ....
Interesting Freudian slip there....