The invasion of Iraq had no more to do with rumours of (non-existant) WMDs than it had to do with 9/11. The invasion was simply the putting into action of the Wolfowitz Doctrine (1992) on Middle Eastern oil.
What do you call it when more than one bad person cooperates on an agenda that they both find mutually beneficial? Hint, it starts with a 'c'.
A corporation?
If there was more than one person in the government that knew of an imminent attack and deliberately obfuscated, delayed, or otherwise covered up the facts to allow it, since it would benefit certain interested parties financially, or with increased power over people, it was a conspiracy.
For all his Star Wars bluster, Reagan didn't involve the US in any major wars.
US foreign policy in his day was to supply arms to various terrorist organisations and states. Mujahadeen in Afghanistan, Iran, The Contras in Nicaragua, etc.
What happened to those US bought weapons?
Regan was certainly involved in foreign wars. Just in an immoral (sometimes illegal), underhand and stupid way.
As I said, as much as Apple fans try to spin it, Apple still walked away.
Logically, if Google had demanded the sacrifice of Tim Cook's first born as a condition, you'd still be claiming Apple walked away.
For Apple to get a similar dataset to Google would take the better part of a decade.
No. The data is there, available from third party map companies. Google uses it, and Apple uses it. Apple's initial problems come from the integration of that data. Correcting that integration isn't easy, but won't take a decade. Probably a year for Apple to catch up.
It's not based entirely on a whim. The rules are there for all developers to read. For sure there are edge cases which might be unpredictable, and Apple reserves the right to create new rules when it encounters a previously unforeseen problem. But nearly all apps are accepted provided the developer follows the rules and UI guidelines and doesn't have any serious bugs.
So what do you do if you have a new category of app and you're not sure whether Apple will rule against it? Softly, softly catchee monkey.
Either: 1) You release a version of the app without any potentially violating features. Then once it's accepted, you try updates with the potentially problematic features. If it's rejected, or takes a long time to review, at least there is a version on the store for people to purchase in the meantime.
Or the opposite approach: 2) Submit a proof of concept app. Create a minimal app with the potentially rejectable feature, and little else. Minimal work, minimal expense. If Apple accept it, then you can polish it.
Though third-party portrait monitors work fine, a Mac user who is not a print graphics professional more than likely doesn't own one.
I agree it's an edge case. But far more people own them than you might imagine, as Dell has shipped lots of monitors with stands with rotatable mounts with perfectly ordinary PCs. A lot more people will have them than realise they have them. That's how I got mine. I use it with my Macbook when doing iOS development. It's great for displaying the iPad simulator in portrait mode.
How many people stand sideways to work on their laptop? Your argument is absurd.
Nobody. As I said the primary displays are not portrait on laptops and the iMac. But secondary displays can be. There's nothing absurd about my answer to the OPs question. Just your lack of comprehension.
No, not that screenshot, the one already linked in the thread. Yours is a fake, and given the filename, the creator hasn't disguised his motives very well.
Try this: You remember what you had for lunch last Wednesday because __________.
You make my point for me. I have no idea what I had for lunch last Wednesday. And that is about a million times more memorable than whether one page out of the hundreds that are visited each week needed a scroll to see the footer.
Heck have you ever seen one of those exercises where they show someone a film of a robbery in progress, and then a minute or so later ask them questions about it? People don't remember the most obvious things. But they will invent things to replace the things they don't remember. They don't remember that a guy was wearing a blue sweater, they say it was red. And then become convinced that their recollection was correct.
Chances of accurately recalling details of whether a web page needed scrolling, asked after a week, are so slim, it's laughable.
Unless there was a specific reason to look for the scrolling behaviour at that time, and take a note (mental or otherwise). Hence the question.
Calling people names doesn't help your case. And the chances of you remembering whether or not you scrolled on a page you visited a week ago are just as slim as they are for him.
Slashdot Mirror
Another Romney voter.
You don't need to be racist to agree with Romney's policies.
...but it helps.
The invasion of Iraq had no more to do with rumours of (non-existant) WMDs than it had to do with 9/11. The invasion was simply the putting into action of the Wolfowitz Doctrine (1992) on Middle Eastern oil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfowitz_Doctrine#Oil
This was a Neo-Con agenda, and thus not one to which Gore would have subscribed. The idea that Gore would have invaded Iraq is ridiculous.
What do you call it when more than one bad person cooperates on an agenda that they both find mutually beneficial? Hint, it starts with a 'c'.
A corporation?
If there was more than one person in the government that knew of an imminent attack and deliberately obfuscated, delayed, or otherwise covered up the facts to allow it, since it would benefit certain interested parties financially, or with increased power over people, it was a conspiracy.
That's a big if.
For all his Star Wars bluster, Reagan didn't involve the US in any major wars.
US foreign policy in his day was to supply arms to various terrorist organisations and states. Mujahadeen in Afghanistan, Iran, The Contras in Nicaragua, etc.
What happened to those US bought weapons?
Regan was certainly involved in foreign wars. Just in an immoral (sometimes illegal), underhand and stupid way.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation#List_of_countries_using_proportional_representation
Looks like a wide range of countries there. Both successes and failures. Just like a list of first past the post countries is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_past_the_post_electoral_system#Use
Neither one is a panacea or a guaranteed failure.
Oh look, a Romney supporter.
If you think nothing matters when you've been smoking weed, then I'd suggest you've never tried it.
There are also apps for finding restaurants.
Well he delivered the original Elite. One of the groundbreaking games that should appear in any history of the genre.
OK, he did it with Ian Bell. But Braben is definitely the business minded one of the two, and the one that's continued to ship commercial games since.
The BBC is a singular noun'
It's another American/British difference. Americans view corporations and companies as singular nouns. The British view them as plural nouns.
The BBC aren't immune from grammar errors, but this isn't one.
There's nothing in your link that contradicts anything I said.
monopoly is legally defined as more than 50% market share in a particular market
No it's not.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/monopoly
I'll trade the turn-by-turn for an app that can find a restaurant I'm 100 yards from.
Driver's wouldn't.
As I said, as much as Apple fans try to spin it, Apple still walked away.
Logically, if Google had demanded the sacrifice of Tim Cook's first born as a condition, you'd still be claiming Apple walked away.
For Apple to get a similar dataset to Google would take the better part of a decade.
No. The data is there, available from third party map companies. Google uses it, and Apple uses it. Apple's initial problems come from the integration of that data. Correcting that integration isn't easy, but won't take a decade. Probably a year for Apple to catch up.
It's not based entirely on a whim. The rules are there for all developers to read. For sure there are edge cases which might be unpredictable, and Apple reserves the right to create new rules when it encounters a previously unforeseen problem. But nearly all apps are accepted provided the developer follows the rules and UI guidelines and doesn't have any serious bugs.
So what do you do if you have a new category of app and you're not sure whether Apple will rule against it? Softly, softly catchee monkey.
Either:
1) You release a version of the app without any potentially violating features. Then once it's accepted, you try updates with the potentially problematic features. If it's rejected, or takes a long time to review, at least there is a version on the store for people to purchase in the meantime.
Or the opposite approach:
2) Submit a proof of concept app. Create a minimal app with the potentially rejectable feature, and little else. Minimal work, minimal expense. If Apple accept it, then you can polish it.
He should be relatively easy to throw out of office.
Well, there's a 2.3% chance of him beoing thrown out of office. Keep hoping if that's what you want.
Not everyone has a piss-poor memory.
Not everyone is as big a liar as you.
Though third-party portrait monitors work fine, a Mac user who is not a print graphics professional more than likely doesn't own one.
I agree it's an edge case. But far more people own them than you might imagine, as Dell has shipped lots of monitors with stands with rotatable mounts with perfectly ordinary PCs. A lot more people will have them than realise they have them. That's how I got mine. I use it with my Macbook when doing iOS development. It's great for displaying the iPad simulator in portrait mode.
How many people stand sideways to work on their laptop? Your argument is absurd.
Nobody. As I said the primary displays are not portrait on laptops and the iMac. But secondary displays can be. There's nothing absurd about my answer to the OPs question. Just your lack of comprehension.
No, not that screenshot, the one already linked in the thread. Yours is a fake, and given the filename, the creator hasn't disguised his motives very well.
Try this: You remember what you had for lunch last Wednesday because __________.
You make my point for me. I have no idea what I had for lunch last Wednesday. And that is about a million times more memorable than whether one page out of the hundreds that are visited each week needed a scroll to see the footer.
Heck have you ever seen one of those exercises where they show someone a film of a robbery in progress, and then a minute or so later ask them questions about it? People don't remember the most obvious things. But they will invent things to replace the things they don't remember. They don't remember that a guy was wearing a blue sweater, they say it was red. And then become convinced that their recollection was correct.
Chances of accurately recalling details of whether a web page needed scrolling, asked after a week, are so slim, it's laughable.
Unless there was a specific reason to look for the scrolling behaviour at that time, and take a note (mental or otherwise). Hence the question.
Calling people names doesn't help your case. And the chances of you remembering whether or not you scrolled on a page you visited a week ago are just as slim as they are for him.
All of them.
Yes, even Including the laptops and iMacs. Although obviously the primary displays on those are not portrait displays.
Of course the fact that you changed the topic from the tablets and smartphones that my post was about means you can't argue against that point.
He posted his screenshot, you post yours.