My Dad is Pro-British whereas I'm Pro-European. My Dad will always vote conservative, whereas I'll give my vote to the third major party; whoever that may be.
I've never heard the phrase 'winner for now' at all in my lifetime. I also don't recount seeing 'winner for now' in the Art of War unless your para-phrasing. I agree there is never a final winner but 'winner for now' just doesn't compute. Victors, winners and leaders sufficiently cover the related outcomes. I'm willing to change my point of view if you can prove otherwise.
Simply put, Firefox is the market leader in Indonesia and that's how the title of this story should be described.
'Winner' to me has always meant something that was final. A 'winner for now' makes no sense because the winner can still lose and therefore can't be a winner. When we have a word to describe the exact situation, 'leader' we should use it.
Don't worry, when the old people die they can just stop using them. lbs is purely descriptive, the computers weigh in grams which meets the legal requirement.
Oh btw, the theory can't really work unless we ignore certain movie elements like Bond getting married. The Roger Moore and Dalton movies reference the events in the Lazenby movie.
In movie terms he never got the origin story but that's even better then isn't it? Since they never made CR with Connery, we were denied the origin story until 5 years ago and nobody DIDN'T understand the character before CR. It was simple, he's a spy, he's on a mission and he loves the ladies. Spiderman is a young chap bitten by a Spider, I get it, I don't really need to see it happen.
Maybe UK viewers are more accepting of having different actors playing the same characters? During Shakespeare's time they had men in female roles, probably stems from that? Or they are so historical it's ingrained in our culture (we know who they are) and we relish seeing famous actor x playing that figure.
James Bond never got an original story until 40 years after he was created, even then, it doesn't go into detail (2006 Casino Royale). Meaning we don't see him as a child, then at school, then in the Navy, then signing up for the MI6. We cut to the chase with his required double kill in the title sequence.
That should be good enough, and it is, its great in fact, especially when there are 25 EON Bond films. Spiderman gets 3, then they want to redo the origin story again, less than 10 years to the previous trilogy? What short attention spans we have.
Again, look at the Bond Franchise against the argument for a different actor requiring an origin story. We knew who Bond was, when Roger Moore, Dalton etc took over, just give us a new plot. The same can be done with Spiderman by carrying on from the third movie.
Slashdot Mirror
The nearest authorised eeseller IS in Swansea (AT Computers just off the Kingsway). But the nearest authorised repair centre is just outside Cardiff.
I hope by now you've illustrated that there can be a third choice to your American friends.
My Dad is Pro-British whereas I'm Pro-European. My Dad will always vote conservative, whereas I'll give my vote to the third major party; whoever that may be.
Thanks for the video in your blog, it would be a comedy if it wasn't so tragic.
I don't want to be, but I am not optimistic with this purchase.
"wondering what it would mean for Linux users" - It means you're fucked! Sadly.
Sadly on the Internet, only trolls live on Slashdot, and therefore deny us this feature.
I've never heard the phrase 'winner for now' at all in my lifetime. I also don't recount seeing 'winner for now' in the Art of War unless your para-phrasing. I agree there is never a final winner but 'winner for now' just doesn't compute. Victors, winners and leaders sufficiently cover the related outcomes. I'm willing to change my point of view if you can prove otherwise.
Simply put, Firefox is the market leader in Indonesia and that's how the title of this story should be described.
Who'd = who would.
'Winner' to me has always meant something that was final. A 'winner for now' makes no sense because the winner can still lose and therefore can't be a winner. When we have a word to describe the exact situation, 'leader' we should use it.
I can't believe people simplify the issue to this extent (but reveals their bias). Even respectable sources for news have done it (FOTO8) and yet Nilay Patel has explained it in great detail: http://www.macgasm.net/2011/04/19/recommended-read-nilay-patel-apple-samsung-lawsuit/.
Shame about SGU, I liked this particular two parter, even with its kludges.
Explain it to me then.
I think every person born before 1850 is now dead. Just a guess.
In case nobody gets the reference, which I was sure somebody would, Tom Hanks is a Typewriter collector.
Hi, I'm Tom Hanks and I can breath a sign of relief.
I'm normally down on America, but this problem is endemic everywhere on the planet sadly.
Don't worry, when the old people die they can just stop using them. lbs is purely descriptive, the computers weigh in grams which meets the legal requirement.
Oh btw, the theory can't really work unless we ignore certain movie elements like Bond getting married. The Roger Moore and Dalton movies reference the events in the Lazenby movie.
In movie terms he never got the origin story but that's even better then isn't it? Since they never made CR with Connery, we were denied the origin story until 5 years ago and nobody DIDN'T understand the character before CR. It was simple, he's a spy, he's on a mission and he loves the ladies. Spiderman is a young chap bitten by a Spider, I get it, I don't really need to see it happen.
Maybe UK viewers are more accepting of having different actors playing the same characters? During Shakespeare's time they had men in female roles, probably stems from that? Or they are so historical it's ingrained in our culture (we know who they are) and we relish seeing famous actor x playing that figure.
I have and I like that theory. But I'm also happy with x number of actors playing the same character and not feeling indifferent towards it.
James Bond never got an original story until 40 years after he was created, even then, it doesn't go into detail (2006 Casino Royale). Meaning we don't see him as a child, then at school, then in the Navy, then signing up for the MI6. We cut to the chase with his required double kill in the title sequence.
That should be good enough, and it is, its great in fact, especially when there are 25 EON Bond films. Spiderman gets 3, then they want to redo the origin story again, less than 10 years to the previous trilogy? What short attention spans we have.
Again, look at the Bond Franchise against the argument for a different actor requiring an origin story. We knew who Bond was, when Roger Moore, Dalton etc took over, just give us a new plot. The same can be done with Spiderman by carrying on from the third movie.
I wish the US had the guts to talk about the real issues in society instead of constantly procrastinating and doing things the hard way.
Just start dating somebody who speaks Mandarin, much easier and fun.