By the time Apple adopted the PowerPC it had become clear that Intel would remain ahead of the curve in the processor wars
Uh, no. The 604e, released two years after the first PowerPC chip, was a faster chip than anything you could get from Intel. The G4's and G5's were competitive chips but fell behind as Motorola and IBM lost interest in making processors for Apple. After the fiasco of IBM promising 3 ghz chips within a year of the G5's launch (which they never delivered on), Apple threw in the towel and went to Intel.
Except when you don't. Most of our prison population is made up of non-violent drug offenders. End the War on Drugs, and you'll end most of the "problem".
YOU bullshit. Blacks routinely vote vote for Democrats by over 90%. That wasn't the case when the GOP was still the Party of Lincoln, but spend a few decades appealing to racism via the Southern Strategy, and blacks have few reasons to vote for Republicans. Another fact inconvenient to your storyline: Obama was the second or even third choice for black voters at the start of the 2008 primaries. They supported Hillary, because they didn't think they'd see a black president in their lifetimes.
You want to change this, do something about the racism that's been part and parcel of the Republican party for the last 40 years.
I honestly believe that Obama intended to do exactly what he said he would...until he actually got elected and realized that he couldn't.
Except there's a host of actions he could have taken as president, without having to wait for a dithering Congress to get around to it:
Obama could have signed an executive order halting DADT
TARP was written so the Treasury could hand out checks as it saw fit. So Obama could have directed Geitner to hand out TARP loans with tough strings attached: no bonuses or dividends until loans are repaid, caps on executive salaries, and caps on consumer interest rates and fees. He didn't.
If he really wanted the prison at Guantanamo closed...he could have simply ordered it closed and the prisoners transferred to domestic facilities. Instead, he fiddle farted around until Congress got the vapors over bringing teh terrorists to American soil, and they passed a bill denying the use of federal funds for prisoner transfers. A bill that Obama conveniently then signed.
He could have appointed an Attorney General willing to lay waste to neocon torturers and Wall Street fraudsters. He didn't do that, either.
And so on. Substantive (as opposed to Republican) criticisms of this president aren't based on what he hasn't had time to do or what he's not capable of, but what he has had time to do and has been capable of.
1. We're not "sacrificing" people, we're allowing people who are willing to tolerate a small risk (under 5%) of death in order for the glory of going to space.
Except it's not just the crew at risk - it's people on the ground as well. You have a rocket weighing hundreds of thousands of pounds traveling at hundreds of miles per hour - what could possibly go wrong?
I think your ideas of what defines a "centrist" are off
Naturally, because you sir, are a fucking moron. Seriously, you make the Darwin Award winners look like Nobel Laureates.
Cap and Trade
An attempt to use capitalism to reduce climate change. Aside from the fact that you usually like to suck capitalist cock, the "leftist" approach would be harsh, across the board regulation, with a corporate death penalty for violators.
Universal Health Care
Where you earned the "fucking moron". Aside from the fact that far out right wing fascists wonder why the hell the U.S. doesn't have UHC, Obama took it off the table from the start, remember? Even as a negotiating point.
Income Redistribution
You referring to the bank bailouts, the blocking of new financial regulations, or mandating millions of new customers to the health insurance industry?
cancelling the moon and Orion missions
First you're against capitalism, then you're for wasteful government spending - could you pull your head out and stick to a meme for 2 seconds? You're as bad as Pudge, who rants against regulations for home schooling in one breath to bitching about gays "shoving homosexual marriage down our throats" in the next.
It's mainly about strategy, not branding. If Democratic policies are successful, Democrats will get the credit, even if Republicans vote for them. But if those policies fail, no Republican will want to have his vote (or name) attached to them.
So Republicans have every reason to oppose everything Obama does. And yet Obama just called for more bipartisanship in a press conference today. Weak Sauce you can believe in.
Just need to take that last step and realize that Democrats do the exact. same. thing. To wit: Keith Olberman's rant about Scott Brown, who if he were a Texan would be leftist.
Uh, no. Just because Reagan would look like a hippie next to today's teabaggers (banned torture, raised taxes, granted amnesty to illegal immigrants) doesn't suddenly make him a "leftist". If the GOP continues it's decades-long run into fascism, Dick Cheney will "look" like a liberal next to House Republicans in 2030.
I suppose you could see it that way, if you're a moron. Or would you have like to have seen Social Security wiped out as well when the credit swap market blew up in 2008?
I just came up with the idea of faster-than-light travel by means of a twinkie
Oh, so you came up with a semi workable model that could be implemented in a few years? You'll be rich, rich!
Except I just gave you multiple examples of where it does. Want more? The radio. The telephone. Penicillin. Vulcanized rubber. The lightbulb. Electricity. Velcro. Zippers. Electric cars.
The parts that you conveniently leave out are the facts that private industry naturally concentrates on research that will be the most profitable, and that huge amounts of money are wasted on marketing, pay & perks that could otherwise be spent on research. One less advertising VP at $5 million a year means 20 more top notch researchers at $250,000 a year.
What is needed is for them to remove the regulations that exist against private space travel.
Sweet, then space pilots will have to work a second job to stay off food stamps, just like airline pilots. And launch command staff can be working on 2 hours of sleep between shifts, just like air traffic controllers. Because hey, you can always sue the parent company for damages when a rocket plows into your apartment complex. Unless you live in a tort reform state, of course.
And in the end, it wont save you one red cent, because all the gains in efficiency (i.e. skimping on safety and slashing staff and staff compensation) will go into the pockets of the board of directors.
You realize that's a fraction of the total loan amount, right? You realize that the banks used them to purchase MORE "toxic assets" so they could get TARP money for them, right?
The iPod was not the first portable digital music player, nor has it ever been the best going by specs.
Other than using 400 Mpbs Firewire when everything else used 11 Mpbs USB or even parallel. And using 5 GB micro hard drives when everything else used tiny flash storage or far more bulky laptop or desktop hard drives. And being able accurately zip through hundreds of songs with the wheel instead of buttons.
I hate the iTunes search interface to the iTunes store, because I don't use it the way Apple's target users do.
No one is holding a gun to your head to make you use it, anymore than someone forced you to make shit up.
With Windows, I could quickly find solutions to problems via forums, where most responses to Mac issues include countless "I refuse to acknowledge your criticism of my Apple product" or more often "but it's shiny" responses... most often you have to reply multiple times with "yes, it is shiny, but I would really like it to do this..." before finally giving up and living with the issue (example, I don't need to see my desktop when working in Photoshop... wtf would I want to see unrelated content of any kind???... but too bad live with it)
Just because you're too stupid to use Google doesn't mean they don't exist. Hell, Macintouch has been around since the Paleozoic age of the internet, 1994.
like having the apple key (core to most actions) only on the left side of the keyboard
WTF are you talking about. Both the Macbook Air (smallest laptop) and their minimized wireless keyboard have the command key on both sides of the spacebar.
Apple's no-competition-when-playing-in-our-house philosophy (message: Apple, your iPhone email app sucks big time; no marking 'all read', no 'send only' accounts, no.... you get the idea)
So use Google's. Or Yahoo's. Or pull your head out....
The intellectual vacuum that exists in fanboyism causes the same sort of negative progress in the Mac arena as the self-entitlement that Windows brought to its own products. If you can't question God, how can you evolve?
Damn your palms must be hairy after that rhetorical masturbation. Could be dangerous with all that projecting you're doing....
Apple users embrace the "free-thinking" mantra because that's the image Apple's served up.'
Or because Apple made an effort to get into media editing back in the 80's and 90's? Or because they put a lot of work into photo, video and music editing apps that they bundle with their computer? Or because Apple embraces open source networking standards with a UNIX operating system?
Nah, the easy work around is to ban corporate sponsored speech if the corporation has foreign shareholders or does not have it's headquarters in the United States. Few corporations will want to give up having foreign investors, and the headquarter requirement will cut off the tax dodgers who have a mailing address in the Cayman islands.
That only applies to costs of doing business - raw materials, energy, labor - not profits. There has never been an increase on business profits that has ever resulted in the loss of a single job, nor has there ever been an income tax cut that has resulted in the creation of a job. This is because businesses already set prices and hire based on maximizing revenue - and that applies whether taxes on profits are 95% or 0%.
That's amazing nonsense, as businesses always set prices based on what the market will bear. If they could raise prices without losing too many customers, they will go ahead and raise prices - taxes or no taxes.
Furthermore, there has never been a tax cut on business income that has ever created a single job in the history of the world. First, taxes on profits are taxes on profits, not a cost of doing business like raw materials or labor. Second, if a business owner will make more money by hiring more employees, then he will go ahead and hire more employees and write off the cost as a business expense. You give a business owner a cut on his income based taxes, and it will simply go into his pocket.
Slashdot Mirror
Forget what article how? What's your point?
By the time Apple adopted the PowerPC it had become clear that Intel would remain ahead of the curve in the processor wars
Uh, no. The 604e, released two years after the first PowerPC chip, was a faster chip than anything you could get from Intel. The G4's and G5's were competitive chips but fell behind as Motorola and IBM lost interest in making processors for Apple. After the fiasco of IBM promising 3 ghz chips within a year of the G5's launch (which they never delivered on), Apple threw in the towel and went to Intel.
Fixed that for you.
Except when you don't. Most of our prison population is made up of non-violent drug offenders. End the War on Drugs, and you'll end most of the "problem".
YOU bullshit. Blacks routinely vote vote for Democrats by over 90%. That wasn't the case when the GOP was still the Party of Lincoln, but spend a few decades appealing to racism via the Southern Strategy, and blacks have few reasons to vote for Republicans. Another fact inconvenient to your storyline: Obama was the second or even third choice for black voters at the start of the 2008 primaries. They supported Hillary, because they didn't think they'd see a black president in their lifetimes.
You want to change this, do something about the racism that's been part and parcel of the Republican party for the last 40 years.
It is rare that I do not see Barney Frank screaming and yelling at the camera's about something.
Then you rarely watch Barney Frank when he's not having to shout over Republicans cutting into his time.
I find it funny that people find Rush extreme but Carville not.
I find your extreme false equivalency funny. You'd have to get Louis Farrakhan on a bad day to get remotely close to Rush.
And I don't know anybody that finds Matthews conservative.
Then all the people you know were in a coma when Bush was in office. On "Mission Accomplished" day, Matthews was dying to give Bush a blow job.
I honestly believe that Obama intended to do exactly what he said he would...until he actually got elected and realized that he couldn't.
Except there's a host of actions he could have taken as president, without having to wait for a dithering Congress to get around to it:
And so on. Substantive (as opposed to Republican) criticisms of this president aren't based on what he hasn't had time to do or what he's not capable of, but what he has had time to do and has been capable of.
1. We're not "sacrificing" people, we're allowing people who are willing to tolerate a small risk (under 5%) of death in order for the glory of going to space.
Except it's not just the crew at risk - it's people on the ground as well. You have a rocket weighing hundreds of thousands of pounds traveling at hundreds of miles per hour - what could possibly go wrong?
I think your ideas of what defines a "centrist" are off
Naturally, because you sir, are a fucking moron. Seriously, you make the Darwin Award winners look like Nobel Laureates.
Cap and Trade
An attempt to use capitalism to reduce climate change. Aside from the fact that you usually like to suck capitalist cock, the "leftist" approach would be harsh, across the board regulation, with a corporate death penalty for violators.
Universal Health Care
Where you earned the "fucking moron". Aside from the fact that far out right wing fascists wonder why the hell the U.S. doesn't have UHC, Obama took it off the table from the start, remember? Even as a negotiating point.
Income Redistribution
You referring to the bank bailouts, the blocking of new financial regulations, or mandating millions of new customers to the health insurance industry?
cancelling the moon and Orion missions
First you're against capitalism, then you're for wasteful government spending - could you pull your head out and stick to a meme for 2 seconds? You're as bad as Pudge, who rants against regulations for home schooling in one breath to bitching about gays "shoving homosexual marriage down our throats" in the next.
It's mainly about strategy, not branding. If Democratic policies are successful, Democrats will get the credit, even if Republicans vote for them. But if those policies fail, no Republican will want to have his vote (or name) attached to them.
So Republicans have every reason to oppose everything Obama does. And yet Obama just called for more bipartisanship in a press conference today. Weak Sauce you can believe in.
Just need to take that last step and realize that Democrats do the exact. same. thing. To wit: Keith Olberman's rant about Scott Brown, who if he were a Texan would be leftist.
Uh, no. Just because Reagan would look like a hippie next to today's teabaggers (banned torture, raised taxes, granted amnesty to illegal immigrants) doesn't suddenly make him a "leftist". If the GOP continues it's decades-long run into fascism, Dick Cheney will "look" like a liberal next to House Republicans in 2030.
I suppose you could see it that way, if you're a moron. Or would you have like to have seen Social Security wiped out as well when the credit swap market blew up in 2008?
I just came up with the idea of faster-than-light travel by means of a twinkie
Oh, so you came up with a semi workable model that could be implemented in a few years? You'll be rich, rich!
Except I just gave you multiple examples of where it does. Want more? The radio. The telephone. Penicillin. Vulcanized rubber. The lightbulb. Electricity. Velcro. Zippers. Electric cars.
The parts that you conveniently leave out are the facts that private industry naturally concentrates on research that will be the most profitable, and that huge amounts of money are wasted on marketing, pay & perks that could otherwise be spent on research. One less advertising VP at $5 million a year means 20 more top notch researchers at $250,000 a year.
What is needed is for them to remove the regulations that exist against private space travel.
Sweet, then space pilots will have to work a second job to stay off food stamps, just like airline pilots. And launch command staff can be working on 2 hours of sleep between shifts, just like air traffic controllers. Because hey, you can always sue the parent company for damages when a rocket plows into your apartment complex. Unless you live in a tort reform state, of course.
And in the end, it wont save you one red cent, because all the gains in efficiency (i.e. skimping on safety and slashing staff and staff compensation) will go into the pockets of the board of directors.
Smashing, yeah capitalism.
You realize that's a fraction of the total loan amount, right? You realize that the banks used them to purchase MORE "toxic assets" so they could get TARP money for them, right?
The iPod was not the first portable digital music player, nor has it ever been the best going by specs.
Other than using 400 Mpbs Firewire when everything else used 11 Mpbs USB or even parallel. And using 5 GB micro hard drives when everything else used tiny flash storage or far more bulky laptop or desktop hard drives. And being able accurately zip through hundreds of songs with the wheel instead of buttons.
I hate the iTunes search interface to the iTunes store, because I don't use it the way Apple's target users do.
No one is holding a gun to your head to make you use it, anymore than someone forced you to make shit up.
Just because you're too stupid to use Google doesn't mean they don't exist. Hell, Macintouch has been around since the Paleozoic age of the internet, 1994.
single-button mouse?
Any complaints that aren't six years out of date?
like having the apple key (core to most actions) only on the left side of the keyboard
WTF are you talking about. Both the Macbook Air (smallest laptop) and their minimized wireless keyboard have the command key on both sides of the spacebar.
Apple's no-competition-when-playing-in-our-house philosophy (message: Apple, your iPhone email app sucks big time; no marking 'all read', no 'send only' accounts, no .... you get the idea)
So use Google's. Or Yahoo's. Or pull your head out....
The intellectual vacuum that exists in fanboyism causes the same sort of negative progress in the Mac arena as the self-entitlement that Windows brought to its own products. If you can't question God, how can you evolve?
Damn your palms must be hairy after that rhetorical masturbation. Could be dangerous with all that projecting you're doing....
...from you, Dr. Phil.
Apple users embrace the "free-thinking" mantra because that's the image Apple's served up.'
Or because Apple made an effort to get into media editing back in the 80's and 90's? Or because they put a lot of work into photo, video and music editing apps that they bundle with their computer? Or because Apple embraces open source networking standards with a UNIX operating system?
Nah, it must just be the marketing.
Presumably, you're a moron to come up with such a comparison - who is Edwards libeling, again?
Nah, the easy work around is to ban corporate sponsored speech if the corporation has foreign shareholders or does not have it's headquarters in the United States. Few corporations will want to give up having foreign investors, and the headquarter requirement will cut off the tax dodgers who have a mailing address in the Cayman islands.
Wow. You win the award for deliberate obtuseness:
You win the award for projecting. With a cannon.
That is because it isn't there.
Other than the entirety of the 4th Amendment, of course.
You are aware that corporations pay little to no taxes after loopholes and deductions, yes?
That only applies to costs of doing business - raw materials, energy, labor - not profits. There has never been an increase on business profits that has ever resulted in the loss of a single job, nor has there ever been an income tax cut that has resulted in the creation of a job. This is because businesses already set prices and hire based on maximizing revenue - and that applies whether taxes on profits are 95% or 0%.
That's amazing nonsense, as businesses always set prices based on what the market will bear. If they could raise prices without losing too many customers, they will go ahead and raise prices - taxes or no taxes.
Furthermore, there has never been a tax cut on business income that has ever created a single job in the history of the world. First, taxes on profits are taxes on profits, not a cost of doing business like raw materials or labor. Second, if a business owner will make more money by hiring more employees, then he will go ahead and hire more employees and write off the cost as a business expense. You give a business owner a cut on his income based taxes, and it will simply go into his pocket.
No, what I don't understand are working people opposed to job security for working people doing their jobs.