Stridder44
Sep 11, 02:36 AM
Mine connection would take around 14 hours, but we have adsl 2+ now which is up to 24mb/sec. Can't wait to upgrade :cool:
This movie store is all exciting and all, but with out world stores, it will be the US who will be enjoying it :(
Holy eff. Im in the states and Im only gettin 786/384 :mad:
Then again we get it for free...but still....
This movie store is all exciting and all, but with out world stores, it will be the US who will be enjoying it :(
Holy eff. Im in the states and Im only gettin 786/384 :mad:
Then again we get it for free...but still....
macinnv
Apr 26, 04:20 PM
Plain and simple. This problem for Apple would go away over the course of 6 months if they were on all 4 US carriers.
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
SandynJosh
Mar 29, 07:31 PM
I think some of you read the story close enough to know that it isn't the battery that is produced in this factory in Japan, but an important component of the battery; a special flexible polymer film.
Secondly, the factory is intact, it is the port that brings in chemicals and ships out finished goods that is damaged.
It is a classical example of, "For the want of a nail, the shoe was lost...etc."
The quick solution might be to use a different port and ship to and from the new port by rail...or to ship in and out by air.
Finally, I suspect that the reason the iPod is listed as being affected and not iPhones and iPads is that whatever materials are available in short supply are being diverted to support iPhones and iPads at the expense of the iPods, which do not contribute as well to the projected bottom line.
Secondly, the factory is intact, it is the port that brings in chemicals and ships out finished goods that is damaged.
It is a classical example of, "For the want of a nail, the shoe was lost...etc."
The quick solution might be to use a different port and ship to and from the new port by rail...or to ship in and out by air.
Finally, I suspect that the reason the iPod is listed as being affected and not iPhones and iPads is that whatever materials are available in short supply are being diverted to support iPhones and iPads at the expense of the iPods, which do not contribute as well to the projected bottom line.
hexor
Apr 26, 03:14 PM
umm there are a lot of high end Android phones.
Apple sells cheap ass phone as well (iPhone 3GS) so it is in the Kmart shopper market is well.
I would not see that as useful. For a cell phone I would hate iOS but for a portable MP3 player the iPod iOS is great but I would never want it as a phone.
Lets look at smart phone only which means you can not count the iPod. Different market different rules.
And that argument is not worthless as it clear that even with the iPhone on Verizon iOS is losing ground in the smart phone market.
How is that not relevant??? What is the point of showing market share then? No really, what is the point? Doesn't it factor heavily into what market a company wants to develop software for? Since the same apps run on all those Apple devices then why would you not want to include those?
Apple sells cheap ass phone as well (iPhone 3GS) so it is in the Kmart shopper market is well.
I would not see that as useful. For a cell phone I would hate iOS but for a portable MP3 player the iPod iOS is great but I would never want it as a phone.
Lets look at smart phone only which means you can not count the iPod. Different market different rules.
And that argument is not worthless as it clear that even with the iPhone on Verizon iOS is losing ground in the smart phone market.
How is that not relevant??? What is the point of showing market share then? No really, what is the point? Doesn't it factor heavily into what market a company wants to develop software for? Since the same apps run on all those Apple devices then why would you not want to include those?
MonkeySee....
Nov 11, 09:23 AM
I work for an IT Security reseller and we sell and support some major companies in the UK.
IMO they haven't made this AV to help anyone out. Its all about cock waving and adding to their port folio.
IMO they haven't made this AV to help anyone out. Its all about cock waving and adding to their port folio.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 7, 01:21 PM
Apple is anticompetitive and should be shut down. By producing products customers want when others in the industry can't, they are forcing the competition out of business.
If Apple is not shut down, they should be forced to only sell the products designed by RIM and Google, while Google and Rim can build any Apple product they want. Apple also needs to be forced to fire their QC department. While they are at it, they might want to replace their marketing department with a bunch of rabid chimps. They might also be forced to purchase advertising for RIM.
Apples cash reserves also give them an unfair advantage. Perhaps they should give half their money to RIM. Perhaps Apple should design and build the products and sell them, however, RIM and Google would get the money.
LMAO
http://www.babynewsnow.com/images/baby_crying.jpg
If Apple is not shut down, they should be forced to only sell the products designed by RIM and Google, while Google and Rim can build any Apple product they want. Apple also needs to be forced to fire their QC department. While they are at it, they might want to replace their marketing department with a bunch of rabid chimps. They might also be forced to purchase advertising for RIM.
Apples cash reserves also give them an unfair advantage. Perhaps they should give half their money to RIM. Perhaps Apple should design and build the products and sell them, however, RIM and Google would get the money.
LMAO
http://www.babynewsnow.com/images/baby_crying.jpg
ChickenSwartz
Aug 11, 09:59 AM
Wait a second...if they release it in Paris, won't it no longer qualify for the free ipod?!? :(
If the Keynote is on the first day of the Expo that would be the 12th.
The iPod offere ends on the 16th, the end of the Paris Expo.
You might have to place your order online as I expect they wouldn't be in stores by then, but you [we] should be all set.
If the Keynote is on the first day of the Expo that would be the 12th.
The iPod offere ends on the 16th, the end of the Paris Expo.
You might have to place your order online as I expect they wouldn't be in stores by then, but you [we] should be all set.
GGJstudios
Dec 28, 03:55 PM
Does this mean I shouldn't bother installing Sophos for my mpb?
So many conflicting opinions.
Read this, then decide for yourself: Mac Virus/Malware Info (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9400648&postcount=4)
So many conflicting opinions.
Read this, then decide for yourself: Mac Virus/Malware Info (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9400648&postcount=4)
Tunster
Mar 28, 11:58 AM
I don't understand people's expectation for an iPhone 5 in 2011. I bet Apple didn't make as much profit fitting in the retina display, 5MP camera and putting together that design compared to the 3G. Why dump a year old design? It would be uncharacteristic for Apple to kill it. I love the design and I'm sure it will stand the test of time.
Maybe an announcement of a 4S maybe with A5 chip etc on the side as a surprise? That'll cover the iPhone 4 White rumors and give Apple a chance to improve the antenna.
Maybe an announcement of a 4S maybe with A5 chip etc on the side as a surprise? That'll cover the iPhone 4 White rumors and give Apple a chance to improve the antenna.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 7, 08:48 PM
These sound sweet, I want one.
But it's funny how the whole Mac Pro is a killer machine but they still neglect the video cards, seriously a nVidia Geforce 7300GT.
But it's funny how the whole Mac Pro is a killer machine but they still neglect the video cards, seriously a nVidia Geforce 7300GT.
NebulaClash
Apr 25, 10:21 AM
News Flash:
He's a Liar.
News Flash: You just lied about Steve Jobs.
He's a Liar.
News Flash: You just lied about Steve Jobs.
adbe
Apr 5, 02:13 PM
That's right, I'm a customer, and I'll modify my apple device how I see fit
Yes.
and that including jailbreaking
Not really.
enabling XCode to develop applications for my device without paying apple $99
Yes.
At the end of the day - a JB device is more useful than a locked up device.
Possibly.
Yes.
and that including jailbreaking
Not really.
enabling XCode to develop applications for my device without paying apple $99
Yes.
At the end of the day - a JB device is more useful than a locked up device.
Possibly.
roadbloc
May 6, 02:39 AM
Fake. Yet another chipset change would lead to many unnecessary problems.
Next Tuesday
Sep 15, 06:59 PM
"Announced" on Tuesday, 9/19; ready for shipping in 10-15 days, maybe longer, once all of us C2D geeks spring for this.
Shipping date then will read: on or before 10/21. :eek:
Just an observation. But, wouldnt it be quicker to just go to an apple store and purchase one rather than wait weeks to get one thru the mail. I know when MBP go to merom, i will be one of the first ones in the store. Maybe im wrong.
Shipping date then will read: on or before 10/21. :eek:
Just an observation. But, wouldnt it be quicker to just go to an apple store and purchase one rather than wait weeks to get one thru the mail. I know when MBP go to merom, i will be one of the first ones in the store. Maybe im wrong.
mrsir2009
Apr 20, 12:31 AM
I'll be buying that phone as my first iDevice :)
shandowee
Sep 16, 08:59 AM
Ok people, how's this? I ordered a 17" MBP on Sep 8. I upgraded the ram and hard drive. It was supposed to ship yesterday, the 15th.
I checked my order status today and the ship date has changed to October 2! I also received an e-mail from Apple stating that there were unexpected delays.
I held out hoping for a C2D but broke down and bought on the 8th. I was all excited that it was going to ship yesterday. I don't even care so much about a C2D, I just want my Mac. But here's hoping anyway.
Ya est�n aqu�...
they are here...
I checked my order status today and the ship date has changed to October 2! I also received an e-mail from Apple stating that there were unexpected delays.
I held out hoping for a C2D but broke down and bought on the 8th. I was all excited that it was going to ship yesterday. I don't even care so much about a C2D, I just want my Mac. But here's hoping anyway.
Ya est�n aqu�...
they are here...
MacNut
Apr 14, 11:12 PM
I agree.
This is a long term fix ... quite like our issue with energy. Quick action is less important that intelligent, strategic moves.
Let's take a moment to assess what works and what doesn't. What needs to be cut and what needs to be augmented.
Let's not be lured into thinking that everything needs to be cut equally. It's bad for haircuts. And it's bad for budgets too.A small cut here and there can go a long way to balancing the budget. We don't have to slash everything but leaving it untouched won't solve anything.
This is a long term fix ... quite like our issue with energy. Quick action is less important that intelligent, strategic moves.
Let's take a moment to assess what works and what doesn't. What needs to be cut and what needs to be augmented.
Let's not be lured into thinking that everything needs to be cut equally. It's bad for haircuts. And it's bad for budgets too.A small cut here and there can go a long way to balancing the budget. We don't have to slash everything but leaving it untouched won't solve anything.
Multimedia
Aug 2, 05:47 PM
How can we get a hold of that keynote that Macrummors said will cover?If history is any reliable bellwether, Apple Will Post a QT Video Stream of the entire SteveNote By 6PM, Probably Sooner. :)
MacBoobsPro
Aug 2, 01:03 PM
You got it wrong. If you can't have cameras.. you CAN'T HAVE CAMERAS even if they're NOT being used. I work at a place where you can't have cellphones with cameras on the premises (i.e., the parking lot) let alone inside. Many companies with such policies will not buy displays because of such.
Actually thinking about it yes you are right :o What about companies that have sensitive material etc. Still think Apple would do it though :D
Actually thinking about it yes you are right :o What about companies that have sensitive material etc. Still think Apple would do it though :D
lPHONE
May 6, 12:19 AM
There's no way that Apple is gonna switch to ARM for their Mac lines when it already took them a decade to make the transition from IBM to Intel processors.
I thought the transition was noteworthy. Not quite flawless, but who else has switched architecture so perfectly?
I thought the transition was noteworthy. Not quite flawless, but who else has switched architecture so perfectly?
steviem
Nov 4, 04:55 PM
Sophos is terrible on Windows; why would anyone want to install that garbage on their Mac? :confused:
LOL, whatever you say chief!
LOL, whatever you say chief!
paolo-
Apr 9, 08:24 PM
Kind of a stupid way to write it. That's why most people add unnecessary parentheses when writing equations on a computer in ascii.
My answer would be 288.
My official answer : slap in your face.
I don't see how people end up with 2? What ever PEMDAS is (french-Canadian here). A division is just the inverse of a multiplication, how could one have precedence over the other (same for addition and subtraction)? 48(1/2)(9+3) gives the same answer. It sounds like a lot of people don't really understand what they are doing but rather following a magic spell.
The confusion really is what is being divided is it 2 or 24. Even if you follow pemdas you should end up with :
48/2(9+3)
=48/2(12)
=24(12)=288.
:confused:
My answer would be 288.
My official answer : slap in your face.
I don't see how people end up with 2? What ever PEMDAS is (french-Canadian here). A division is just the inverse of a multiplication, how could one have precedence over the other (same for addition and subtraction)? 48(1/2)(9+3) gives the same answer. It sounds like a lot of people don't really understand what they are doing but rather following a magic spell.
The confusion really is what is being divided is it 2 or 24. Even if you follow pemdas you should end up with :
48/2(9+3)
=48/2(12)
=24(12)=288.
:confused:
someguy
Jul 30, 09:10 AM
Not happening. Never in a million years. (Trying to reverse-jinx it.) :D
I've got a Nextel plan that I hate and a phone I can't stand (Motorola i830), so if this phone is reasonably priced and works on the Verizon network, it's mine for sure. :)
I've got a Nextel plan that I hate and a phone I can't stand (Motorola i830), so if this phone is reasonably priced and works on the Verizon network, it's mine for sure. :)