h1r0ll3r
Apr 5, 01:56 PM
The few hours they paid someone to make this theme has netted Toyota many news articles/discussion of "free advertising" that has come of offering the irrelevant skin and now the followup stories of them being asked to remove the theme.
+1 for Toyota for succeeding in this marketing campaign.
^This. Regardless of the if/ands/buts, Toyota comes out with tons of free publicity over this and their brand. Whether good or bad, Toyota will definitely reap something out of all this. From my POV, kudos to Toyota/Scion for the crafty marketing campaign here.
+1 for Toyota for succeeding in this marketing campaign.
^This. Regardless of the if/ands/buts, Toyota comes out with tons of free publicity over this and their brand. Whether good or bad, Toyota will definitely reap something out of all this. From my POV, kudos to Toyota/Scion for the crafty marketing campaign here.
~Shard~
Aug 12, 01:05 AM
That being said bring on the quad cores in the MBP's in a couple years. Just when I will be getting ready to upgrade. :D
Sounds like you'll be getting a nice Penryn MBP then! ;) :D :cool:
Sounds like you'll be getting a nice Penryn MBP then! ;) :D :cool:
freebooter
Sep 11, 01:06 AM
Actually, no, I believe it's more along the lines of an example of success breeding lots and lots and lots of admiring / eager people who want to attend their exclusive product showcases, and their resorting to excluding some people to keep such events from turning into crazed circuses.
Besides, I mean, who really wants to go to such an event, anyway? I'd rather just read about it on internet forums like this.
You have a point there. I certainly wouldn't want to attend. But I wasn't saying I would want to. Nor was I saying that any of the eager masses should be able to attend.
The original post by Macrumors implied that this site is shut out of such events. Shutting out representatives sites such as this, which do much to promote Apple products is, I think, to some degree arrogant and perhaps spiteful. This site likes to penetrate Apple's notorious secrecy.
Besides, I mean, who really wants to go to such an event, anyway? I'd rather just read about it on internet forums like this.
You have a point there. I certainly wouldn't want to attend. But I wasn't saying I would want to. Nor was I saying that any of the eager masses should be able to attend.
The original post by Macrumors implied that this site is shut out of such events. Shutting out representatives sites such as this, which do much to promote Apple products is, I think, to some degree arrogant and perhaps spiteful. This site likes to penetrate Apple's notorious secrecy.
balamw
Apr 9, 08:35 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEMDAS#Mnemonics
I like this young geeky woman:
There is a new mnemonic featured in Danica McKellar's books Math Doesn't Suck[2] and Kiss My Math[3] that does address this very issue: "Pandas Eat: Mustard on Dumplings, and Apples with Spice." The intention being that Mustard and Dumplings is a "dinner course" and that Apples and Spice is a "dessert course." Then it becomes not a linear string of operations to do one after the other, but rather the "dinner course" operations are considered together and performed left to right, and then addition and subtraction are considered together, again performed again left to right.
B
I like this young geeky woman:
There is a new mnemonic featured in Danica McKellar's books Math Doesn't Suck[2] and Kiss My Math[3] that does address this very issue: "Pandas Eat: Mustard on Dumplings, and Apples with Spice." The intention being that Mustard and Dumplings is a "dinner course" and that Apples and Spice is a "dessert course." Then it becomes not a linear string of operations to do one after the other, but rather the "dinner course" operations are considered together and performed left to right, and then addition and subtraction are considered together, again performed again left to right.
B
PlipPlop
May 6, 06:27 AM
Wouldn't a new CPU have to be much faster than the equivalent Intel chip to make it worthwhile? Not just equivalent. Wouldn't it have to be able to run previous generation software in emulation for a period of years.
Yes, Arm would have to make significant performance increases. You would need a faster ARM processor than Intel ones if you want to emulate them. So in a year will Arm have a desktop cpu of emulating Intel's current sandybridge processors at a decent speed. I doubt it very much.
Yes, Arm would have to make significant performance increases. You would need a faster ARM processor than Intel ones if you want to emulate them. So in a year will Arm have a desktop cpu of emulating Intel's current sandybridge processors at a decent speed. I doubt it very much.
3CCD
Aug 11, 04:55 PM
digitalbiker thats not realistic. Figure a machine like that would cost you something around $1799
SmileyBlast!
May 4, 03:10 PM
thanks for alerting me to this. I had no idea that macrumors took up gbs of my bandwidth cap. :p
lol :)
lol :)
Spiritgreywolf
Mar 27, 04:03 PM
Every time I hear about "mobile computing" and "cloud" in the same sentence, along with the security and privacy implications, I think more of the really immediate implications as soon as I put tunes or media out in the cloud...
...money...
Bandwidth costs money. If everyone starts streaming everything they own, they'll be paying for it again and again and.... well, you get the picture.
In an unlimited bandwidth plan, I can see the allure. When I pay for blocks of data splooged through the intertubes at a premium, the less "out in the cloud" I fetch from, the better...
...money...
Bandwidth costs money. If everyone starts streaming everything they own, they'll be paying for it again and again and.... well, you get the picture.
In an unlimited bandwidth plan, I can see the allure. When I pay for blocks of data splooged through the intertubes at a premium, the less "out in the cloud" I fetch from, the better...
bhurdscu
May 6, 01:46 AM
I agree with a lot of what other people are saying. ARM designs will not be able to keep up with Intel. Intel has the performance advantage, and ARM has the power advantage right now. I see Intel moving into ARM's business before ARM can get into Intel's business.
A rumor that would be more realistic would be Apple converting the iPhone and iPad to Intel once Intel can get the power down on their chips.
A rumor that would be more realistic would be Apple converting the iPhone and iPad to Intel once Intel can get the power down on their chips.
Piggie
Apr 23, 05:28 PM
I will be honest and truthful and say for a mobile device on batteries, I'm very impressed as what the iPhone and iPad can do gaming wise.
However I will also state, and I think we all should be honest, that at the moment, Apple are bringing the games DOWN to what their hardware can do, as opposed to making Hardware so great that gaming is being pushed UP to take advantage of Apples industry leading performance.
When Apple release GTX580 beating desktops, and/or Xbox360 / PS3 beating gaming devices, I will happily bow down to them being the greatest in graphics.
But right now, they are trailing by miles due to years of neglect as they just did not have products that could compete, and their one semi attempt at a console got nowhere.
Note: I would LOVE LOVE LOVE Apple to turn this around.
They need to ditch the "Laptops on a Stand" design of the iMac for starters, but I feel they never will as they have decided they won't compete and they cannot compete in this sector of the market.
Console wise, I'm not sure they could compete against a 360 or a PS3. Let's say Apple against a PS4 or a Xbox720
Nope, can't see that happening either.
The low power/trimmed down, casual gamers games, seems to be the only area they are going for.
But Again, I would LOVE Apple to turn this around and take high end graphics seriously in their future products.
However I will also state, and I think we all should be honest, that at the moment, Apple are bringing the games DOWN to what their hardware can do, as opposed to making Hardware so great that gaming is being pushed UP to take advantage of Apples industry leading performance.
When Apple release GTX580 beating desktops, and/or Xbox360 / PS3 beating gaming devices, I will happily bow down to them being the greatest in graphics.
But right now, they are trailing by miles due to years of neglect as they just did not have products that could compete, and their one semi attempt at a console got nowhere.
Note: I would LOVE LOVE LOVE Apple to turn this around.
They need to ditch the "Laptops on a Stand" design of the iMac for starters, but I feel they never will as they have decided they won't compete and they cannot compete in this sector of the market.
Console wise, I'm not sure they could compete against a 360 or a PS3. Let's say Apple against a PS4 or a Xbox720
Nope, can't see that happening either.
The low power/trimmed down, casual gamers games, seems to be the only area they are going for.
But Again, I would LOVE Apple to turn this around and take high end graphics seriously in their future products.
BC2009
Apr 26, 04:14 PM
Boy, you are sniffing a serious amount of glue.:rolleyes: His motivation is to make brainwashed fanboys BELIEVE Apple is making the best darn tech gadgets in the world, such that Apple can make the most darn profits and he can get the biggest darn bonus. And with THAT, he is a genious.
Tony
Tony had better check the fumes in his own house. The "brainwashed fanboy" argument just keeps sounding more and more like self-deluding denial and some kind of insecurity or envy. How he could read my entire post and somehow have that sentence be the one that strikes a chord makes me think that Tony might in fact be insecure about some decision he has made. Maybe Tony is afraid that others have a different opinion than him and that somehow might diminish his opinion. Better lash out now before more people disagree -- try your best to belittle them and maybe they might agree with you instead, right? I know... accuse them of sniffing glue and being brainwashed -- that just might work..... :rolleyes:
I am truly amazed that the wider the audience becomes for Apple products the bigger the argument for "brainwashed fanboys" gets . It's really hard to have over 200 million "fanboys" and even harder to brainwash them. If Steve Jobs could in fact accomplish that then he could rule the world. I don't think he is that good of a marketer.
Apple's target audience is not the fans, fanatics, and fanboys who post on this and other websites -- its the everyday folks who just want their tech gadgets to work without them having to think about it. It just so happens that many of the tech-savvy professionals who do real work with their computers and tech devices also like the technology to just get out of the way.
When 200 million or more people feel that your expensive tech products are the ones they want to spend their money on, then you must be doing something right -- and I don't think it is some kind of Jedi mind trick.
Clearly, Jobs wants the world to think his products are the best, but I don't think it has anything to do with money -- I think he would be done by now if it was all about money -- unless he saving up to buy something really big :D. There is something more personal about it to the guy -- he is way to invested in being CEO of Apple -- its seems more than a job to him, he takes things way too personally.
Personally, I think that Apple products can be beat on specific features, but when comparing the whole product (hardware, OS, software availability, ecosystem, support, ease-of-use, and integration across product-line), they get my tech-allowance money almost every time. When somebody rises up and offers me a suite of components that work better than Apple's do together then they will likely start getting my money instead -- it wouldn't be the first time I switched platforms, but currently Apple is my platform of choice.
Tony
Tony had better check the fumes in his own house. The "brainwashed fanboy" argument just keeps sounding more and more like self-deluding denial and some kind of insecurity or envy. How he could read my entire post and somehow have that sentence be the one that strikes a chord makes me think that Tony might in fact be insecure about some decision he has made. Maybe Tony is afraid that others have a different opinion than him and that somehow might diminish his opinion. Better lash out now before more people disagree -- try your best to belittle them and maybe they might agree with you instead, right? I know... accuse them of sniffing glue and being brainwashed -- that just might work..... :rolleyes:
I am truly amazed that the wider the audience becomes for Apple products the bigger the argument for "brainwashed fanboys" gets . It's really hard to have over 200 million "fanboys" and even harder to brainwash them. If Steve Jobs could in fact accomplish that then he could rule the world. I don't think he is that good of a marketer.
Apple's target audience is not the fans, fanatics, and fanboys who post on this and other websites -- its the everyday folks who just want their tech gadgets to work without them having to think about it. It just so happens that many of the tech-savvy professionals who do real work with their computers and tech devices also like the technology to just get out of the way.
When 200 million or more people feel that your expensive tech products are the ones they want to spend their money on, then you must be doing something right -- and I don't think it is some kind of Jedi mind trick.
Clearly, Jobs wants the world to think his products are the best, but I don't think it has anything to do with money -- I think he would be done by now if it was all about money -- unless he saving up to buy something really big :D. There is something more personal about it to the guy -- he is way to invested in being CEO of Apple -- its seems more than a job to him, he takes things way too personally.
Personally, I think that Apple products can be beat on specific features, but when comparing the whole product (hardware, OS, software availability, ecosystem, support, ease-of-use, and integration across product-line), they get my tech-allowance money almost every time. When somebody rises up and offers me a suite of components that work better than Apple's do together then they will likely start getting my money instead -- it wouldn't be the first time I switched platforms, but currently Apple is my platform of choice.
jaw04005
May 7, 10:34 AM
If true, this is good news.
However, it would make sense Apple would limit the free service to iPod touch, iPhone, Mac and iPad owners. Maybe then it’ll remain ad free.
Their next step should be to purchase DropBox and replace iDisk or at least implement a faster WebDAV solution. iDisk is dog slow even on fast connections compared to other services.
Then they should up the storage limit from 20GB to 50GB and finally implement LaLa-like iTunes Web streaming.
However, it would make sense Apple would limit the free service to iPod touch, iPhone, Mac and iPad owners. Maybe then it’ll remain ad free.
Their next step should be to purchase DropBox and replace iDisk or at least implement a faster WebDAV solution. iDisk is dog slow even on fast connections compared to other services.
Then they should up the storage limit from 20GB to 50GB and finally implement LaLa-like iTunes Web streaming.
radesousa
May 6, 01:18 AM
Hell, Apple has so much cash they should buy AMD. :D
Apple can then sell CPUs to the PC manufacturers such as HP, Dell, etc. :D
Apple can then sell CPUs to the PC manufacturers such as HP, Dell, etc. :D
GregA
May 6, 03:58 AM
Why do you think, MS is making an ARM version of Windows 8? Because ARM is gona be the actual feature x68 enemy. Time will tell.
Or they want Windows phones on ARM... which they already are aren't they?.
Just like Apple put OSX on ARM 5 years ago (aka iPhone OS).
Or they want Windows phones on ARM... which they already are aren't they?.
Just like Apple put OSX on ARM 5 years ago (aka iPhone OS).
Plutonius
May 4, 04:30 PM
I'm glad we finally started moving :).
We might as well keep moving forward through the door at the end of the hallway.
We might as well keep moving forward through the door at the end of the hallway.
Tomorrow
May 3, 08:03 PM
:confused: Not progress because you'd have to relearn something?
You missed my point; it isn't progress because it's an enormous step backward. It's not the "learning something new" part, it's the "throwing away everything you already know."
Mate, what progress would ever have been made if people always held to that argument? In the 80's/90's there were probably more than a few people in the design/publishing industry saying, 'Sorry, can't switch to Macs� Got 20 years experience rubbing Letraset down and maintaining my bromide machine.'
I would see your point if switching everything to metric would actually make things more efficient, but it wouldn't. People who use Imperial units are already comfortable with it - the system already works, and isn't broken.
You missed my point; it isn't progress because it's an enormous step backward. It's not the "learning something new" part, it's the "throwing away everything you already know."
Mate, what progress would ever have been made if people always held to that argument? In the 80's/90's there were probably more than a few people in the design/publishing industry saying, 'Sorry, can't switch to Macs� Got 20 years experience rubbing Letraset down and maintaining my bromide machine.'
I would see your point if switching everything to metric would actually make things more efficient, but it wouldn't. People who use Imperial units are already comfortable with it - the system already works, and isn't broken.
milo
May 4, 03:11 PM
If I have to DL it from the App Store, I've got to download it 4 times! I don't care about paying for multiple licenses... I do care about blowing out my internet bandwidth downloading the same multi-gigabyte file 4 times.
What makes you so sure you wouldn't be able to copy the installer to your other machines? With the current app store, you don't have to re-download everything, you can copy an app over and then just have to authorize with your apple ID. Or do installs over a network (which is already possible, even wirelessly).
What makes you so sure you wouldn't be able to copy the installer to your other machines? With the current app store, you don't have to re-download everything, you can copy an app over and then just have to authorize with your apple ID. Or do installs over a network (which is already possible, even wirelessly).
lilo777
Apr 25, 11:33 AM
Even if we take SJ at his word (stupid idea, I know). The fact remains that Apple does store the database of all your moves on the phone and PC for eternity thus preserving the capability to access it any time they want. This is clearly a very bad idea any way you look at it.
Putting on SJ hat:
"You are all idiots anyways"
Sent from my iPhone
Putting on SJ hat:
"You are all idiots anyways"
Sent from my iPhone
EricNau
May 3, 09:48 PM
I don't have the time to write an exhaustive response to this magnum opus, but I'm going to leave with a few concluding points:
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
Justinf79
Apr 21, 05:38 PM
Hopefully it'll be cheaper as well... :D
baxterbrittle
Nov 22, 01:29 AM
They do know whom they're talking about right? I mean they say PC manufacturers yet palm are producing windows mobile pieces of junk. Windows mobile is the biggest piece of shite operating system - it would not be hard to come up with something a lot better (for Apple at least). And the Palm OS is very dear to my heart, but not exactly cutting edge and palm don't even own that anymore.
Palm are washed out, end of story.
Palm are washed out, end of story.
NebulaClash
Apr 25, 09:31 AM
Nothing to see here...just the unabashed evilness of Apple shining through. I'm sure Apple will 'flash the wad' to the right people and make this issue go away...sad :( We are nothing more than chattel to Apple Consumer Electronics, where we are tracked and monitored like open range livestock. This is how they view us, as THEIR herd to do with as they please.
Welcome to the future guys. :mad:
You do realize everything you said is untrue, right?
Welcome to the future guys. :mad:
You do realize everything you said is untrue, right?
BRLawyer
May 7, 12:02 PM
While I agree, MobileMe is still in my eyes the best of the bunch. That's how they get away with charging $99/year. However, if it became free, they could really talk up how great owning a Mac is because of MobileMe.
It makes sense to turn it into a free service, considering that Apple now benefits from enough network effects to have MobileMe much more as a "driver" of content and interoperability between its devices than a standalone cash cow...it will probably happen soon.
It makes sense to turn it into a free service, considering that Apple now benefits from enough network effects to have MobileMe much more as a "driver" of content and interoperability between its devices than a standalone cash cow...it will probably happen soon.
milo
Sep 11, 11:05 AM
As for the movie store...I think I remember SJ in an interview awhile back saying, while he likes the purchase model for music, movies lend themselves to the subscription model because most people only watch a movie once or twice, Star Wars geeks notwithstanding. So I think the movie store is going to be like a true movie store. If you want to buy a movie you can, but the emphasis will be more on a NetFlix type model. A $15/mo sub gets you 3 movies at a time, unlimited d/ls per mo. Alternatively, you could rent a single movie for $4, viewable for a week or so. For people who don't have time to convert a DVD to an iPod viewable format that makes sense. Buying for $15 or $10 isn't going to excite anyone I don't think.
I doubt a download service would be able to offer unlimited movie downloads, at least not for a price next to netflix. Netflix "unlimited" movies really aren't because they are limited by the speed of the post office (and artificially limited even more by Netflix if you watch too many).
I doubt a download service would be able to offer unlimited movie downloads, at least not for a price next to netflix. Netflix "unlimited" movies really aren't because they are limited by the speed of the post office (and artificially limited even more by Netflix if you watch too many).