Powered by Blogger.

lung cancer ribbon

Sunday, May 22, 2011

lung cancer ribbon. white awareness ribbon pin
  • white awareness ribbon pin

  • THX1139
    Jul 12, 04:50 PM
    we are not saying conroe is crap it just is not suitable for a mac pro.

    This thread is getting too funny. Apple has been so far behind on power these past few years and now we get the chance to use Conroe, and suddenly that's not good enough for the Mac snobs. Conroe is an extremely fast chip (especially compared to G5), so I don't get why some people think it's a bad choice for the pro-line up. Sure, it can't do smp, but not everyone needs or want to pay for quad processing.

    So, aside from the ability to do multiple processing, what advantages does Woodcrest have that make it mandatory to go in the pro-line? How much "faster" is it going to be over the Conroe? It's my understanding that they are identical in that respect.

    lung cancer ribbon. After all, lung cancer kills
  • After all, lung cancer kills

  • Huntn
    Mar 14, 02:16 PM
    You need to separate capacity from demand. Capacity is just the maximum power a station can theoretically produce. In practice, most of these renewable stations never reach that max. I've checked the stats at my utility's wind farm and that thing is usually around 9% of capacity. Considering a wind farm costs 4 times as much money as a natural gas generator to build for the same capacity, efficiency-wise, the station is a joke.

    What's more important is demand - being able to produce enough energy when we need it. This is where solar and wind fall short. They don't generate when we want them to, they only generate when mother nature wants them to. It would be fine if grid energy storage (IE batteries) technology was developed enough to be able to store enough energy to power a service area through an entire winter (in the case of solar). But last I checked, current grid energy storage batteries can only store a charge for 8-12 hours before they start losing charge on their own. They're also the size of buildings, fail after 10 years, and cost a ton of money.

    This is why a lot of utilities have gone to nuclear to replace coal and why here in the US, we still rely on coal to provide roughly 50% of our electricity and most of our base load. There are few options.

    It would require a multi-tiered approach. We have abundant coal which I believe can be made to burn cleanly although I'm not necessarily advocating that. And none of these sources if they break down (except nuclear) threaten huge geographical areas with basically permanent radioactivity. In case of worst case accidents, it could be plowed under but we'd still have substantial problems. The thing about nuclear power if it was perfect it would be a great power source, but it is far from perfect and the most dangerous.

    lung cancer ribbon. With God Cross Lung Cancer
  • With God Cross Lung Cancer

  • Capt Underpants
    Jul 12, 12:08 AM
    Hate to say I told you so (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=2559135#post2559135) ;)

    Oded S.

    I'm sticking to my belief that the iMacs will get Merom.

    We'll soon see...

    lung cancer ribbon. breast cancer ribbon vector
  • breast cancer ribbon vector

  • quigleybc
    Sep 20, 11:50 AM
    it will not replace my 4 year old xbox. Which itself has a 120Gig drive and a remote.

    What do you do with your Xbox that would been relevant to watching videos on your TV?

    Can you load Vids onto the Xbox HD and play them??

    lung cancer ribbon. cancer ribbon clip art. for
  • cancer ribbon clip art. for

  • Sm0kejaguar
    Oct 26, 10:56 AM
    After much debate and anguish i finally decided to order my Mac Pro yesterday... figures this would come up now.... /sigh. I am assuming they will only add a higher end config, but honestley... do any of us know?

    lung cancer ribbon. Free Breast Cancer Ribbon
  • Free Breast Cancer Ribbon

  • Gelfin
    Mar 27, 10:45 PM
    Dr. Spitzer is an intelligent, nonreligious psychiatrist who believes that some can change their sexual orientations.

    You just quoted me as saying something I did not say. Please correct it.

    lung cancer ribbon. life against lung cancer
  • life against lung cancer

  • pdjudd
    Oct 7, 11:24 PM
    I'm sorry OSX market share would most definitely go up. From a business perspective though it would would be a terrible move, you are right about that. Profits would drop as Apple would get next to nothing from the sale of software only. The market share of OSX would drop once Apple went bankrupt.

    Which is kinda the point. Short term improvements are meaningless if they go right back down. I don;t contend that they would go up, but the whole point of increasing sales is to hope that they stay up. Otherwise it�s just a waste of time. You can;t just say �market share will go up�. Their market share goes up the minute a Mac gets sold. We have to look at the long run which you point out, will invariably go down and possibly lower than the base. A net loss kinda contradicts the idea of increased market share.

    But this is all conjecture since Apple has already indicated that they are not playing the market share game.

    [QUOTE]Allowing greater access to your product almost always leads to larger sales volumes, but it isn't always in your best interest.
    Of course that statement is true. But does that require Apple to license their hardware out to others? I argue that it�s not the case. Taking the MS approach fundamentally changes Apple�s business. They don�t have to do that. Of course the Grueber article covers that too. There are tones of ways to increase access to your product. The tough part is making it profitable. Both Microsoft and Apple accomplish that goal just fine without getting into a fight that results in a bad outcome for Apple or MS.

    lung cancer ribbon. life against lung cancer
  • life against lung cancer

  • TennisandMusic
    Apr 21, 02:46 PM
    I own 3 macs and 5 advices. I have a PhD in electrical engineering and designed microprocessors for 14 years, including microprocessors used in many PCs. I've written millions of lines of source code in C, assembler, C++, etc.

    And most of the folks I know who use Linux or solaris all day at work to design chips use macs at home and carry iPhones. I don't know a single one of them who uses an android phone (many carry blackberries however).

    Just out of curiosity, why do you suppose that is? The *NIX family? Or something else? I'd like to hear your perspective.

    lung cancer ribbon. Kidney+cancer+ribbon+
  • Kidney+cancer+ribbon+

  • AidenShaw
    Jul 13, 07:07 AM
    it depends whether you are looking at it from software-perspective or hardware-perspective.
    Actually, it looks the same from both perspectives.

    Yonah, Conroe and Merom have full hardware SMP support on the package (or on the chip itself).

    The cache coherency and inter-processor (in this case meaning inter-core) communications features are present, and must be present in order to avoid corrupting memory data and to support an SMP operating system.

    The difference with Woodcrest is that Yonah/Conroe/Merom do not support SMP features *between* sockets - the cache coherency and IPC mechanisms are not brought out to the pins on the package.

    Woodcrest brings those signals out to the pins, and the Woodcrest's 5000x chipset connects those signals between sockets.

    lung cancer ribbon. cancer ribbon tattoo ideas
  • cancer ribbon tattoo ideas

  • ArcaneDevice
    Apr 6, 03:09 PM
    Navigation on a Mac is far faster.

    If you know what you are doing.

    Every folder can be moved to any visible location in the finder even if it's just in the file path.

    Keyboard commands and shortcuts from OS 9 still apply. Everything can be navigated by CMD and cursors, dragging folders into dialog boxes opens the location in other apps, panel navigation is infinitely superior to the Explorer tree, CMD and clicking on a window title gives you instant path hierarchy, double-click still minimizes, you can drop any folder into the dock to provide access to anything you want to put in there, files can be viewed without opening the application, option and clicking on a folder arrow in list view opens all folder contents in list view, option and close closes all windows on screen ...

    there are hundreds of tricks and shortcuts that can be found to navigate the Finder that Windows 7 still hasn't come around to yet. Switchers need to pick up a book otherwise the flexibility of the Finder will not be unlocked.

    One of the basic failings of Windows is that even if you can see the location that doesn't mean you can interact with it.

    lung cancer ribbon. Ovarian Cancer Ribbon
  • Ovarian Cancer Ribbon

  • matticus008
    Mar 21, 02:45 AM
    Where are you seeing a difference between digital copyrights and any other kind of copyright in U.S. law? There is no such difference, and current law and current case law says that purchases of copyrighted works are in fact purchases. They are not licenses.

    They are purchases of usage rights, not of ownership of the intellectual property contained therein. Review the cases more carefully. If you don't want to call it a license, fine. But it's not ownership of the song. It's ownership of your limited-use copy of that song.

    No, you've got it in reverse. The Supreme Court of the United States specifically said that anything not disallowed is allowed. That was (among other places) the betamax case that I referenced.

    You seem to be conflating the DMCA with copyright. The DMCA is not about copyright. It's about breaking digital restrictions. The DMCA did not turn purchases into licenses. Things that were purchases before the DMCA are still purchases today.
    Yes, the Supreme Court said that, but in reference to all laws, not just copyright laws. Anything not forbidden by law is permissable. What this does is break other laws, as well as the distribution component of the copyright law. The DMCA is about digital copyright law, whether it has other purposes or not. It governs your rights with regard to copyrighted digital works. Your purchase of the CD did not and still does not give you ownership of the digital content of that CD, only ownership of the physical disc itself.

    This is a poor analogy. The real analogy would be that you have purchased the car, but now law requires that you not open the door without permission from the manufacturer.

    When you rent a car, the rental agency can at any time require that you return the car and stop using it. The iTunes music store has no right to do this. CD manufacturers have no right to do this.

    Not true. If you misuse your copy of any copyrighted work, you can be required to surrender your copy of the work and desist immediately. The law does not require you to do anything special with material you OWN. But you don't own the music. The analogy stands.

    Music purchases were purchases before the DMCA and they are purchases after the DMCA. There are more restrictions after the DMCA, but the restrictions are placed on the locks, not on what is behind the locks. The music that you bought is still yours; but you aren't allowed to open the locks.
    Exactly right about the restrictions placed on the locks, but exactly wrong about the content behind them. You did not own it before the DMCA, and you do not own it now.

    Your analogy with "so that anyone can use it" also misrepresents the DMCA: the better analogy is that you can't even open the locks so that *you* can use it.
    No, not at all. The DMCA has issues that need to be addressed, but it does not prohibit your fair use of material.

    In the sense that you have described it above, books are digital. Books can be copied with no loss and then the original sold. Books are, according to the Supreme Court, purchases, not licenses. Book manufacturers are not even allowed to place EULAs on their books and pretend that it is a license. There is no different law about music. It's all copyright.
    Again, read the court cases more carefully. You have rights to do as you please with the physical book. You do not have rights to the content of the books. You never did, and the Supreme Court has never granted you this permission. With your digital file, there is nothing physical that you own and control, only the intellectual property which is owned SOLELY by the copyright holder. Books are purchases of a physical, bound paper product containing the intellectual property of another individual. The Supreme Court has supported this since the implementation of IP law in the 19th century.

    Are you claiming that playing my CDs on my iPod is illegal? The file has been modified in ways that it was not originally intended: they were uncompressed digital audio files meant for playback on a CD player. Now they're compressed digital audio played back on an iPod.
    It's not illegal by copyright law to put your unprotected music on an iPod. You are not modifying the intellectual property of the owner. You are taking it from what you own (the physical disc) and putting it on something else you own (the iPod hard disk).

    That is completely outside of what the manufacturer intended that I use that CD for. I don't believe that's illegal; the U.S. courts don't believe that it's illegal. Apple certainly doesn't believe that it's illegal. The RIAA would like it to be illegal but isn't arguing that any more. Do you believe that it is illegal?
    One more time. The copyright law governs the material, your purchase covers the disc. You can do whatever you want with the disc, but you don't have the same freedom with the data on that disc. No one is stopping you from breaking the CD or selling it or doing whatever you want. You are not allowed to take control of the intellectual property that is not yours (the songs). Show ME a case that demonstrates otherwise from the past 50 years. Older cases are not applicable, and I'm being generous with the 50 year window as well given the wealth of more recent cases, all of which support IP rights and consumer ownership of the media but not the content.

    lung cancer ribbon. Cancer Awareness Ribbon
  • Cancer Awareness Ribbon

  • appleguy123
    Mar 24, 06:56 PM
    The Catholic Church doesn't hate homosexuals

    "People are being attacked for taking positions that do not support sexual behaviour between people of the same sex," he told the current session of the Human Rights Council....

    "These attacks are violations of fundamental human rights and cannot be justified under any circumstances," Tomasi said."
    Is this not exactly what the Catholic Church has done to homosexuals? Do they not have "Fundamental human rights"?
    Sounds like hate to me.

    lung cancer ribbon. Lung+cancer+symbol+tattoos
  • Lung+cancer+symbol+tattoos

  • skunk
    Mar 14, 07:38 PM
    Did they attack your reading comprehension skills too?No, they didn't. They wouldn't dare. ;)

    lung cancer ribbon. cancer ribbon colours. stock
  • cancer ribbon colours. stock

  • camomac
    Jul 14, 02:12 PM
    ahhh, why didn't they have dual optical slots in the current G5's..
    too much heat from the PPC's and all those fans?

    well i am really looking forward to the new look.

    lung cancer ribbon. cancer ribbon designs.
  • cancer ribbon designs.

  • Cameront9
    Apr 9, 10:07 PM
    Nintendo will go out of business before they sell themselves to ANYONE. They're a proud Japanese company that's been around since 1889. They aren't going anywhere.

    lung cancer ribbon. cancer ribbon clip art.
  • cancer ribbon clip art.

  • Rt&Dzine
    Mar 24, 07:06 PM
    "When they express their moral beliefs or beliefs about human nature ... they are stigmatised, and worse -- they are vilified, and prosecuted.

    "These attacks are violations of fundamental human rights and cannot be justified under any circumstances," Tomasi said.

    As soon as they quit trying to legislate and force their beliefs on the rest of us, the sooner they will be left alone to wallow in their archaic beliefs.

    lung cancer ribbon. Cancer Ribbons Quilt
  • Cancer Ribbons Quilt

  • GGJstudios
    May 2, 04:44 PM
    trying to stick to facts...

    OSX marketshare was just shy of 50 mill
    That's Mac OS X installed base, not the installed base of Macs, as I said. Mac OS X is not the only Mac OS out there. Reading comprehension is fun!
    lol, sorry........I can't get into this but you are SO wrong its not true.
    Which means, of course, that you can't back up your claims with facts.

    there are governments around the world employing people to do this kind of thing.
    So? That has nothing to do with your baseless claims about hackers.

    lung cancer ribbon. +cancer+ribbon
  • +cancer+ribbon

  • Mattie Num Nums
    Apr 13, 09:43 AM
    Part of the reason established IT folk feel so threatened by Apple.


    OMG I almost fell out of my chair cracking up when I saw this last statement. That just goes to show just how much you DON'T know. IT professional don't feel threatened at all by Apple. Its just the opposite. After Apple dropped the Xserve and delivered us a Macbook Pro Early 2011 that requires its own special build of OSX most IT professionals are rethinking the Apple strategy all together. I know here and a lot of places are moving away from XServes into the Windows world. If you want to see real Mac IT professionals check out the JAMF Casper User Forum. Some of the brightest Mac admins in world. We are all pretty much in the same boat. Apple is making our jobs harder and making it harder for us to justify getting Macs for our customers. Thank God for a company like JAMF because Apple hasn't given any of its IT supporters tools to support the environment. Unlike lets say... Microsoft. :rolleyes: How great is it when a VP comes up to you and says we need 50 copies of X software but we can only get it from the AppStore. Apple doesn't care about the IT world or its corp. user base.

    lung cancer ribbon. In Memory Lung Cancer t-shirts
  • In Memory Lung Cancer t-shirts

  • bugfaceuk
    Apr 9, 09:26 AM
    Heh, you put "REAL" in caps. :p

    If you don't believe me, there's plenty of history to read. Just go look at the following industries that were disrupted by technology...

    May 3, 10:29 AM
    You mean running stuff like iphoto?

    PC versions of cross platform apps are typically faster, have more features than their mac counterparts. That's if there even is a version for mac. Its viable to not own a PC anymore because macs use PC hardware now and can run windows. PC users have no use for osx at all but many mac users still need to have windows

    I would dispute your claims that PC versions are faster and more feature-laden than their Mac versions. And sure, there is going to be some software for which there is no Mac counterpart. But the same can be said for the reverse. It's not like the 90s - back then this was a valid argument. Today it's a much different story; the Mac marketshare has risen to a point where it is in the best interests of software developers to create a Mac version.

    There are indeed PC versions for most everything I do on my Mac. My point was simply that it tends to be easier to do on the Mac, and much less frustrating. Having used both, I can tell you that (IMO) Macs make the work seem much less cumbersome. I enjoy creating promotional videos, for example on my Mac. Or fun videos of my kids (using iMovie - which makes it so fast and easy - and professional looking - that the kids can put on a skit at the beginning of a birthday party, and at the end of the party I can give each child a DVD of their skit to take home). Doing it on a PC is painful. Graphic design and web development is fantastic on the Mac - and just plain irritating on a PC.

    We can debate this until we're blue in the face - this is just my opinion as a heavy user of myriad applications, and I will concede that I have not tried every possible text editor out there to see if something compares to BBEdit. But I don't need to. I love my Mac - always have - and I really hate the experience on a Windows PC. But if you are as happy on your PC as I am with my Mac, I'm not going to call you names or belittle your choice. To each their own. I just take issue with the whole idea that we Mac users NEED to run Windows. We don't. Ever.

    Mar 18, 12:25 PM
    It's an interesting problem. I would bet you will find this hole in WMA stores for the same reason. Of course Jon prefers to target the source that will get him headlines.

    Agreed, Jon probably wants headlines.

    Apple will make another "good enough" fix to block it for another 6 months. But they really don't care. Although externally they "care", I bet internally it doesn't particularly bother them because ITMS is so big that the record companies can't afford to pull out of it.

    The problem is, this may not hurt Apple all that much but it will hurt the Music Download industry. With every DRM that is cracked it gives the RIAA more fuel against their "downloading is bad" campaign. Also less labels would be willing to allow iTMS to sell their music.

    Mar 14, 05:41 PM
    that could be one way to go, another would be having sun/wind farms in the middle of the ocean, to be moved out of the way when weather comes along.Haven't we screwed with the oceans long enough?

    one problem with this off-site approaches is that you still have to transfer the energy long distanceDC power lines. Edison would approve.

    Apr 15, 12:09 PM
    Right, because civil marriage is required for gays to have sex with each other. Nobody is forcing you to do anything. You can have sex with whomever you want to.

    No, civil marriage is not required for sex, but it sure is required for a whole lot of other things like protecting our kids and partners legally. I know you must think that's just horrible, but there you go.

    Right, lame jokes. Ok. Modern equivalent of female stand-up comics that used to joke about men leaving the toilet seat up.

    Real sophisticated.

    I don't think he meant it as a joke. A friend of mine got AIDS from a priest when he was under age. It's not funny.

    Apr 15, 10:44 AM
    Read before you post. One more time: READ BEFORE YOU POST.

    I'm not wound up about people having opinions that don't match with mine. What's really got me on a roll here is the fact that another poster took the freedom to JUDGE me, and LABEL me, as a self-hater. THAT is what has me irritated. I 'attacked' the media and its approach towards the issue of homosexuality. My attack was not on my own community or no one individual. Are you really having a hard time understanding that?

    I'm straight and I understand your point fine. Because you don't fit into the other gay gentlemans stereotype of "what it is to be gay to him" he labeled you a self hater, which is absurd. How hard is it to understand that?

    No comments:

    Post a Comment