GeekLawyer
Nov 19, 04:10 PM
TJ Maxx bought them at retail to sell in their stores.
They're definitely taking a loss. A very limited-run loss.
Earlier this week, a small number of T.J.Maxx and Marshalls stores received a very limited quantity of first quality electronic tablets that were sourced from a retailer.http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/11/19/how-to-get-on-steve-jobs-naughty-list/
They're definitely taking a loss. A very limited-run loss.
Earlier this week, a small number of T.J.Maxx and Marshalls stores received a very limited quantity of first quality electronic tablets that were sourced from a retailer.http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/11/19/how-to-get-on-steve-jobs-naughty-list/
Kaeonadai
Jul 11, 12:41 AM
I'll be getting to the mall at 5:30 (it opens at 6:00).
Cubemaster13
May 6, 09:57 PM
try them yourself and then report back with the answer
Reach9
Mar 23, 09:22 PM
Your apparent eagerness to lay blame on the victim is bizarre and highly questionable.
I'm not blaming woman for being raped, don't get me wrong. In fact i know that a lot of times it doesn't matter what the attire is.
I'm just saying that it increases your chances of getting raped if you're wearing inviting gear. (If the rapist has a sexual desire [that's what i'm talking about])
It's like showing off your Rolex watch while walking by a dangerous area known for robbery and crime.
Should you be robbed? No. But mother always said not to walk around showing off your latest bling in dangerous places. That's the point i meant to make, rape is horrible and a disgusting crime. Don't get me wrong, i don't blame the victim.
Why is dressing provocatively stupid? That's one of the many freedoms women enjoy in the western world, and i enjoy looking at them dressed that way. But I'm not gonna go and rape them. What you're saying confirms Muslim countries justification for sharia law. And I also find it insulting to males, because it says that if a women dresses provocatively then we have no self control and will rape them.
Good for you. You're right, it's a free country, and I love it for being so. I like to keep hold of my morals and I enjoy women who have values, dignity and self respect.
A woman dressing provocatively heightens the chances of assault, that's all i'm saying. I'm not saying that men should rape women who dress provocatively, don't get me wrong.
If you don't think that women who dress provocatively get more attention from men, then it's pointless to continue the discussion.
Sharia Law is just some stupid extremist ideology, i'm not even going to go there.
Good for you to have control, it's not only about controlling themselves, some are stalking women in inviting circumstances. I've seen it myself.
The point is that you have a reasonable expectation of safety regardless of decisions.
Placing more and more responsibility on the victims is a slippery slope.
Today its "don't walk down that street" tomorrow its "what were you doing outside without your gun and bullet proof vest".
No matter the poor nature of one's decision they do not deserve to be raped or murdered. And responsibility for the event belongs solely to the perpetrator.
Agreed. I never said it was, and i never will, rape is absolutely terrible. I understand that a person has a reasonable expectation of safety, I'm just saying that wearing provocative outfit will increase the chances of assault. Is that right? No, but i've seen it myself along with some of my friends victimized numerous times.
It's sad how the world works.
I think the difference is that there are certain situations where i feel that both parties are at fault for the concluding action that was taken place.
For example, if a woman decides to wear provocative clothing and acts accordingly at a bar and then gets assaulted by a drunk man, which afterwards she claims as rape, then i'll be looking into both parties.
Nobody deserves to get raped or murdered, i'm not saying anything like that.
I'm not blaming woman for being raped, don't get me wrong. In fact i know that a lot of times it doesn't matter what the attire is.
I'm just saying that it increases your chances of getting raped if you're wearing inviting gear. (If the rapist has a sexual desire [that's what i'm talking about])
It's like showing off your Rolex watch while walking by a dangerous area known for robbery and crime.
Should you be robbed? No. But mother always said not to walk around showing off your latest bling in dangerous places. That's the point i meant to make, rape is horrible and a disgusting crime. Don't get me wrong, i don't blame the victim.
Why is dressing provocatively stupid? That's one of the many freedoms women enjoy in the western world, and i enjoy looking at them dressed that way. But I'm not gonna go and rape them. What you're saying confirms Muslim countries justification for sharia law. And I also find it insulting to males, because it says that if a women dresses provocatively then we have no self control and will rape them.
Good for you. You're right, it's a free country, and I love it for being so. I like to keep hold of my morals and I enjoy women who have values, dignity and self respect.
A woman dressing provocatively heightens the chances of assault, that's all i'm saying. I'm not saying that men should rape women who dress provocatively, don't get me wrong.
If you don't think that women who dress provocatively get more attention from men, then it's pointless to continue the discussion.
Sharia Law is just some stupid extremist ideology, i'm not even going to go there.
Good for you to have control, it's not only about controlling themselves, some are stalking women in inviting circumstances. I've seen it myself.
The point is that you have a reasonable expectation of safety regardless of decisions.
Placing more and more responsibility on the victims is a slippery slope.
Today its "don't walk down that street" tomorrow its "what were you doing outside without your gun and bullet proof vest".
No matter the poor nature of one's decision they do not deserve to be raped or murdered. And responsibility for the event belongs solely to the perpetrator.
Agreed. I never said it was, and i never will, rape is absolutely terrible. I understand that a person has a reasonable expectation of safety, I'm just saying that wearing provocative outfit will increase the chances of assault. Is that right? No, but i've seen it myself along with some of my friends victimized numerous times.
It's sad how the world works.
I think the difference is that there are certain situations where i feel that both parties are at fault for the concluding action that was taken place.
For example, if a woman decides to wear provocative clothing and acts accordingly at a bar and then gets assaulted by a drunk man, which afterwards she claims as rape, then i'll be looking into both parties.
Nobody deserves to get raped or murdered, i'm not saying anything like that.
Dimwhit
Apr 30, 07:14 PM
I like Castle for the new service. The whole Castle in the Cloud theme. It works.
kretzy
Dec 23, 06:42 AM
That's great!...a summary of Windows in one little avartar!:p
Thunderhawks
Apr 13, 11:33 AM
Can you guys answer 1 question for me?
When the next iPhone does come out how will iPhone 4 Verizon customers be able to upgrade? Do you think that Verizon and AT&T will work out an early upgrade for them?
Or do you think people who want the iPhone on Verizon will have already waited for the 5.
Once your contract is up you are probably ready for iphone 6.
In the meantime, penalty for earlier upgrade would be my guess.
................BUT 2 years is a lot of time for technology in the cellular field.
By then there may be a whole new way of doing that business out there.
Apple could become a player in that field like Skype. They can do it via ichat, face time or itunes or mobile me.
Maybe in the future we don't need cellphone providers, just data access companies. A wifi network all over the country may do.
Their North Carolina facility is only starting up........
When the next iPhone does come out how will iPhone 4 Verizon customers be able to upgrade? Do you think that Verizon and AT&T will work out an early upgrade for them?
Or do you think people who want the iPhone on Verizon will have already waited for the 5.
Once your contract is up you are probably ready for iphone 6.
In the meantime, penalty for earlier upgrade would be my guess.
................BUT 2 years is a lot of time for technology in the cellular field.
By then there may be a whole new way of doing that business out there.
Apple could become a player in that field like Skype. They can do it via ichat, face time or itunes or mobile me.
Maybe in the future we don't need cellphone providers, just data access companies. A wifi network all over the country may do.
Their North Carolina facility is only starting up........
R94N
Oct 2, 10:08 AM
You have mail
LOL I'll say! Almost as much mail as Leo Laporte gets whilst he's doing iPad Today :D
LOL I'll say! Almost as much mail as Leo Laporte gets whilst he's doing iPad Today :D
oban14
Apr 29, 12:17 AM
What do you expect?
1) Most people (AT&T and Verizon) are locked into contracts.
2) When the Verizon iPhone debuted in February, we were all expecting the iPhone 5 in 4-6 months. Why get locked into an iPhone 4 when the 5 was just a few months away?
If there were no contracts and the iPhone4 had debuted on both carriers at the same time, it would have gone very differently.
1) Most people (AT&T and Verizon) are locked into contracts.
2) When the Verizon iPhone debuted in February, we were all expecting the iPhone 5 in 4-6 months. Why get locked into an iPhone 4 when the 5 was just a few months away?
If there were no contracts and the iPhone4 had debuted on both carriers at the same time, it would have gone very differently.
bruinsrme
Apr 15, 08:51 PM
I don't care for Kobe but when your body is producing adrenaline and endorphins your behavior changes. Very common in basketball and football
to hear every possible slur imaginable.
Exactly!
Heck I have said some crap to good friends of mine on the ice and they have said some crap to me. Even at my level of play there's emotion that sometimes gets the better of us.
to hear every possible slur imaginable.
Exactly!
Heck I have said some crap to good friends of mine on the ice and they have said some crap to me. Even at my level of play there's emotion that sometimes gets the better of us.
ViciousShadow21
Oct 4, 10:00 AM
Speaking of tv shows... so excited that Chuck is back on; hence this month's background.
thats an intense background and i really like the dock icons but how do you know which is which? and where did you get them?
thats an intense background and i really like the dock icons but how do you know which is which? and where did you get them?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 16, 06:24 PM
Yes, and they're all just bleeding heart emotional responses, and i don't buy into that crap.
On the contrary, yours is the emotional response. I once supported capital punishment. Rational reflection on the subject has changed my mind. Desiring punishment by death is either vengeful or bloodthirsty, or both, but it is not just.
On the contrary, yours is the emotional response. I once supported capital punishment. Rational reflection on the subject has changed my mind. Desiring punishment by death is either vengeful or bloodthirsty, or both, but it is not just.
gkarris
Nov 29, 01:24 PM
I was just over at the Universal Studios iPod tax forum ranting and raving about video amongst the people ranting and raving about audio.
Now, this news pops up about ALL the studios wanting to do something about videos....
Do I start the ranting and raving in this forum, or just wait until the whole industry implodes on itself (thank you studios and Microsoft...)?
Now, this news pops up about ALL the studios wanting to do something about videos....
Do I start the ranting and raving in this forum, or just wait until the whole industry implodes on itself (thank you studios and Microsoft...)?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 15, 05:22 PM
I wonder if there will be a critical point where enough states get rid of it so the rest follow?
I don't think so, at least not in the forseeable future. Some states will probably keep the death penalty for many, many years. Also, the federal government still uses the death penalty in certain cases, though only three people have been excecuted by the federal government since the '60s. The US military also have captial punisment on the books, though again they have not executed anyone for over 40 years.
It's interesting to note that Michigan is the only state that constitutionally forbids the death penalty - all other death penalty bans are statutory.
I don't think so, at least not in the forseeable future. Some states will probably keep the death penalty for many, many years. Also, the federal government still uses the death penalty in certain cases, though only three people have been excecuted by the federal government since the '60s. The US military also have captial punisment on the books, though again they have not executed anyone for over 40 years.
It's interesting to note that Michigan is the only state that constitutionally forbids the death penalty - all other death penalty bans are statutory.
lloydh
Mar 31, 10:10 AM
To me it looks like necessary groundwork to bring this kind of functionality to touch devices, but I hope there are people out there who can create a more intuitive interface paradigm than just having a ton of dense pop-over palettes etc.
Good to see Adobe's working on this, though.
Good to see Adobe's working on this, though.
Crazysah
Mar 29, 09:40 AM
Hello,
Where can I see my two and a half year old Sony HDR-HC7 Camcorder? I tried Craigslist but all I'm getting is people trying to scam me. I"m trying eBay at the moment but it isn't working. What do you people suggest I do? Would anyone here want it?
Crazysah
Where can I see my two and a half year old Sony HDR-HC7 Camcorder? I tried Craigslist but all I'm getting is people trying to scam me. I"m trying eBay at the moment but it isn't working. What do you people suggest I do? Would anyone here want it?
Crazysah
Kwill
Apr 28, 08:06 PM
World War Sue.
Apple has something like 200+ patents (http://www.mad4mobilephones.com/the-21-most-important-iphone-patents/562/) for the iPhone. This could get bloody when Apple responds with additional counter suits. I would pity those called for jury duty to make sense of the technical minutia. The breadth of the patent portfolios will be too detailed to battle in court. They are presented primarily as a way of saying "back off!" Ultimately, cross licensing agreements are forged.
Apple has something like 200+ patents (http://www.mad4mobilephones.com/the-21-most-important-iphone-patents/562/) for the iPhone. This could get bloody when Apple responds with additional counter suits. I would pity those called for jury duty to make sense of the technical minutia. The breadth of the patent portfolios will be too detailed to battle in court. They are presented primarily as a way of saying "back off!" Ultimately, cross licensing agreements are forged.
appleguy123
May 5, 07:15 PM
BTO=build to order
tropicoola
Oct 14, 05:22 PM
http://uppix.net/6/e/3/eeb5d6b2468b2593fe93d8072e344tt.jpg (http://uppix.net/6/e/3/eeb5d6b2468b2593fe93d8072e344.html)
Sankersizzle
Oct 9, 06:45 PM
That's not the same Miranda Kerr who's father is Jim Kerr of Simple Minds is it? I read he had a daughter who was into acting or modeling or something, but never looked it up.
I just did some research, and alas, I don't think they are related. Also check yo' pm's!
I just did some research, and alas, I don't think they are related. Also check yo' pm's!
unispherephoto
Mar 20, 10:46 PM
i think i saw somewhere the other day that apple will begin select authorization of apps made for ipod. is this true? any word on what these apps might be or how long before we get them?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 15, 04:50 PM
It might get extra support on fiscal grounds, if moral fence-sitters on the issue find the financial arguments against capital punishment attractive in the current environment.
JDB1983
Dec 28, 12:38 PM
yeah, sure. Because all of those business/enterprise applications written exclusively for windows run ah-so smoothly on macs...
Just accept it, folks: There is no business case for using macs in an enterprise environment.
Compatibility? Fail. (there is a world beyond the microsoft .doc format where enterprise applications live. There's old java, and many java apps require a very specific oracle jvm to run. There's .net. There's sharepoint. There's an ibm mainframe you need to talk to. There are department printers that have no os x drivers. There's a long list of office equipment that only plays well with windows.)
enterprise-ready? Fail. See compatibility, see support, see backup.
Central administration? Fail. Try applying group policies to a mac.
Central backup? Fail. No, time machine is not an enterprise solution.
Tco? Fail. Expensive hardware, short-lived platform support.
Enterprise-support from the manufacturer (apple)? Huge fail.
Roadmaps? Fail. Apple doesn't even know what the word means. You just cannot plan with this company and their products.
Product longevity? Knock-out fail. (try getting support for os x leopard in two years from now. Try getting support for tiger or panther today. Then compare it to windows xp, an os from the year that will be officially supported until 2014. Then make your strategic choice and tell me with a straight face that you want to bet your money on cupertino toys.)
it's much easier to integrate linux desktops into an enterprise environment than it is to put mac os x boxes in there. Why? Because some "blue chip" companies like oracle and ibm actually use, sell and support linux and make sure that it can be used in an enterprise environment.
Trying to push a home user/consumer platform like the mac into a corporate environment is a very bad idea. Especially if the company behind the product recently even announced that they dropped their entire server hardware because nobody wanted them. Why should the head of a large it department trust a company that just dropped their only product that was even remotely targeted at the enterprise market? It's like asking a cto to bet the company's it future on nintendo wiis.
And just for your info: I've had those discussions at the world health organization of the united nations, and it turned out to be impossible to integrate macs into their it environment. I had the only mac (a 20" core duo) in a world wide network because i was able to talk someone higher up the ladder into approving the purchase order for it, but then i quickly had to give up on os x and instead run windows on it in order to get my job as an it admin done and be able to use the it resources of the other who centers. Os x tiger totally sucked in our network for almost all of the above reasons, but windows vista and xp got the job done perfectly. It wasn't very persuasive to show off a mac that only runs windows. That's what you get for being an apple fanboy, which i admittedly was at that time.
Where i work now, two other people bought macs, and one of them has ordered windows 7 yesterday and wants me to wipe out os x from his hard disk and replace it with windows. He's an engineer and not productive with os x, rather the opposite: Os x slows him down and doesn't provide any value to him.
And personally, after more than five years in apple land, i will now also move away from os x. It's a consumer platform that's only there to lock people into the apple hardware and their itunes store. If the web browser and itunes and maybe final cut studio, logic studio or the adobe creative suites are the only pieces of software that you need to be happy, then os x probably is okay for you. For everything else, it quickly becomes a very expensive trap or just a disappointment. When apple brag about how cool it is to run windows in "boot camp" or a virtualization software, then this rather demonstrates the shortcomings of the mac platform instead of its strengths. I can also run windows in virtualbox on linux. But why is this an advantage? Where's the sense in dividing my hardware resources to support two operating systems to get one job done? What's the rationalization for that? There is none. It just shows that the mac still is not a full computing platform without microsoft products. And that is the ultimate case against migrating to mac os x.
qft
Just accept it, folks: There is no business case for using macs in an enterprise environment.
Compatibility? Fail. (there is a world beyond the microsoft .doc format where enterprise applications live. There's old java, and many java apps require a very specific oracle jvm to run. There's .net. There's sharepoint. There's an ibm mainframe you need to talk to. There are department printers that have no os x drivers. There's a long list of office equipment that only plays well with windows.)
enterprise-ready? Fail. See compatibility, see support, see backup.
Central administration? Fail. Try applying group policies to a mac.
Central backup? Fail. No, time machine is not an enterprise solution.
Tco? Fail. Expensive hardware, short-lived platform support.
Enterprise-support from the manufacturer (apple)? Huge fail.
Roadmaps? Fail. Apple doesn't even know what the word means. You just cannot plan with this company and their products.
Product longevity? Knock-out fail. (try getting support for os x leopard in two years from now. Try getting support for tiger or panther today. Then compare it to windows xp, an os from the year that will be officially supported until 2014. Then make your strategic choice and tell me with a straight face that you want to bet your money on cupertino toys.)
it's much easier to integrate linux desktops into an enterprise environment than it is to put mac os x boxes in there. Why? Because some "blue chip" companies like oracle and ibm actually use, sell and support linux and make sure that it can be used in an enterprise environment.
Trying to push a home user/consumer platform like the mac into a corporate environment is a very bad idea. Especially if the company behind the product recently even announced that they dropped their entire server hardware because nobody wanted them. Why should the head of a large it department trust a company that just dropped their only product that was even remotely targeted at the enterprise market? It's like asking a cto to bet the company's it future on nintendo wiis.
And just for your info: I've had those discussions at the world health organization of the united nations, and it turned out to be impossible to integrate macs into their it environment. I had the only mac (a 20" core duo) in a world wide network because i was able to talk someone higher up the ladder into approving the purchase order for it, but then i quickly had to give up on os x and instead run windows on it in order to get my job as an it admin done and be able to use the it resources of the other who centers. Os x tiger totally sucked in our network for almost all of the above reasons, but windows vista and xp got the job done perfectly. It wasn't very persuasive to show off a mac that only runs windows. That's what you get for being an apple fanboy, which i admittedly was at that time.
Where i work now, two other people bought macs, and one of them has ordered windows 7 yesterday and wants me to wipe out os x from his hard disk and replace it with windows. He's an engineer and not productive with os x, rather the opposite: Os x slows him down and doesn't provide any value to him.
And personally, after more than five years in apple land, i will now also move away from os x. It's a consumer platform that's only there to lock people into the apple hardware and their itunes store. If the web browser and itunes and maybe final cut studio, logic studio or the adobe creative suites are the only pieces of software that you need to be happy, then os x probably is okay for you. For everything else, it quickly becomes a very expensive trap or just a disappointment. When apple brag about how cool it is to run windows in "boot camp" or a virtualization software, then this rather demonstrates the shortcomings of the mac platform instead of its strengths. I can also run windows in virtualbox on linux. But why is this an advantage? Where's the sense in dividing my hardware resources to support two operating systems to get one job done? What's the rationalization for that? There is none. It just shows that the mac still is not a full computing platform without microsoft products. And that is the ultimate case against migrating to mac os x.
qft
braddouglass
Apr 6, 03:39 PM
Wrong;
1 petabyte = 1*048*576 gigabytes
Google it
So I googled it. and It says. 1 PB is 1000 TB sooooo. Wrong?
1 petabyte = 1*048*576 gigabytes
Google it
So I googled it. and It says. 1 PB is 1000 TB sooooo. Wrong?
