motulist
Aug 7, 04:54 PM
Jobs finally delivered on his 3 Ghz promise! ;) :D :D
PBF
Apr 23, 10:01 PM
I love retinal operating systems. It's so freakin' futuristic.
pmz
Mar 28, 11:14 AM
This better not happen. Seriously.
Or else what?
Several things. Apple's stock growth will slow, and the price will take a hit. Big deal? Maybe, maybe not. But I can tell you definitively that there is a large amount of padding in the price based on Apple keeping up with it's own defined yearly cycle. The successive cycle that has stayed strict through every iPhone, iPod, iPad, and iOS launch for 5 years has created a pattern that Apple must stick to, or risk losing ground in the mind of investors.
No one ever expected/demanded Apple to go to a yearly cycle for such advanced refreshes, but they're the ones who chose to do it. If they now begin to fall behind, the growth they've seen WILL suffer, no ifs ands or buts about it.
Or else what?
Several things. Apple's stock growth will slow, and the price will take a hit. Big deal? Maybe, maybe not. But I can tell you definitively that there is a large amount of padding in the price based on Apple keeping up with it's own defined yearly cycle. The successive cycle that has stayed strict through every iPhone, iPod, iPad, and iOS launch for 5 years has created a pattern that Apple must stick to, or risk losing ground in the mind of investors.
No one ever expected/demanded Apple to go to a yearly cycle for such advanced refreshes, but they're the ones who chose to do it. If they now begin to fall behind, the growth they've seen WILL suffer, no ifs ands or buts about it.
*LTD*
Apr 5, 07:51 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
I wonder why Apple gives a hoot? This couldn't be hurting them could it?:confused:
It makes no difference. For starters, Toyota is violating the User Agreement. That in itself is grounds for immediate rejection. Second, it sends the wrong message. You want to do business with Apple, it has to be above-board. This should be obvious.
I wonder why Apple gives a hoot? This couldn't be hurting them could it?:confused:
It makes no difference. For starters, Toyota is violating the User Agreement. That in itself is grounds for immediate rejection. Second, it sends the wrong message. You want to do business with Apple, it has to be above-board. This should be obvious.
itcheroni
Apr 15, 11:25 AM
...
Latest 2011 Good Friday
famous love quotes from songs
drizzy drake quotes from
By Eminem quotes and songs for
love quotes from songs 2010.
sad love quotes 2011. love
Good Day Text Quote Animated
By Eminem quotes and songs for
good quotes from songs about
Lohri Quotes. January 13, 2011
kesha quotes from songs
good quotes from songs about
good quotes from songs about
good quotes from songs about
Don't panic
May 3, 02:09 PM
i'll go with drunken dwarf.
satkin2
Apr 20, 02:51 AM
What real difference would a larger screen make, it's half an inch at best, barely any difference.
I really can't see what could be gained from doing this, other than being in line with the competitions screen sizes. It would have an impact on the resolution and thus affect all apps.
Would increasing the screen size really enhance the product if it compromised the ecosystem upon which it is so tightly engrained in?
I really can't see what could be gained from doing this, other than being in line with the competitions screen sizes. It would have an impact on the resolution and thus affect all apps.
Would increasing the screen size really enhance the product if it compromised the ecosystem upon which it is so tightly engrained in?
rdlink
Apr 21, 09:12 PM
And how do you operate it? A server can be accessed from a workstation but a Mac Pro IS a workstation, it's not a server. It's not a logical step. I have a professional photographer in the family, with a Mac Pro. He needs to load his RAWs onto his Mac for post processing. How to do this if that Mac is in another room, in a rack :confused: Very inconvenient if you ask me.
Not sure you quite get it. The idea here would be that the one machine could be used either as a workstation, or as a server. You could use it in a SOHO situation as a workstation/under the desk server. An enterprise could configure it as a rack mounted server. One assembly line. Two products.
Not sure you quite get it. The idea here would be that the one machine could be used either as a workstation, or as a server. You could use it in a SOHO situation as a workstation/under the desk server. An enterprise could configure it as a rack mounted server. One assembly line. Two products.
rtharper
Sep 11, 01:26 AM
OK, honestly, I just don't get this. I don't see how a Core 2 Duo laptop right now is going to be so much more 'future proof' than a Core Duo laptop. Are you anticipating some time in the near future where everyone with Core Duo laptops is going to find that no-one is making *nix for 32-bit processors or something?
No, but the thermal efficiency and performance bump are not trivial issues to me if I'm going to spend near 3,000USD on something. I'm also praying for a graphics bump, which is VERY important for futureproofing.
I mean, really now. What are you doing in *nix that a Core Duo based laptop is going to be so much less future proof than a Core 2 Duo laptop?
Ever done graphics work or gaming on a laptop? Unfortunately, I need a notebook, and I can afford one machine. Therefore, I wouldn't mind some of the enhancements that may come with the Merom update.
I don't see why you wouldn't just go ahead and order a Core 2 Duo PC laptop then now and get one soon. The only reason to get a MBP is if you specifically need to run OS X, but if the lack of Core 2 Duo is enough to make you just as happy to get a PC laptop and run Windows and FreeBSD on it, why in the world are you waiting for a MBP? It can't be that important to you if the Core Duo vs. Core 2 Duo issue is the "dealbreaker".
It wouldn't make me happy; it would fulfill my needs of a laptop. Apple OS is damned good for everything, and much faster than X11 under FreeBSD, for example. I've been trying to chuck windows forever but am dependent on it for a few apps that happen to run on OSX as well, but not other *nix platforms. Dual booting would suck. Plus, the form factor is nice.
Unfortunately, I don't have all year to wait. I have the need for a new laptop as my current laptop is rather ag�d and out of warrantly, and having my sole machine fail as Dell machines seem to be so wont to do is not something I'm looking forward to with out a replacement.
No, but the thermal efficiency and performance bump are not trivial issues to me if I'm going to spend near 3,000USD on something. I'm also praying for a graphics bump, which is VERY important for futureproofing.
I mean, really now. What are you doing in *nix that a Core Duo based laptop is going to be so much less future proof than a Core 2 Duo laptop?
Ever done graphics work or gaming on a laptop? Unfortunately, I need a notebook, and I can afford one machine. Therefore, I wouldn't mind some of the enhancements that may come with the Merom update.
I don't see why you wouldn't just go ahead and order a Core 2 Duo PC laptop then now and get one soon. The only reason to get a MBP is if you specifically need to run OS X, but if the lack of Core 2 Duo is enough to make you just as happy to get a PC laptop and run Windows and FreeBSD on it, why in the world are you waiting for a MBP? It can't be that important to you if the Core Duo vs. Core 2 Duo issue is the "dealbreaker".
It wouldn't make me happy; it would fulfill my needs of a laptop. Apple OS is damned good for everything, and much faster than X11 under FreeBSD, for example. I've been trying to chuck windows forever but am dependent on it for a few apps that happen to run on OSX as well, but not other *nix platforms. Dual booting would suck. Plus, the form factor is nice.
Unfortunately, I don't have all year to wait. I have the need for a new laptop as my current laptop is rather ag�d and out of warrantly, and having my sole machine fail as Dell machines seem to be so wont to do is not something I'm looking forward to with out a replacement.
FluJunkie
Apr 22, 01:08 AM
And how do you operate it? A server can be accessed from a workstation but a Mac Pro IS a workstation, it's not a server. It's not a logical step. I have a professional photographer in the family, with a Mac Pro. He needs to load his RAWs onto his Mac for post processing. How to do this if that Mac is in another room, in a rack :confused: Very inconvenient if you ask me.
It is trivial, in say my case, to SSH into a "workstation" type Mac Pro, say "Noble Mac Pro, run this really computational intensive code, I'll check back in a bit" and then SSH the output back to another machine when it's done. No muss, no fuss.
Now imagine you have bunches of workstations...
It is trivial, in say my case, to SSH into a "workstation" type Mac Pro, say "Noble Mac Pro, run this really computational intensive code, I'll check back in a bit" and then SSH the output back to another machine when it's done. No muss, no fuss.
Now imagine you have bunches of workstations...
MrWinters
May 4, 05:15 PM
they're probably make it that if your hard drive dies, you need to go to the apple store and have them do it. If you don't have apple care, or if ran out, lol enjoy their high prices.
.
qft
.
qft
heisetax
Aug 4, 09:09 AM
Isn't that what Rosetta is for :p :D
Hardly Apple's fault. Apple has managed to transition all it's apps - Adobe is certainly dragging their collective feet.
Maybe you should blame AMD. They outdid Intel by increasing their % of the market. This put pressure on Intel to release their Core duo, Core 2 duo & Xeon 5100 6 months to a year or so early. This made Apple bring out their new Intel Macs much earlier than expected.
Because of the amount of work involved & the original Intel/Apple schedule, Adobe made the plan to skip the UB for CS2 & just make it part of CS3. This was to be on the same timetable as the original Intel Mac changes. They weere just too far into their schedule to make such large changes for a 6 month - year time.
MicroSoft just has a lot of problems doing upgrades. Virtual PC 7 was 6-9 months late. They quietly admitted that the programming was much harder than they thought it would be. That reason adds to the problem that the new version of MS Office also is changing to an XML file format for all of their programs. This means twice the trouble for MS. MS Office for Windows is usually a year ahead of the Mac MS Office upgrades. That means that if MS brings out their new Mac MS Office program in 2007 they will be the same year as MS Office for Windows. This actually means that the Mac MS Office program would be coming out a year ahead of schedule, not a year behind the schedule that many Intel Mac people believe shuld be the case. Also MS in my opinion has said that they will have 2 veersion of Office for the Mac, one PPC only & the other Intel Mac only. It just seems like they have said that they will have no UB for MS Office. This double programming may takke loner. It also will probably mean that the PPC Mac will not have as good of product upgrading/changes.
In another year the most of the software will be ready for the Intel Mac. By that time we may be seeing the 3rd group of Intel Macs, 4 or 5 if they keep up with the Intel/AMD Windows world.
Bill the TaxMan
Hardly Apple's fault. Apple has managed to transition all it's apps - Adobe is certainly dragging their collective feet.
Maybe you should blame AMD. They outdid Intel by increasing their % of the market. This put pressure on Intel to release their Core duo, Core 2 duo & Xeon 5100 6 months to a year or so early. This made Apple bring out their new Intel Macs much earlier than expected.
Because of the amount of work involved & the original Intel/Apple schedule, Adobe made the plan to skip the UB for CS2 & just make it part of CS3. This was to be on the same timetable as the original Intel Mac changes. They weere just too far into their schedule to make such large changes for a 6 month - year time.
MicroSoft just has a lot of problems doing upgrades. Virtual PC 7 was 6-9 months late. They quietly admitted that the programming was much harder than they thought it would be. That reason adds to the problem that the new version of MS Office also is changing to an XML file format for all of their programs. This means twice the trouble for MS. MS Office for Windows is usually a year ahead of the Mac MS Office upgrades. That means that if MS brings out their new Mac MS Office program in 2007 they will be the same year as MS Office for Windows. This actually means that the Mac MS Office program would be coming out a year ahead of schedule, not a year behind the schedule that many Intel Mac people believe shuld be the case. Also MS in my opinion has said that they will have 2 veersion of Office for the Mac, one PPC only & the other Intel Mac only. It just seems like they have said that they will have no UB for MS Office. This double programming may takke loner. It also will probably mean that the PPC Mac will not have as good of product upgrading/changes.
In another year the most of the software will be ready for the Intel Mac. By that time we may be seeing the 3rd group of Intel Macs, 4 or 5 if they keep up with the Intel/AMD Windows world.
Bill the TaxMan
DudeDad
Mar 29, 10:48 AM
For any of these cloud-based services, what is the streaming bit-rate/SQ? What if you don't have a signal?
I have concerns about the agreement with Amazon, as other posters have wisely pointed out....I'm sure Apple's will be similar, if not better....time will tell...
I have concerns about the agreement with Amazon, as other posters have wisely pointed out....I'm sure Apple's will be similar, if not better....time will tell...
p0intblank
Sep 11, 11:57 AM
The only things comin out are the Video Rental service, and a size increase for the Nano.
Move along.
I have to disagree. What makes you think Apple is going to go with only a video rental service? Apple is all about wanting their users being able to "own" content, not borrow it. If anything, they'll go the route of Amazon and allow the user to choose to either own or rent it.
And size increase for the iPod nano sounds very likely, but I expect Apple to do something with the 5G iPod also. Whether it's increase storage capacities or a true fullscreen model, anything works for me.
Move along.
I have to disagree. What makes you think Apple is going to go with only a video rental service? Apple is all about wanting their users being able to "own" content, not borrow it. If anything, they'll go the route of Amazon and allow the user to choose to either own or rent it.
And size increase for the iPod nano sounds very likely, but I expect Apple to do something with the 5G iPod also. Whether it's increase storage capacities or a true fullscreen model, anything works for me.
clibinarius
Mar 29, 02:54 PM
The batteries of note are probably for the nano/shuffle, not the touch. Hence why the supply isn't a problem yet with the iphones.
Try to remember, people who post these things, there's several types of ipods.
Try to remember, people who post these things, there's several types of ipods.
CellarDoor
Aug 4, 02:08 PM
maybe, but we don't have that yet
sure we do. Developer Tools for example. also there are more 64 bit 3rd party apps out there, that I dont feel like looking up right now.
however, your right, consumer apps are primarily 32 bit, and os x apps like ical, mail etc, wont go 64 bit until leopard.
sure we do. Developer Tools for example. also there are more 64 bit 3rd party apps out there, that I dont feel like looking up right now.
however, your right, consumer apps are primarily 32 bit, and os x apps like ical, mail etc, wont go 64 bit until leopard.
Al Coholic
Mar 29, 01:09 PM
Hilarious that companies are copying Apple rumors now.Right. Like Apple invented everything.
lol.
You fanboys crack me up.
lol.
You fanboys crack me up.
LegendKillerUK
Mar 26, 10:49 PM
means nothing
people are reading too much into that slide
Saves him an email.
people are reading too much into that slide
Saves him an email.
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.
123orion
Sep 15, 05:21 PM
This (http://switchtoamac.com/site/apple-will-soon-announce-a-macbook-pro-revison-heres-why.html) an a good read on why we may see a MacBook Pro revision very soon.
Makes sense to me
Makes sense to me
guitarman777
May 8, 09:52 AM
This is easy to see
MobilMe Becomes Free
MobilMe gets laden with 1Ads
All part of the Apple strategy
I would be happy to keep paying $99/year for adfree Mobilme
I agree with that.
MobilMe Becomes Free
MobilMe gets laden with 1Ads
All part of the Apple strategy
I would be happy to keep paying $99/year for adfree Mobilme
I agree with that.
kjdenison
Jul 31, 07:07 AM
great, and i just signed up for 2 years with t-mobile. thats usually my luck. I think it would be like 200$ to cancel.. not worth it
MrCrowbar
Nov 23, 11:40 AM
You own Apple do you? My! You've kept a very low profile!
OMG STEVE IS HERE!!!
Besides that he probably is, good one geese. :p
OMG STEVE IS HERE!!!
Besides that he probably is, good one geese. :p
aswitcher
Sep 11, 12:53 AM
Dial-up. ...
And I'm in the 10th largest city in the country. My parents, who live in a little country town a long way from anywhere get quite decent broadband speeds. Go figure...:confused:
Common mate, the Gong isn't a city ;)
I get ~8000kbps so Movie downloads works for me - if the price and quality and DRM are right.
And I'm in the 10th largest city in the country. My parents, who live in a little country town a long way from anywhere get quite decent broadband speeds. Go figure...:confused:
Common mate, the Gong isn't a city ;)
I get ~8000kbps so Movie downloads works for me - if the price and quality and DRM are right.