Scottsdale
May 6, 01:02 AM
I welcome this idea. Intel is a disgusting anti-competitive company that cannot play fair. Apple is forced to use Intel's chipset and IGP instead of Nvidia which may have lead Apple to a decision like this. ARM is the future as is iOS, so like it or lump it. The low end Macs would probably have ARM and others both ARM and Intel. I would also welcome a switch to AMD.
Eidorian
Aug 11, 12:04 PM
Merom vs. Yonah Benchmarks (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808)
Cry me a river if you're using Yonah. Unless you need 64-bit or are encoding video/audio 24/7 on your laptop the gains aren't paramount.
Cry me a river if you're using Yonah. Unless you need 64-bit or are encoding video/audio 24/7 on your laptop the gains aren't paramount.
msb3079
Apr 20, 11:11 AM
No. Don't stretch to the bezel, unless the bezel is getting bigger, which is the same bloody thing as making a bigger phone. I don't want the screen at the edge of the phone, and nobody makes this, for good reason. You have to be able to hold onto something on the phone. Really.
I'm getting so sick of hearing this excuse. NO ONE holds the phone by the TINY little black glass area next to the screen (right and left in portrait orientation)... the hold it by the metal edge, which has nothing to do with how close the edge of the screen is to the edge of the phone.
So tired of this.
I'm getting so sick of hearing this excuse. NO ONE holds the phone by the TINY little black glass area next to the screen (right and left in portrait orientation)... the hold it by the metal edge, which has nothing to do with how close the edge of the screen is to the edge of the phone.
So tired of this.
Tmelon
Mar 30, 07:03 PM
So developers...
Any changes noticed yet?
Any changes noticed yet?
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 25, 10:40 AM
2. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company and can't afford to lie in public.
You're holding it wrong. Non-Issue.
You're holding it wrong. Non-Issue.
ahuman7341
Jul 29, 09:52 PM
Oh I hope for these to be false, I hate cell phones and I don't want to hate an apple product. But if they did make a phone it would require the following features.
-At least 5 megapixel camera, I'd love to minimize the amount of things in my pocket by combing my camera and my cell phone ( i hate the beast but my mother makes me carry it) but there isint a camera phone good enough to actually use to take a picture other than an imac G5 in an elevator.
- The inablilty to do "texting :) :) :) :) :) :) " although there would be an option for "texting" but if someone were to select it a dialogue would come up , "YOU ARE RETARDED, just call them." the only option would be, "get hit by a bus"
-At least 5 megapixel camera, I'd love to minimize the amount of things in my pocket by combing my camera and my cell phone ( i hate the beast but my mother makes me carry it) but there isint a camera phone good enough to actually use to take a picture other than an imac G5 in an elevator.
- The inablilty to do "texting :) :) :) :) :) :) " although there would be an option for "texting" but if someone were to select it a dialogue would come up , "YOU ARE RETARDED, just call them." the only option would be, "get hit by a bus"
BWhaler
Sep 15, 07:59 PM
I thought I could wait out the move to Intel for some time since my PowerBook is less than a year old.
But it's just not going to happen. The speed jump is simply too great.
I'm waiting at this point for the update. Painfully waiting.
I don't really care about the C2D processor, since most reviews are it is a bland chip without the Santa Rosa chip set. Better, sure enough, but not enough to care about.
But, what I really need is:
1. 160gig drive
2. Much better GPU
3. Apple to fix the quality and heat issues.
Everything else is just a nice to have in my book.
But it's just not going to happen. The speed jump is simply too great.
I'm waiting at this point for the update. Painfully waiting.
I don't really care about the C2D processor, since most reviews are it is a bland chip without the Santa Rosa chip set. Better, sure enough, but not enough to care about.
But, what I really need is:
1. 160gig drive
2. Much better GPU
3. Apple to fix the quality and heat issues.
Everything else is just a nice to have in my book.
rock6079
Nov 26, 03:15 PM
bah! how many times do we have to hear these tablet rumors! one day they will come out with a tablet and one of these rumors will be right, untill then...
goobot
Apr 7, 10:29 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
iPad 3 to be a small update like iPad 2? I wouldn't doubt it with the lack of competition.
iPad 3 to be a small update like iPad 2? I wouldn't doubt it with the lack of competition.
RazHyena
May 7, 09:46 PM
Finally, they'll be charging what the service is worth!
+1
My MobileMe email account didn't work all the time during my trial period, thankfully. Sometimes, I'd send an email from my MobileMe account and it wouldn't arrive at my receiving email account for like a day an a half.
Just too many bugs to justify the $99 price tag. :confused:
+1
My MobileMe email account didn't work all the time during my trial period, thankfully. Sometimes, I'd send an email from my MobileMe account and it wouldn't arrive at my receiving email account for like a day an a half.
Just too many bugs to justify the $99 price tag. :confused:
kalsta
May 6, 11:15 PM
I didn't say that at all.
Certain things are good for one thing but not as good for another. Basing your metrics off of water and light make a lot of sense when you have to measure a great deal of new items and compare them objectively.
On the other hand when you need metrics to be a guide through daily life and nothing else, the system that's born from daily necessity makes a lot more sense.
Daily necessity? Is measuring your foot a daily necessity? I don't get what you're trying to say here.
Some defenders of the Imperial system tell us it's handy to measure in body parts, presumably because you all have them. But what percentage of US citizens honestly have foot-long feet? Perhaps half a foot should be called a penis? (Credit to rdowns for that idea.)
The reasoning gets worse when you'd ask 311 million to make a change because a smaller community of professionals would like their standards to be the standards for all of society. It's not like the two can't coexist; there might be a good argument there if the two were incompatible, but the fact is that they're not.
Can't you concede that there is a benefit to having a single 'standard'? The two are only compatible in the sense that you can convert between them if you know the conversion factors. Every time someone has to do this, they are wasting time. Multiply that over 311 million people and you have an awful lot of wasted time!
A distinction needs to be made here: just because something is easier to multiply by 10 (or 1/10th) doesn't mean that it's easier to use. How many times in your daily life do you need to multiply by 10 �
You multiply or divide by a multiple of 10 every time you need to convert from one derivative unit to another. 'Kilo' means a multiple of 1000 over the base unit. So if I need to convert from kilometres to metres, I simply divide by 1000. Now, that happens to be very easy to do. Why? Because our whole system of counting is base 10! It's as easy as moving the decimal point three places.
� or even multiply what you measure?
It doesn't matter what operations you're doing � multiplication, division, addition, or subtraction � it's as easy as manipulating any decimal number. You never, ever have to remember odd conversion factors to convert between different units and fractions thereof.
How often does that easy arithmetic come up outside of science? Can you think of a real life example?
I do a bit of carpentry and other work around the house. From time to time I'm buying lengths of timber, so I may be multiplying a required length over the number of lengths required, or adding up different lengths. If you're a cook, no doubt there are times when the recipe serves 4 people, but you need to cook for 6 or 8 or something, so you have to multiply measurements. When I used to go swimming at my local Olympic sized pool (which is 50 metres long) it was easy to calculate how far I swam. 20 laps = 1000 metres = 1 kilometre. I mean, I could go on and on giving you everyday examples if you want me to, but I think you're capable of doing that yourself.
I don't think Tomorrow ever responded to my earlier hypothetical, so let me put the same question to you:
Okay, imagine for a moment that one of the US states wasn't using the decimal system for counting. Instead, they had a system where letters were used to designate certain amounts, similar to Roman numerals, but instead of having a base of 10, it varied. So perhaps A is equal to 12. Then three As is equal to B. Two Bs is equal to C. 22 Bs is equal to a D, and so on with this kind of inconsistency. You have a friend living in this state who claims that the system works just fine � he spent many years studying this system and even more using it in his line of work and can't see why he or anyone else in the state should have to learn this dangfangled decimal system. What would you say to your friend?
In any case, I do already have it. It's on every measuring device I have, from my ruler to my bathroom scale. I use it when it's necessary or more effective, but that's rare. Maybe you should accept that people can have a different preference.
But (1) it's not your first 'language' so to speak, so you're no doubt less comfortable with it, and (2) if no one else around you speaks the same 'language' it doesn't help you communicate with them. This is why we have 'standards'.
Certain things are good for one thing but not as good for another. Basing your metrics off of water and light make a lot of sense when you have to measure a great deal of new items and compare them objectively.
On the other hand when you need metrics to be a guide through daily life and nothing else, the system that's born from daily necessity makes a lot more sense.
Daily necessity? Is measuring your foot a daily necessity? I don't get what you're trying to say here.
Some defenders of the Imperial system tell us it's handy to measure in body parts, presumably because you all have them. But what percentage of US citizens honestly have foot-long feet? Perhaps half a foot should be called a penis? (Credit to rdowns for that idea.)
The reasoning gets worse when you'd ask 311 million to make a change because a smaller community of professionals would like their standards to be the standards for all of society. It's not like the two can't coexist; there might be a good argument there if the two were incompatible, but the fact is that they're not.
Can't you concede that there is a benefit to having a single 'standard'? The two are only compatible in the sense that you can convert between them if you know the conversion factors. Every time someone has to do this, they are wasting time. Multiply that over 311 million people and you have an awful lot of wasted time!
A distinction needs to be made here: just because something is easier to multiply by 10 (or 1/10th) doesn't mean that it's easier to use. How many times in your daily life do you need to multiply by 10 �
You multiply or divide by a multiple of 10 every time you need to convert from one derivative unit to another. 'Kilo' means a multiple of 1000 over the base unit. So if I need to convert from kilometres to metres, I simply divide by 1000. Now, that happens to be very easy to do. Why? Because our whole system of counting is base 10! It's as easy as moving the decimal point three places.
� or even multiply what you measure?
It doesn't matter what operations you're doing � multiplication, division, addition, or subtraction � it's as easy as manipulating any decimal number. You never, ever have to remember odd conversion factors to convert between different units and fractions thereof.
How often does that easy arithmetic come up outside of science? Can you think of a real life example?
I do a bit of carpentry and other work around the house. From time to time I'm buying lengths of timber, so I may be multiplying a required length over the number of lengths required, or adding up different lengths. If you're a cook, no doubt there are times when the recipe serves 4 people, but you need to cook for 6 or 8 or something, so you have to multiply measurements. When I used to go swimming at my local Olympic sized pool (which is 50 metres long) it was easy to calculate how far I swam. 20 laps = 1000 metres = 1 kilometre. I mean, I could go on and on giving you everyday examples if you want me to, but I think you're capable of doing that yourself.
I don't think Tomorrow ever responded to my earlier hypothetical, so let me put the same question to you:
Okay, imagine for a moment that one of the US states wasn't using the decimal system for counting. Instead, they had a system where letters were used to designate certain amounts, similar to Roman numerals, but instead of having a base of 10, it varied. So perhaps A is equal to 12. Then three As is equal to B. Two Bs is equal to C. 22 Bs is equal to a D, and so on with this kind of inconsistency. You have a friend living in this state who claims that the system works just fine � he spent many years studying this system and even more using it in his line of work and can't see why he or anyone else in the state should have to learn this dangfangled decimal system. What would you say to your friend?
In any case, I do already have it. It's on every measuring device I have, from my ruler to my bathroom scale. I use it when it's necessary or more effective, but that's rare. Maybe you should accept that people can have a different preference.
But (1) it's not your first 'language' so to speak, so you're no doubt less comfortable with it, and (2) if no one else around you speaks the same 'language' it doesn't help you communicate with them. This is why we have 'standards'.
B.winkle
Apr 10, 10:53 AM
Answer is 2. I'm right and you're wrong. So there! ;.) I sleep with a math teacher!!!
ChrisTX
Apr 20, 05:34 AM
I dont agree. A 4" screen would be larger real estate, but that would mean developers would have to rewrite their apps to fit the new size. For example, the iPad has an obviously larger screen space, which means that developers had to scale their software up to match, because lets face it, the 2x button just makes things look like pixels and thats just awful, this is not SNES system.
But the iPad has similar dimensions and screen ratio. But a 4" display would makes things look stretched, so developers would have to code each app to fit the new stretched screen. This would also be quite annoying on the app store, looking for apps which work on 3g, 3gs, i4 and i5 and iPad and iPad 2. It would just become a nuisance to download an app to see its stretched on older phones. this wouldn't be a good move by apple just yet. Apple like to care for older tech users, the 3g and 3gs users, and this larger screen would make apps not run as smoothly.
Have you ever tried to run any iPhone apps on the iPad? Have you not noticed that what they scale down to is a size larger than the iPhone's current 3.5" size? Not sure why Apple chose a size slightly larger than 3.5" but none the less they scale just fine.
But the iPad has similar dimensions and screen ratio. But a 4" display would makes things look stretched, so developers would have to code each app to fit the new stretched screen. This would also be quite annoying on the app store, looking for apps which work on 3g, 3gs, i4 and i5 and iPad and iPad 2. It would just become a nuisance to download an app to see its stretched on older phones. this wouldn't be a good move by apple just yet. Apple like to care for older tech users, the 3g and 3gs users, and this larger screen would make apps not run as smoothly.
Have you ever tried to run any iPhone apps on the iPad? Have you not noticed that what they scale down to is a size larger than the iPhone's current 3.5" size? Not sure why Apple chose a size slightly larger than 3.5" but none the less they scale just fine.
-aggie-
May 3, 05:18 PM
methinks we need someone with some perspective in charge here, so before the crazy wizard gets us all killed for his king's secret quests, whatever they are, I propose we follow the wisdom of my brother Jorah
I deem thyself dead forthwith.
This is going to be very, very interesting. Especially since apparently I'm married to Eldiablojoe. Now I understand why he killed me in the last game.
He has quite the appropriate name then.
I deem thyself dead forthwith.
This is going to be very, very interesting. Especially since apparently I'm married to Eldiablojoe. Now I understand why he killed me in the last game.
He has quite the appropriate name then.
Surreal
Jul 24, 10:04 AM
I bought the 17" MBP the day it came out and i must say;
i don't care about these new chips.
that feels really good.
thank you apple. finally.
i don't care about these new chips.
that feels really good.
thank you apple. finally.
cube
May 6, 02:33 AM
The headline is wrong.
The rumor is NOT that they would abandon Intel. The claim being made is that they would switch from x86 to ARM.
The rumor is NOT that they would abandon Intel. The claim being made is that they would switch from x86 to ARM.
jayducharme
Apr 24, 02:52 PM
I just checked my current desktop pictures folder. The images are 2560x1600, and they're only about 1 mb each. So it's really not much more of a leap to get to 3200.
benpatient
Mar 29, 11:59 AM
I seem to remember the "backing up your library" to the "cloud" was tried by someone before. They had software that scanned the CD in your drive and then either ripped it to their servers, or just unlocked access to that album in your account. RIAA brought them down. This seems a little different, and highly wasteful of space. If 500 people upload a copy of "whatever," Amazon has to store 500x the space of "whatever," rather then just unlocking one copy for 500x people. Keep in mind 1 meg of cloud space is easily over 10 megs of physical storage. (RAID, redundancy, geographical peers, backups, etc...)
Amazon... not sure what to make them. They seem to be doing things which obviously will get them sued. I guess they figure if any ONE takes off they will make bank. Either way, I'm excited about this because Apple is great at being the best. The better the competition, the better the Apple product.
Um...the RIAA didn't bring them down. Apple bought them. it was called Lala.com and nothing has been as good since.
It was nearly perfect. Amazon's offering here is a good step back towards they way things were a year ago with Lala.com.
I had nearly 100 GB of itunes library synced to lala.com and available anywhere there was a browser. I could listen to any song or album in their massive library one time all the way through for free. "web albums" were 99 cents. Tracks were 10 cents. My biggest gripe was the lack of a non-browser player option. Of course they were working on an iOS player app (in public beta) when Apple bought them and shut them down without ceremony.
Whatever we get will be less than what Lala was 2 years or more ago. They had the support of all the major labels and most of the larger indie distributors, as well.
Amazon... not sure what to make them. They seem to be doing things which obviously will get them sued. I guess they figure if any ONE takes off they will make bank. Either way, I'm excited about this because Apple is great at being the best. The better the competition, the better the Apple product.
Um...the RIAA didn't bring them down. Apple bought them. it was called Lala.com and nothing has been as good since.
It was nearly perfect. Amazon's offering here is a good step back towards they way things were a year ago with Lala.com.
I had nearly 100 GB of itunes library synced to lala.com and available anywhere there was a browser. I could listen to any song or album in their massive library one time all the way through for free. "web albums" were 99 cents. Tracks were 10 cents. My biggest gripe was the lack of a non-browser player option. Of course they were working on an iOS player app (in public beta) when Apple bought them and shut them down without ceremony.
Whatever we get will be less than what Lala was 2 years or more ago. They had the support of all the major labels and most of the larger indie distributors, as well.
CalBoy
May 3, 03:39 PM
I see no reason why 99, 99.5, and 100 are easier to track than 37.2, 37.5, and 37.7. As you said, we accept body temp to be 98.6 and 37.0 in Celsius. If decimals are difficult to remember, then clearly we should pick the scale that represents normal body temp as an integer, right? ;)
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.
Perhaps your set of measuring cups is the additional piece of equipment. Indeed you wouldn't need them. For a recipe in SI, the only items you would need are an electronic balance, graduating measuring "cup," and a graduated cylinder. No series of cups or spoons required (although, they do of course come in metric for those so inclined).
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).
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).
It might seem that way to you, but the majority of the world uses weight to measure dry ingredients. For them it's just as easy.
Sure when you have a commercial quantity (which is also how companies bake in bulk-by weight), but not when you're making a dozen muffins or cupcakes. The smaller the quantity, the worse off you are with weighing each ingredient in terms of efficiency.
Why would you need alternative names? A recipe would call for "30ml" of any given liquid. There's no need to call it anything else.
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?
Well, no one would ask for a 237ml vessel because that's an arbitrary number based on a different system of units. But if you wanted, yes, you could measure that amount in a graduated measuring cup (or weigh it on your balance).
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.
I suspect people would call it a "quarter liter," much like I would say "quarter gallon."
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?
And no, you wouldn't call 500ml a "pint" because, well, why would you? :confused:
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.
...But countries using SI do call 500ml a demi-liter ("demi" meaning "half").
Somehow I don't see that becoming popular pub lingo...
This is the case with Si units as well. 500, 250, 125, 75, etc. Though SI units can also be divided by any number you wish. Want to make 1/5 of the recipe? ...Just divide all the numbers by five.
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.
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.
Not that OS X Panthera Leo doesn't have a nice ring to it, of course. ;)
No, but it is onerous for kids to learn SI units, which is a mandatory skill in this global world. Like I said, why teach kids two units of measure if one will suffice?
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.
You could be right for international commerce where values have to be recalculated just for the US, but like I said, I think those things should be converted. I don't really care if I buy a 25 gram candy bar as opposed to a 1 ounce candy bar or a 350ml can of soda.
Perhaps true, but just because you switch to metric, doesn't mean you need to stop using tablespoons and teaspoons for measurements. It's all an approximation anyway, since there are far more than 2 different spoon sizes, and many of them look like they're pretty much equal in size to a tablespoon.
I'm sorry, but which tablespoons do you use that aren't tablespoons? The measuring spoons most people have at home for baking are very precise and have the fractions clearly marked on them.
Other than that, there's a teaspoon, tablespoon, and serving spoon (which you wouldn't use as a measurement). The sizes are very different for each of those and I don't think anyone who saw them side by side could confuse them.
So if you're cooking, do what everyone else does with their spoons; if you need a tablespoon, grab the big-ish one and estimate. If you needed more precision than that, why wouldn't you use ml? :confused:
Because it's a heck of a lot easier to think, "I need one xspoon of secret ingredient" than it is to think, "I need xml of secret ingredient." You think like a scientist (because you are one). Most people aren't. That's who the teaspoons and tablespoons are for.
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.
Perhaps your set of measuring cups is the additional piece of equipment. Indeed you wouldn't need them. For a recipe in SI, the only items you would need are an electronic balance, graduating measuring "cup," and a graduated cylinder. No series of cups or spoons required (although, they do of course come in metric for those so inclined).
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).
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).
It might seem that way to you, but the majority of the world uses weight to measure dry ingredients. For them it's just as easy.
Sure when you have a commercial quantity (which is also how companies bake in bulk-by weight), but not when you're making a dozen muffins or cupcakes. The smaller the quantity, the worse off you are with weighing each ingredient in terms of efficiency.
Why would you need alternative names? A recipe would call for "30ml" of any given liquid. There's no need to call it anything else.
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?
Well, no one would ask for a 237ml vessel because that's an arbitrary number based on a different system of units. But if you wanted, yes, you could measure that amount in a graduated measuring cup (or weigh it on your balance).
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.
I suspect people would call it a "quarter liter," much like I would say "quarter gallon."
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?
And no, you wouldn't call 500ml a "pint" because, well, why would you? :confused:
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.
...But countries using SI do call 500ml a demi-liter ("demi" meaning "half").
Somehow I don't see that becoming popular pub lingo...
This is the case with Si units as well. 500, 250, 125, 75, etc. Though SI units can also be divided by any number you wish. Want to make 1/5 of the recipe? ...Just divide all the numbers by five.
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.
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.
Not that OS X Panthera Leo doesn't have a nice ring to it, of course. ;)
No, but it is onerous for kids to learn SI units, which is a mandatory skill in this global world. Like I said, why teach kids two units of measure if one will suffice?
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.
You could be right for international commerce where values have to be recalculated just for the US, but like I said, I think those things should be converted. I don't really care if I buy a 25 gram candy bar as opposed to a 1 ounce candy bar or a 350ml can of soda.
Perhaps true, but just because you switch to metric, doesn't mean you need to stop using tablespoons and teaspoons for measurements. It's all an approximation anyway, since there are far more than 2 different spoon sizes, and many of them look like they're pretty much equal in size to a tablespoon.
I'm sorry, but which tablespoons do you use that aren't tablespoons? The measuring spoons most people have at home for baking are very precise and have the fractions clearly marked on them.
Other than that, there's a teaspoon, tablespoon, and serving spoon (which you wouldn't use as a measurement). The sizes are very different for each of those and I don't think anyone who saw them side by side could confuse them.
So if you're cooking, do what everyone else does with their spoons; if you need a tablespoon, grab the big-ish one and estimate. If you needed more precision than that, why wouldn't you use ml? :confused:
Because it's a heck of a lot easier to think, "I need one xspoon of secret ingredient" than it is to think, "I need xml of secret ingredient." You think like a scientist (because you are one). Most people aren't. That's who the teaspoons and tablespoons are for.
CainIs4Charlie
Nov 8, 07:24 AM
can anyone comment on the sound quality when playing music on the iphone via the tomtom kit when it's connected to the car's sound system?
reason for asking: when i use a standard audio cable from the headphone output of my iphone into my car's aux in, the sound quality leaves a lot to be desired. i basically have to crank up the volume all the way on both my car system and the iphone to hear anything, and even what i hear isn't all that great.
reason for asking: when i use a standard audio cable from the headphone output of my iphone into my car's aux in, the sound quality leaves a lot to be desired. i basically have to crank up the volume all the way on both my car system and the iphone to hear anything, and even what i hear isn't all that great.
0010101
Nov 25, 08:11 PM
Well the funny thing really is that Apple hasn't ever said they were going to make an iPhone, and all this rumor and speculation is based on a .org domain name and a whole lot of circumstantial evidence.
Let's not forget 'iPod' was originally the name they were going to call a sit in internet kiosk type thing, not a music player.
Apple could very well just be cooking up a cellular capable iPod to enable wireless downloads from the iTunes store directly to the device.. which makes way more sense than trying to jump into an already saturated market with low profit margins and tremendous competition.
Let's not forget 'iPod' was originally the name they were going to call a sit in internet kiosk type thing, not a music player.
Apple could very well just be cooking up a cellular capable iPod to enable wireless downloads from the iTunes store directly to the device.. which makes way more sense than trying to jump into an already saturated market with low profit margins and tremendous competition.
toddybody
Mar 28, 10:24 AM
Ehh...I cant see this happening. Unless of course the iPhone 5 is what will follow an iphone 4s (with A5)...in that case, duh 2012 makes sense...
jaxstate
Aug 4, 08:37 AM
After working on my MBP for about two months now, I call BS. Apple says it's 4-5 x faster than the last powerbooks, I couldn't really tell. I think we are in a new era of ********, where they (Apple) are trying to get people to upgrade just because of a slight Mhz boost, and lower power consumption. Bring on the real world test, and post them on their website.
Christina1971
May 7, 11:03 AM
Why not just make it a $20 product instead of giving it away for no profit?
I guess the question would be, would people feel MobileMe has $20 worth of value? As some folks have mentioned already, there's some free services that compete with some of the MobileMe tools. I don't use MobileMe at all now, but I certainly would give it a shot it were free. If a lot of people were like me, that might be a valuable subscriber base for iAds.
These people actually perceive this as being "Free" when in fact you're letting Google profit handsomely off your data.
I think people think of "free" generally as being "no money out of my pocket." And I don't pay Google any money to use their products. I do pay them in the loss of privacy, this is true. But that's a less tangible "price" than a bill coming every month or year.
I guess the question would be, would people feel MobileMe has $20 worth of value? As some folks have mentioned already, there's some free services that compete with some of the MobileMe tools. I don't use MobileMe at all now, but I certainly would give it a shot it were free. If a lot of people were like me, that might be a valuable subscriber base for iAds.
These people actually perceive this as being "Free" when in fact you're letting Google profit handsomely off your data.
I think people think of "free" generally as being "no money out of my pocket." And I don't pay Google any money to use their products. I do pay them in the loss of privacy, this is true. But that's a less tangible "price" than a bill coming every month or year.
No comments:
Post a Comment