- kate middleton hot bikini.
- Hottie, Kate Middleton,
- Kate Middleton - A Tam and
- kate middleton hot photos kate
- kate middleton hot bikini.
- kate middleton hot bikini. hot
- Kate Middleton Hot Pics | By D
- kate middleton hot photos.
- kate middleton hot bikini.
- kate middleton hot bikini.
- Kate Middleton Hot Bikini
- kate middleton hot bikini.
- kate middleton hot bikini.
- hot, kate middleton hot
- kate middleton hot bikini.
- kate middleton hot. kate
- Kate Middleton Shows Off White
- Home // Kate Middleton Bikini
- kate middleton hot bikini.
pivo6
Apr 22, 10:35 AM
All seems rather silly to me.
Over the years, there must have been 85 threads on some type of reputation/like/thanks system and it's always been shot down (thankfully). What changed?
I realize that this is just a test run of this "feature", but I too wonder what has changed in order to come up with a reputation system.
Over the years, there must have been 85 threads on some type of reputation/like/thanks system and it's always been shot down (thankfully). What changed?
I realize that this is just a test run of this "feature", but I too wonder what has changed in order to come up with a reputation system.
BRLawyer
Oct 3, 03:36 PM
One and ONLY release at MW 2007: iTV. Oh yeah, and the retirement annoucement by SJ: iGiveup.
Mammoth
Oct 3, 08:40 PM
I'm dreaming for 2 'iPhones'
RAZR Killer: $149, ultra slim. iTunes, iCal, iChat, .Mac, Address Book, Mail, Mobile iWeb, Bluetooth. 2GB flash storage. 2MP camera.
Treo/Blackberry Killer: $299, Treo-like form, full QWERTY, same apps as RAZR killer + 4GB flash storage. 3MP camera.
And of course iTV, Merom updates, and a true video iPod.
RAZR Killer: $149, ultra slim. iTunes, iCal, iChat, .Mac, Address Book, Mail, Mobile iWeb, Bluetooth. 2GB flash storage. 2MP camera.
Treo/Blackberry Killer: $299, Treo-like form, full QWERTY, same apps as RAZR killer + 4GB flash storage. 3MP camera.
And of course iTV, Merom updates, and a true video iPod.
Porco
Mar 28, 09:05 PM
Of course Apple are free to do what they want, and limit the scope of the awards in whatever way they see fit, but by doing so it lessens the value of winning the award, because it's from a smaller group of apps and is more blatantly self-serving rather than creating the impression that it is more of a recognition of genuinely well-designed software.
I would liken it to the Oscars, where films that are heavy on acting performances gain an instant advantage because most of the voters are actors. That's fine, but it doesn't mean the awards mean as much as if they were voted for by a more independent, disinterested (as opposed to uninterested) group that didn't have a built-in bias to promote the stature of their own section of the industry.
I would liken it to the Oscars, where films that are heavy on acting performances gain an instant advantage because most of the voters are actors. That's fine, but it doesn't mean the awards mean as much as if they were voted for by a more independent, disinterested (as opposed to uninterested) group that didn't have a built-in bias to promote the stature of their own section of the industry.
more...
nosen
Sep 12, 07:35 AM
wow! real early! can't believe we have to wait over 4 more hours. :o
eawmp1
May 6, 10:17 AM
This is a little ridiculous. Is it really a big deal to answer simple questions about firearms?
And that is the problem. Any question about guns to certain segments of the population degenerates into the ridiculous.
And that is the problem. Any question about guns to certain segments of the population degenerates into the ridiculous.
more...
PghLondon
May 1, 06:06 PM
Dude, honestly, WTF are you going on about? You throw abstract generic words around like "software and computer engineering" that encompass literally the ENTIRE computer market and then tell people they don't know WTF they're talking about. Sorry, but I have to laugh. You demonstrate no knowledge about the subject and your reponses are pretty much, "I won't even bother to argue because you're a 5-year old". ROTFLMAO. Nothing says "clueless" to me quite like throwing insults and giving no valid arguments what-so-ever on a given topic. I've got two degrees in electronic engineering so you calling me a 5-year old is so utterly absurd, it's a joke.
What Apple does with iOS and OSX uses engineering, but there is no technology 'god' up there demanding that Apple head in the direction of closed systems, non-professional features, etc. There is no template that forces Apple to go in a given direction. More advanced engineering doesn't mean more closed. Learn the difference for goodness sake!
Apple is making these decisions based on business decisions with some 'control' factors thrown-in based on their CEO's personality. Engineering simply accommodates/implements the business decisions taken. It is not responsible for those decisions in any way. They could accommodate improvements with or without open/closed. Yes, it has 'something' to do with it, but it's completely irrelevant to the conversation here because implementing or creating a vision technologically is still not a business decision whether to do something or not (in this case whether to pursue real technological improvements to OSX or spend their time dumbing down the interface and/or making it more like the iPad/iPhone. Those are 'lateral' steps at best, not engineering breakthroughs.
Wow, at no time in this rant did you come close to a point. You actually argued both for and against my point at various times in your incoherent ramble.
What Apple does with iOS and OSX uses engineering, but there is no technology 'god' up there demanding that Apple head in the direction of closed systems, non-professional features, etc. There is no template that forces Apple to go in a given direction. More advanced engineering doesn't mean more closed. Learn the difference for goodness sake!
Apple is making these decisions based on business decisions with some 'control' factors thrown-in based on their CEO's personality. Engineering simply accommodates/implements the business decisions taken. It is not responsible for those decisions in any way. They could accommodate improvements with or without open/closed. Yes, it has 'something' to do with it, but it's completely irrelevant to the conversation here because implementing or creating a vision technologically is still not a business decision whether to do something or not (in this case whether to pursue real technological improvements to OSX or spend their time dumbing down the interface and/or making it more like the iPad/iPhone. Those are 'lateral' steps at best, not engineering breakthroughs.
Wow, at no time in this rant did you come close to a point. You actually argued both for and against my point at various times in your incoherent ramble.
sartinsauce
Oct 3, 12:40 PM
Holy crap! I can't believe it's time for another MWSF SteveNote! It seems like the last one just happened.
So do you think we'll have until then for anything new? Before the last iPod announcement, everyone seemed to think Apple had something else up their sleeve for the holiday shopping season. Now everyone's clammed up.
It's been a big year for new products from Apple. Do you think they're done for this calendar year?
So do you think we'll have until then for anything new? Before the last iPod announcement, everyone seemed to think Apple had something else up their sleeve for the holiday shopping season. Now everyone's clammed up.
It's been a big year for new products from Apple. Do you think they're done for this calendar year?
more...
wlh99
Apr 26, 08:59 PM
After that I implement a Cancel method pointing to sender (button)
So, my goal is to use 1 start button and 1 cancel button.. and just do their actions. I have set up a the start button to start both timers, obviously both start their countdown at the same time which is not good.
I want to tell one timer to start and if I press cancel, invalidate it. Then If I press start again, call the second timer. (I do this because I read that you can't reuse a timer after you invalidate it).
Some people have suggested to use Booleans like true or false, or conditions. What do you think?
What if after pressing the start button, you create a timer and start it. Then pressing the cancel button invalidates and releases it. Then pressing the start button would create another timer, using the same pointer.
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
So, my goal is to use 1 start button and 1 cancel button.. and just do their actions. I have set up a the start button to start both timers, obviously both start their countdown at the same time which is not good.
I want to tell one timer to start and if I press cancel, invalidate it. Then If I press start again, call the second timer. (I do this because I read that you can't reuse a timer after you invalidate it).
Some people have suggested to use Booleans like true or false, or conditions. What do you think?
What if after pressing the start button, you create a timer and start it. Then pressing the cancel button invalidates and releases it. Then pressing the start button would create another timer, using the same pointer.
Totally untested and probably broken code below, but should demonstrate the idea:
-(IBAction)startButton:(id) sender {
// myTimer is declared in header file ...
if (myTimer!=nil) { // if the pointer already points to a timer, you don't want to create a second one without stoping and destroying the first
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release];
}
// Now that we know myTimer doesn't point to a timer already..
myTimer = [NSTimer scheduledTimerWithTimeInterval:aTimeInterval target:self selector:@selector(echoIt:) userInfo:myDict repeats:YES];
[myTimer retain];
}
-(IBAction)cancelIt:(id) sender {
[myTimer invalidate];
[myTimer release]; // This timer is now gone, and you won't reuse it.
}
voicegy
Jan 11, 05:08 PM
if you want to prevent people from screwing with you presentations on tvs, just disable the ir port (via the rs232 console/diagnostic software or by slapping a sticker over the ir port). securing you devices takes at most 2min per device. so let the companies learn from this and don't bash gizmodo like mad.
And, pray tell, what other completely unnecessary "precautions" should the companies take to insure that snot-nosed jackasses (who are stupid to the point of even ADMITTING their lame stunt on their own web site) not screw around with their presentation walls and equipment? Security dogs next to power switches? Locks on power strips? Bits of tape over every ir port on every device they show? Oh, yes, the big dork-off companies should learn their lesson against such obvious security risks. The same companies that invest sweat, blood, money and tears to bring us the gadgets we love to have.
It's not even as if these bone-heads went out and invented some magic solder-based toy in their garage and showed the world how uber-geek they could be; for that, I MIGHT consider a prop in their direction IF they kept the mischief down to one or two non-presentation instances. They simply used a stupid TV-B-Gone that can be had by any moron for 20 bucks.
Way to go, GizLamo. That was as funny as letting the air out of a tire of your neighbor and giggling from the front window watching him worry about being late for work. A laff-riot if you're 12 and developmentally disabled. Hardy-har-har.:mad:
And, pray tell, what other completely unnecessary "precautions" should the companies take to insure that snot-nosed jackasses (who are stupid to the point of even ADMITTING their lame stunt on their own web site) not screw around with their presentation walls and equipment? Security dogs next to power switches? Locks on power strips? Bits of tape over every ir port on every device they show? Oh, yes, the big dork-off companies should learn their lesson against such obvious security risks. The same companies that invest sweat, blood, money and tears to bring us the gadgets we love to have.
It's not even as if these bone-heads went out and invented some magic solder-based toy in their garage and showed the world how uber-geek they could be; for that, I MIGHT consider a prop in their direction IF they kept the mischief down to one or two non-presentation instances. They simply used a stupid TV-B-Gone that can be had by any moron for 20 bucks.
Way to go, GizLamo. That was as funny as letting the air out of a tire of your neighbor and giggling from the front window watching him worry about being late for work. A laff-riot if you're 12 and developmentally disabled. Hardy-har-har.:mad:
more...
LagunaSol
Apr 29, 04:13 PM
What is this hideous faux leather iCal format ????? It's just like the truly awful wooden background that somehow crawled in to the iPad. Please think again on this. It will look abysmal on a large iMac or MBP screen. It looks like a child's toy. :o
Agreed. I thought we were well past the days when computer applications had to emulate their analog compatriots. Leather, wood, paper, stone = not for computer UIs please! :mad:
Speaking of bad iCal, why is it I can't flip pages in the Calendar app on my iPad by actually flicking the pages (a la iBooks)? Instead I have to tap on arrow buttons? What's up with that???
Agreed. I thought we were well past the days when computer applications had to emulate their analog compatriots. Leather, wood, paper, stone = not for computer UIs please! :mad:
Speaking of bad iCal, why is it I can't flip pages in the Calendar app on my iPad by actually flicking the pages (a la iBooks)? Instead I have to tap on arrow buttons? What's up with that???
Rt&Dzine
May 4, 03:27 PM
The hypocrisy from those of you on the left on this issue is pretty clear. If this was the GLBTA trying to pass a similar law regarding homosexuality, etc. you'd have no problem with it.
Because being a homosexual is just like owning a gun. They're both choices. :rolleyes:
Because being a homosexual is just like owning a gun. They're both choices. :rolleyes:
more...
buffalo
Jan 5, 07:07 PM
Maybe I'm missing something, but doesn't the idea of a spoiler-free experience sort of run completely opposite to the purpose of this site? You sit around all year reading rumors and then don't want to be spoiled three hours before they post the keynote? Huh?
When you spend the whole year waiting for the event you want the moment to be perfect.
When you spend the whole year waiting for the event you want the moment to be perfect.
Mac Fly (film)
Oct 19, 11:30 AM
Two can play at that game. I still have the 400 shares I bought in 1997.
Do the math. :)
I bought 4600 shares in 1997, do that math ;)
My last comment was a complete fabrication!! :D
Do the math. :)
I bought 4600 shares in 1997, do that math ;)
My last comment was a complete fabrication!! :D
more...
Drag'nGT
Oct 6, 12:08 PM
Isn't Verizon's 4G network going to be GSM?
on another note if it is wouldn't their coverage also be spotty?
Verizon bought many different CDMA companies that didn't take off during the early years of cell phones. Because of that, they have infrastructure that can be upgraded. In other words, they have towers in those areas that shaded red. CDMA or GSM doesn't matter so much as having a tower in the area to put equipment on. So no, the upgrade to 4G will not cause spotty coverage.
on another note if it is wouldn't their coverage also be spotty?
Verizon bought many different CDMA companies that didn't take off during the early years of cell phones. Because of that, they have infrastructure that can be upgraded. In other words, they have towers in those areas that shaded red. CDMA or GSM doesn't matter so much as having a tower in the area to put equipment on. So no, the upgrade to 4G will not cause spotty coverage.
DylanLikesPorn
Jul 21, 08:40 PM
go Apple. fight fire with fire.
more...
DeSnousa
Apr 29, 01:04 AM
Thanks for posting, looks scary but I like it! You planning on getting GPUs for the AMD systems? How do AMD processors go at f@h? Imagine if you got some GT260s on the 4 AMD systems :eek:
obeygiant
Apr 17, 10:09 PM
We should add left handed history ahead of gay history,
Or maybe people with uncontrollable flatulence (http://www.thesmartset.com/article/article10240701.aspx).
Or maybe people with uncontrollable flatulence (http://www.thesmartset.com/article/article10240701.aspx).
rdowns
Apr 25, 02:24 PM
Already a thread and still in Current Events.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1141721
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1141721
SPUY767
Oct 3, 06:21 AM
It looks so long and narrow...
That's what she said?
That's what she said?
someguy
Jul 24, 09:51 AM
And there actually are people who don't know who made the iPod! :confused:
My mother, a month ago:
Her: A guy I was talking to has an iPod for sale, he only wants 100 bucks for it.
Me: What is it? A regular iPod or a nano, and what size?
Her: It's an Apple one, so it's got to be the better kind, whichever that is.
Me: That's iPod, but there are different iPods available.
Her: Well, whichever one Apple makes is the one he's selling.
Eventually, I was able to show her that iPod is made by Apple. There are no Sony iPods, Creative iPods, etc. iPod does not simply mean MP3 player. I guess that's one of the downfalls of Apple's success with the iPod is that the term eventually becomes synonymous with MP3 players in general.
My mother, a month ago:
Her: A guy I was talking to has an iPod for sale, he only wants 100 bucks for it.
Me: What is it? A regular iPod or a nano, and what size?
Her: It's an Apple one, so it's got to be the better kind, whichever that is.
Me: That's iPod, but there are different iPods available.
Her: Well, whichever one Apple makes is the one he's selling.
Eventually, I was able to show her that iPod is made by Apple. There are no Sony iPods, Creative iPods, etc. iPod does not simply mean MP3 player. I guess that's one of the downfalls of Apple's success with the iPod is that the term eventually becomes synonymous with MP3 players in general.
iMikeT
Aug 7, 08:15 PM
Here comes my 23" display.
gorgeousninja
Apr 16, 11:53 AM
No, when Apple revealed the iPhone most people were thinking something along the line of "Apple seriously need to reconsider leaving out 3G and the ability to install software if they want to make it in the smart phone business", a phone that doesn't let you install new software is by definiton not a smart phone. The iPhone 3G was the real deal, ofcourse the first gen was successful, simply because it was Apple, but the 3G was when it turned into a good product and soared in popularity.
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.
No, that is exactly my point, people were not thinking along those lines at all. You can name any phone from the last ten years if you want, and you might as well include Alexander Graham-Bell, and Star Trek. When the iPhone debuted everyone got interested, but just saying that it was 'only because it was Apple' is being extremely disingenuous.
There were also many 'experts' saying that Apple were going to fall flat on it's face trying to take on the 'big boys' of Nokia and Motorola et al.
This is the same roundabout argument that has gone on since Apple started, 'Oh, it wasn't them it was Xerox, Riva, Sony, MS etc etc. Why is it so hard for some to give credit where it is due, and instead try to rubbish everything. It just seems so petty.
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.
No, that is exactly my point, people were not thinking along those lines at all. You can name any phone from the last ten years if you want, and you might as well include Alexander Graham-Bell, and Star Trek. When the iPhone debuted everyone got interested, but just saying that it was 'only because it was Apple' is being extremely disingenuous.
There were also many 'experts' saying that Apple were going to fall flat on it's face trying to take on the 'big boys' of Nokia and Motorola et al.
This is the same roundabout argument that has gone on since Apple started, 'Oh, it wasn't them it was Xerox, Riva, Sony, MS etc etc. Why is it so hard for some to give credit where it is due, and instead try to rubbish everything. It just seems so petty.
Mac-Addict
Oct 3, 12:53 PM
I definalty will be angry if the iPhone doesnt come out but at the same time i wouldnt be shocked.. but steve jobs giving it up? pfft no way hes still got a few years left in him :P unlike billy boy..
Source URL: https://queladesigns.blogspot.com/2011/05/kate-middleton-hot-bikini.html
Visit Quela designs for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
No comments:
Post a Comment