dime21
May 5, 11:15 AM
Why are you using fear as part of your argument? I shouldn't have to have a gun on me to feel safe in my community. It's not saying I feel immune to crime, but fear of crime shouldn't drive a person.
Not fear of crime, but rather, the desire for self-preservation. Is someone else providing that safety for you? Or are you providing it for yourself? It sounds like you're taking option 3, and not providing it at all. FYI- the supreme court ruled that the police have no legal obligation to provide for your safety. Their job is only to catch the criminals during/after a crime - not to prevent it, and not to "keep you safe". Do you also choose not to wear your seat belt in your car, because that's for people who always fear collisions, and fear of an automotive collision shouldn't drive a person?
Yes, I own a few guns and I carry a hand gun on my person anytime I leave the house. To run errands, to pick the kids up from school, you name it, I'm carrying. I look it at the same way as the fire extinguisher I have sitting in the corner of my kitchen. I really really don't want an occasion to use it. Ever. But should that occasion arise, I absolutely want to have immediate access to it. Without that fire extinguisher, all I could do is stand in the front yard and watch my home burn to the ground waiting for the fire department to arrive. Carrying a hand gun is no different that that fire extinguisher in my kitchen or the airbags in my car. I don't ever want to use them, but having them can mean the difference between life and death. It doesn't mean I'm being driven by fear of kitchen fires or vehicle collisions.
Violent criminals frequently use guns to kill people. That is a fact, and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change that. Nothing. All you can do is arm yourself to level the playing field.
Given the choice, I'd much rather have the robber hold me up with a knife, than a gun.
Yes, because violent criminals give you a choice. lol. Next time you're in that situation, be sure to voice your opinion to your assailant. Please sir, if you are determined to rob me, please kindly exchange your hand gun for a knife. lmao. Oh wait, you may not even have the chance to ask, because now you're dead. He shot you because he felt like it, and there was nothing you could do to stop him.
Not fear of crime, but rather, the desire for self-preservation. Is someone else providing that safety for you? Or are you providing it for yourself? It sounds like you're taking option 3, and not providing it at all. FYI- the supreme court ruled that the police have no legal obligation to provide for your safety. Their job is only to catch the criminals during/after a crime - not to prevent it, and not to "keep you safe". Do you also choose not to wear your seat belt in your car, because that's for people who always fear collisions, and fear of an automotive collision shouldn't drive a person?
Yes, I own a few guns and I carry a hand gun on my person anytime I leave the house. To run errands, to pick the kids up from school, you name it, I'm carrying. I look it at the same way as the fire extinguisher I have sitting in the corner of my kitchen. I really really don't want an occasion to use it. Ever. But should that occasion arise, I absolutely want to have immediate access to it. Without that fire extinguisher, all I could do is stand in the front yard and watch my home burn to the ground waiting for the fire department to arrive. Carrying a hand gun is no different that that fire extinguisher in my kitchen or the airbags in my car. I don't ever want to use them, but having them can mean the difference between life and death. It doesn't mean I'm being driven by fear of kitchen fires or vehicle collisions.
Violent criminals frequently use guns to kill people. That is a fact, and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change that. Nothing. All you can do is arm yourself to level the playing field.
Given the choice, I'd much rather have the robber hold me up with a knife, than a gun.
Yes, because violent criminals give you a choice. lol. Next time you're in that situation, be sure to voice your opinion to your assailant. Please sir, if you are determined to rob me, please kindly exchange your hand gun for a knife. lmao. Oh wait, you may not even have the chance to ask, because now you're dead. He shot you because he felt like it, and there was nothing you could do to stop him.
Jony Mac
Apr 11, 12:07 PM
I purchased a stay at this Castle. I hope the wife likes it.
CaoCao
Apr 17, 04:35 AM
Awesome, to make enough time for this lets just forget everything after the Great Depression because it's not like that junk matters as much as gays being persecuted. Seriously, the Holocaust and the Rape of Nanjing are totally trivial events compared to the Stonewall riots. We should totally drop coverage of the bombing of Pearl Harbor to make room for a lecture on how NAMBLA doesn't represent gays. To top it off we should ditch the civil rights movement in favor of the White Night riots!
:rolleyes: there is no time available to teach this, if we teach this something else gets whacked. As is we get to the 1930s by the tests which go to the 1980s...
:rolleyes: there is no time available to teach this, if we teach this something else gets whacked. As is we get to the 1930s by the tests which go to the 1980s...
fsck-y dingo
Nov 8, 02:26 PM
I'm worried about getting banned for getting it (a few hours) early.
No need to worry. If you have a retail copy of the game you can play before the official release date without any issues.
Just out of curiosity, where did the games that have already been delivered come from? I ordered through Amazon with the delivery date shipping option so I won't have mine until tomorrow. If there's a place that tends to ship early I may use them next time.
No need to worry. If you have a retail copy of the game you can play before the official release date without any issues.
Just out of curiosity, where did the games that have already been delivered come from? I ordered through Amazon with the delivery date shipping option so I won't have mine until tomorrow. If there's a place that tends to ship early I may use them next time.
flopticalcube
Apr 21, 12:07 PM
Vote count before you vote: 2
Vote count after you vote down: 1 (net change: -1)
Vote count after you vote up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote down, then up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote up, then down: 1 (net change: -1)
The net effect of you voting is only a +1 or -1. Remember, you don't know who else clicked the vote button on that same post just before you did. When you load a page, the current vote loads. If you take a minute or even a few seconds to read a post and vote, others could have voted during that time. The vote counter doesn't dynamically update every time someone votes; it does only when you vote or refresh the page.
So it's a like/dislike system that nets the like/dislikes to a numerical value, assuming the dislikes are negative. That is why when you change from a vote down to an up, you are removing your dislike and adding a like. Correct?
EDIT: Counts are update after you make a selection so it may appear that your vote was not counted but the count may not be accurate on your page when you make the vote. Got it.
Vote count after you vote down: 1 (net change: -1)
Vote count after you vote up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote down, then up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote up, then down: 1 (net change: -1)
The net effect of you voting is only a +1 or -1. Remember, you don't know who else clicked the vote button on that same post just before you did. When you load a page, the current vote loads. If you take a minute or even a few seconds to read a post and vote, others could have voted during that time. The vote counter doesn't dynamically update every time someone votes; it does only when you vote or refresh the page.
So it's a like/dislike system that nets the like/dislikes to a numerical value, assuming the dislikes are negative. That is why when you change from a vote down to an up, you are removing your dislike and adding a like. Correct?
EDIT: Counts are update after you make a selection so it may appear that your vote was not counted but the count may not be accurate on your page when you make the vote. Got it.
Lord Blackadder
Aug 8, 02:40 PM
You forgot something. You are comparing diesel to unleaded even in hybrid form. You need to compare the generators (unlead to unlead). Now image if those very high gas mileage diesel running as a hybrid.
The problem with battery right now is we are still working on a break threw. When we finally get a true break threw in battery technology I can see things really taking off.
Batteries are very efficient at story power. problem is they are a little on the heavy side but we are getting better at it.
Modern diesel hatchbacks like the Golf TDI (Euro engines, not the US-spec) can exceed 50-60mpg (http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/new/golf-vi/which-model/engines/fuel-consumption). The Volt is harder to measure because it's a plugin, so some power comes from the grid. GM's own webiste is rather mealymouthed about fuel economy. At one point they claimed over 200mpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt), but that included a full batery charge from the grid. Using only its onboard generator it gets about 50mpg (http://www.greencarreports.com/blog/1044209_now-we-know-2011-chevrolet-volt-will-get-50-mpg-in-gas-mode). So all the extra tech essentially fails to improve on a diesel. The plugin feature may actually make the car less green/efficient if you get the juice from a dirty or inefficient power plant.
I'd really like to agree with you, believe me. But the reason I'm skeptical is that we have no proof that a battery "breakthrough" is really on the horizon. I read somewhere that the overall efficiency of an electric car is currently only about 5-7% greater than a gasoline-powered car (EDIT here (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/fuel-cell4.htm) is a link for those numbers, but admittedly not a very good one). The energy efficiency of batteries is reasonably good, but they are still too big and heavy, as well as being expensive and dirty to manufacture. And again, electric cars are only as good as the powerplant they get power from, and that is where the biggest efficiency loss comes into play.
As for the mass rail system. You might be thinking of the east coast. Trying coming to some city west of the Mississippi and you will see how little rail they have and we just do not have any good way to put a rail system in. It is very costly to retrofit those system in and it is a very slow process. Slowly it is happening but really the system that was designed in the past was based around people driving their own personal cars around. That was 40+ years ago that was put in so now it is harder to do put it in now.
It's less logistics than politics, sadly. And you are right, it's not cheap. But we have to do it eventually. Moving to dependence on our interstates and letting passenger rail services atrophy was a mistake, and now we will be forced to fall back on our rail networks more.
Electric cars (that are able to fully charge in under 20 minutes) subsidized by a solar panel roof is the future. Don't think a 300 mile range would be out of the question (within a few years) and would def work even in large countries like the U.S.
If you look here, they are talking 5 minutes for 70% charge of the car, even though it is currently only a short range vehicle.
Link: http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/07/05/new-quick-charger-for-electric-cars-is-really-quick/
Two issues with that: First, solar panels are neither practical in most states, nor to they really have the lifespan to do more than break-even interms of paying for the,mselves.
Second, that juice still has to come from the power plants, with all the attendant downsides.
I really don't want to sound like a naysayer, but "going green" has become so fashionable that I think people are ignoring the engineering realities. We want whizz-bang electrics and hybrids when a simple diesel would be much easier to get on the market literally today and dramatically decrease our national fuel consumption (and dependence on oil imports) while we work to perfect the next step in alternative fuel vehicles. One step at a time, people!
Why are we letting Congress and the EPA block sales of diesels here that could be used in everyday cars in addition to series hybrids?
The problem with battery right now is we are still working on a break threw. When we finally get a true break threw in battery technology I can see things really taking off.
Batteries are very efficient at story power. problem is they are a little on the heavy side but we are getting better at it.
Modern diesel hatchbacks like the Golf TDI (Euro engines, not the US-spec) can exceed 50-60mpg (http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/new/golf-vi/which-model/engines/fuel-consumption). The Volt is harder to measure because it's a plugin, so some power comes from the grid. GM's own webiste is rather mealymouthed about fuel economy. At one point they claimed over 200mpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt), but that included a full batery charge from the grid. Using only its onboard generator it gets about 50mpg (http://www.greencarreports.com/blog/1044209_now-we-know-2011-chevrolet-volt-will-get-50-mpg-in-gas-mode). So all the extra tech essentially fails to improve on a diesel. The plugin feature may actually make the car less green/efficient if you get the juice from a dirty or inefficient power plant.
I'd really like to agree with you, believe me. But the reason I'm skeptical is that we have no proof that a battery "breakthrough" is really on the horizon. I read somewhere that the overall efficiency of an electric car is currently only about 5-7% greater than a gasoline-powered car (EDIT here (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/fuel-cell4.htm) is a link for those numbers, but admittedly not a very good one). The energy efficiency of batteries is reasonably good, but they are still too big and heavy, as well as being expensive and dirty to manufacture. And again, electric cars are only as good as the powerplant they get power from, and that is where the biggest efficiency loss comes into play.
As for the mass rail system. You might be thinking of the east coast. Trying coming to some city west of the Mississippi and you will see how little rail they have and we just do not have any good way to put a rail system in. It is very costly to retrofit those system in and it is a very slow process. Slowly it is happening but really the system that was designed in the past was based around people driving their own personal cars around. That was 40+ years ago that was put in so now it is harder to do put it in now.
It's less logistics than politics, sadly. And you are right, it's not cheap. But we have to do it eventually. Moving to dependence on our interstates and letting passenger rail services atrophy was a mistake, and now we will be forced to fall back on our rail networks more.
Electric cars (that are able to fully charge in under 20 minutes) subsidized by a solar panel roof is the future. Don't think a 300 mile range would be out of the question (within a few years) and would def work even in large countries like the U.S.
If you look here, they are talking 5 minutes for 70% charge of the car, even though it is currently only a short range vehicle.
Link: http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/07/05/new-quick-charger-for-electric-cars-is-really-quick/
Two issues with that: First, solar panels are neither practical in most states, nor to they really have the lifespan to do more than break-even interms of paying for the,mselves.
Second, that juice still has to come from the power plants, with all the attendant downsides.
I really don't want to sound like a naysayer, but "going green" has become so fashionable that I think people are ignoring the engineering realities. We want whizz-bang electrics and hybrids when a simple diesel would be much easier to get on the market literally today and dramatically decrease our national fuel consumption (and dependence on oil imports) while we work to perfect the next step in alternative fuel vehicles. One step at a time, people!
Why are we letting Congress and the EPA block sales of diesels here that could be used in everyday cars in addition to series hybrids?
fanboy05
Mar 17, 08:54 AM
:eek:
I feel bad when i forget to return a pen to the bank when I borrow one to write a check ect...
I guess this is a reminder that there are people of all kinds in this world. :(
I feel bad when i forget to return a pen to the bank when I borrow one to write a check ect...
I guess this is a reminder that there are people of all kinds in this world. :(
kainjow
Apr 22, 10:22 AM
I was initially opposed to having only an up-vote button, but it might not be a bad idea. Say a single "+1" button, and only display the count if it's >= 1. Might be worth trying.
ChrisTX
Apr 25, 07:06 PM
I seriously doubt Apple is going to change the screen size so slightly because it may require a lot of software re-writes (unless the apps are truly resolution independent).
Perhaps, the screen only appears bigger because the borders will relatively shrink in the next generation????
Notice the size the iPhone apps scale to on the iPad is significantly larger than the actual 3.5" of the iPhone and they scale just fine. I didn't read all of the comments, but I've never seen anyone ever point this out before.
Perhaps, the screen only appears bigger because the borders will relatively shrink in the next generation????
Notice the size the iPhone apps scale to on the iPad is significantly larger than the actual 3.5" of the iPhone and they scale just fine. I didn't read all of the comments, but I've never seen anyone ever point this out before.
glocke12
May 4, 05:38 PM
Guns are within my scope of practice (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/rchoi/detail?entry_id=88328)
Couple this with the fact that the NRA has prevented any studies on guns and their impact on American society and I think we can all rest assured that we're heading towards a society ruled by the American Taliban. Heavy sarcasm intended.
If guns are so important to society, why is it taboo to have an adult conversation about their impact on that society?
Sorry, but whether I have guns in my house with my kids is not anyones business but my own.
Couple this with the fact that the NRA has prevented any studies on guns and their impact on American society and I think we can all rest assured that we're heading towards a society ruled by the American Taliban. Heavy sarcasm intended.
If guns are so important to society, why is it taboo to have an adult conversation about their impact on that society?
Sorry, but whether I have guns in my house with my kids is not anyones business but my own.
Torrijos
Jul 21, 04:55 PM
Even if Rim, Palm, etc. exhibit the same antenna problems as the iPhone 4, Apple is acting like a cry baby by trying to shift the discussion to include their competitors. �Teacher, the other kids are being bad too, don�t punish me alone�.
Actually it was the competitors that tried to use the antenna problems as a selling point and as propaganda.
http://conversations.nokia.com/2010/06/28/how-do-you-hold-your-nokia/
So the lot of them are fair game...
As for bloggers that just wanted to troll the issue to drive their numbers up the presentation (and answers that followed) were pretty much Jobs telling them to try and get a journalist degree and get their facts straight, and who could blame him?
Since the iPhone 4 as started shipping we've had the antenna problem that has being described as if the phone could simply not be used (numbers debunked that) without real investigation, fake Jobs e-mail, fake reports of an engineer warnings etc.
If it wasn't for anandtech this all would be a complete disaster. The way different technology sites reported the story is just pathetic.
Actually it was the competitors that tried to use the antenna problems as a selling point and as propaganda.
http://conversations.nokia.com/2010/06/28/how-do-you-hold-your-nokia/
So the lot of them are fair game...
As for bloggers that just wanted to troll the issue to drive their numbers up the presentation (and answers that followed) were pretty much Jobs telling them to try and get a journalist degree and get their facts straight, and who could blame him?
Since the iPhone 4 as started shipping we've had the antenna problem that has being described as if the phone could simply not be used (numbers debunked that) without real investigation, fake Jobs e-mail, fake reports of an engineer warnings etc.
If it wasn't for anandtech this all would be a complete disaster. The way different technology sites reported the story is just pathetic.
Much Ado
Jan 9, 01:30 PM
I accidentally just went on BBC News... spoilt one surprise for myself :(
Yeah, i don't think the internet is a safe place until after weve seen the QT vid ourselves.
Meanwhile, the whole world is going nuts about a 300Gb iPod with built in Sat-Nav and Intel Quad-Core processors and we're sitting here nervously going at the alcohol, refusing to be tempted.
I love every minute :D
MA.
Oh, and in reply to the guy who is going to give up at 8, please don't put spoilers on here if you do take a look. That would not make me happy after all this waiting! :)
Yeah, i don't think the internet is a safe place until after weve seen the QT vid ourselves.
Meanwhile, the whole world is going nuts about a 300Gb iPod with built in Sat-Nav and Intel Quad-Core processors and we're sitting here nervously going at the alcohol, refusing to be tempted.
I love every minute :D
MA.
Oh, and in reply to the guy who is going to give up at 8, please don't put spoilers on here if you do take a look. That would not make me happy after all this waiting! :)
Mac.World
Apr 17, 01:43 PM
Being gay for most of human history has been pretty difficult. To not touch on that is really stupid and shows a bias that when it comes to history, should not be shown.
You do realize that homosexuality is not new and in fact was prevalent throughout ancient Greece, Rome and Egypt. It wasn't until Christianity took root and became prevalent that homosexuality was looked down upon. You can thank religion for that (Leviticus 18:22). So in fact, for most of human history homosexuality was seen as no different from heterosexuality.
You do realize that homosexuality is not new and in fact was prevalent throughout ancient Greece, Rome and Egypt. It wasn't until Christianity took root and became prevalent that homosexuality was looked down upon. You can thank religion for that (Leviticus 18:22). So in fact, for most of human history homosexuality was seen as no different from heterosexuality.
Full of Win
May 2, 09:37 AM
VICTORY. I just Apple does not replace it with some more invasive.
MorphingDragon
May 4, 03:56 AM
Just like communism
Just like Communism my arse.
This is why I don't do phone contracts. PrePay may not be as cheap in the long run but it lets you be agile with your mobile provider and they can't pull !@#$ like this as often. Currently with 2Degrees, cant see myself moving anytime soon. Work pays me $20/month for credit so I'm happy.
Just like Communism my arse.
This is why I don't do phone contracts. PrePay may not be as cheap in the long run but it lets you be agile with your mobile provider and they can't pull !@#$ like this as often. Currently with 2Degrees, cant see myself moving anytime soon. Work pays me $20/month for credit so I'm happy.
theregoesmybus
Aug 7, 10:00 PM
I purchase an Apple 30" display 2 1/2 weeks ago for $2499. Before I think about calling Apple, anyone have any thoughts on whether they would issue a refund for the difference? Or suggestions on how to ask?
Thanks, Andy
Thanks, Andy
amin
Oct 11, 10:37 AM
Don't get your hopes up too high, since the iPod's screen is the same resolution as the Zune, it has better battery than the Zune and its thinner than the Zune.
A bigger screen than the iPod's would be preferable, even without an increase in pixel count. A 320x240 video on my iMac display is far easier on the eyes than a 320x240 video on my iPod when both are set to the same brightness. Why? Because the iPod display is too damn small for long-term comfortable viewing.
A bigger screen than the iPod's would be preferable, even without an increase in pixel count. A 320x240 video on my iMac display is far easier on the eyes than a 320x240 video on my iPod when both are set to the same brightness. Why? Because the iPod display is too damn small for long-term comfortable viewing.
Squareball
Oct 2, 05:16 PM
Zune won't be able to play iTunes/FairPlay content because all this software by Dvd John does is let others ENCODE their content with FairPlay DRM, not DECODE.
Decoding is illegal but providing an alternative encoding is murky and there is history that suggests it's legal (Compaq's IBM PC clone).
So this only hurts the iTunes store not the iPod. It's also easy enough for Real to license this technology and provide a front end to their own store that then downloads the files to your computer and tells iTunes where they are so you can just open up iTunes and drag them to your iPod from a Real smart list (much the way LimeWire adds its own Smart List to your iTunes playlists side bar).
So no, Zune will never be able to play iTunes content with this software nor will any other non-apple device.
Decoding is illegal but providing an alternative encoding is murky and there is history that suggests it's legal (Compaq's IBM PC clone).
So this only hurts the iTunes store not the iPod. It's also easy enough for Real to license this technology and provide a front end to their own store that then downloads the files to your computer and tells iTunes where they are so you can just open up iTunes and drag them to your iPod from a Real smart list (much the way LimeWire adds its own Smart List to your iTunes playlists side bar).
So no, Zune will never be able to play iTunes content with this software nor will any other non-apple device.
dhc
Sep 12, 02:55 AM
iPod shuffle discontinued entirely
I can't see this happening - not without an imediate replacement (though this may be achieved by significantly reducing the cost of the Nano?)
I've been wrong before though.
I can't see this happening - not without an imediate replacement (though this may be achieved by significantly reducing the cost of the Nano?)
I've been wrong before though.
Rocketman
Oct 29, 10:42 AM
[QUOTE=eric_n_dfw;2992297]I'd love to be able to legally install OS X on a Dell or build-it-myself PC, even it it wasn't $0, but Apple would tank in no time as they make the lion's share of their money selling hardware. Especially when Dell's can sell this cheap: Is one MacBook Pro C2D worth two Dells? (http://blog.dealnews.com/?p=75)
That's IF you jump through hoops, IF you find the discount coupon, and IF Dell honors it. You WILL get an inferior machine in every way to Apple's offerings. If you simply call up Dell and order a machine, you won't get that price.
Trust me, I do this for a living - you don't put Dell and quality in the same page, let alone sentence.
That being said, Apple would do fine on software sales. Especially if they significantly upped their software sales. At least 1 OEM has said they would love to ditch Windows at the first sight of a capable OS. OS X is that OS. All Apple would have to do is shift from a primarily hardware company to an iPod/hardware and software co.
If Apple were to follow Microsoft's lead on a similar problem, virtualization installations of Vista, Apple would simply charge $150-200 EXTRA for OSX on Commodity PCs.
The backlash to Microsoft has been notable and you cannot even widely buy the software yet. I wonder how it would impact the relatively untarnished image of Apple?
Rocketman
That's IF you jump through hoops, IF you find the discount coupon, and IF Dell honors it. You WILL get an inferior machine in every way to Apple's offerings. If you simply call up Dell and order a machine, you won't get that price.
Trust me, I do this for a living - you don't put Dell and quality in the same page, let alone sentence.
That being said, Apple would do fine on software sales. Especially if they significantly upped their software sales. At least 1 OEM has said they would love to ditch Windows at the first sight of a capable OS. OS X is that OS. All Apple would have to do is shift from a primarily hardware company to an iPod/hardware and software co.
If Apple were to follow Microsoft's lead on a similar problem, virtualization installations of Vista, Apple would simply charge $150-200 EXTRA for OSX on Commodity PCs.
The backlash to Microsoft has been notable and you cannot even widely buy the software yet. I wonder how it would impact the relatively untarnished image of Apple?
Rocketman
joeboy_45101
Oct 28, 09:40 PM
Oh ****! Thanks Apple! Now, how am I supposed to get Mac OS X to run on my old Linux box?
Dagless
Apr 22, 10:02 AM
No sir I don't like it. By all means have a +rep button, but don't add a -rep one. With this kind of site if you express the slightest justified dissatisfaction with Apple you'll be downranked to oblivion.
I believe the Steam forum has the best method. Positive only. Keep reputation details private, but have the accumulated total under usernames.
I believe the Steam forum has the best method. Positive only. Keep reputation details private, but have the accumulated total under usernames.
SimonMW
Jan 15, 05:50 PM
still 700:1 contrast ratio
In the context that manufacturers state such figures, this is meaningless. All it really boils down to is how white their whites are so they can claim a high contrast ratio, even though in the real world it means sod all.
Now what would really get me interested is a flat screen that displays truly black blacks.
In the context that manufacturers state such figures, this is meaningless. All it really boils down to is how white their whites are so they can claim a high contrast ratio, even though in the real world it means sod all.
Now what would really get me interested is a flat screen that displays truly black blacks.
aafuss1
Sep 12, 08:37 AM
Paramount should offer on the iTunes store-the Nickelodeon movies will be family friendly and Nicktoons Nwtwork original series-Kappa Mikey could be added.
No comments:
Post a Comment