spicyapple
Dec 3, 10:34 AM
Judging by the progression in the poll numbers, looks like FUD is gaining traction.
yac_moda
Jul 11, 08:05 PM
I'm not sure if it's just a bunch of "computer guys" around here, but in the gaming world Xbox 360 has a fair amount of cultural cachet. It's not my cup of tea, but it's pretty dang popular with youth culture. Microsoft already has a highly successful, profitable, and critically lauded online service in Xbox Live, with millions of subscribers.
I think it's a bit of wishful thinking to claim MS will "screw this up", since the infrastructure is already there, and it's already functioning in a lot of young people's homes.
Look, I'm the biggest Apple fan I know, but Microsoft has proven over and over that they can move into an arena with another market leader and chip away. They lost hundreds of millions on the Xbox, and went right ahead and made a successor. They don't care if they lose some money, because eventually, they will make money.
I would love to see iPod continue its success, but, aside from a current lead in marketshare, Microsoft has a lot going for it this time around.
:eek: YOUTH CULTURE :eek:
Where has it gone, withered on the vine ??? the USA's YC used to rule the world ?? Now PC is the only thing the comes close to ruling the world ?
I think it's a bit of wishful thinking to claim MS will "screw this up", since the infrastructure is already there, and it's already functioning in a lot of young people's homes.
Look, I'm the biggest Apple fan I know, but Microsoft has proven over and over that they can move into an arena with another market leader and chip away. They lost hundreds of millions on the Xbox, and went right ahead and made a successor. They don't care if they lose some money, because eventually, they will make money.
I would love to see iPod continue its success, but, aside from a current lead in marketshare, Microsoft has a lot going for it this time around.
:eek: YOUTH CULTURE :eek:
Where has it gone, withered on the vine ??? the USA's YC used to rule the world ?? Now PC is the only thing the comes close to ruling the world ?
rubberwheels
Apr 17, 11:32 PM
I love the Macbook Air but I would hate it if they released a new one. Especially since this was only out in 10/2010.
rdowns
Mar 8, 08:22 AM
I wonder how Emilio Estevez is doing during all this..
He's at home waiting for the Breakfast Club 2 script. :D
He's at home waiting for the Breakfast Club 2 script. :D
mandis
Apr 13, 04:55 PM
It will probably cost twice the price of the equivalent LG/Samsung and at first will only offer half the features.:rolleyes:
bvz
Apr 26, 05:57 PM
smug free screen? Apple will never eliminate smugness in its products! :)
happy former owner of a 27" i7 imac that was stolen last month. Looking forward to replacing it with this new one.
I saw and got my hands on a possible prototype IMac that had a touchable screen and a smug free screen. It also had the earlier uncoded virtual keyboard in the Lion OS. though it was only a prototype but a very realistic one for production. I believe it to be the IMac I and my father both got our hands on earlier this year.:apple:
happy former owner of a 27" i7 imac that was stolen last month. Looking forward to replacing it with this new one.
I saw and got my hands on a possible prototype IMac that had a touchable screen and a smug free screen. It also had the earlier uncoded virtual keyboard in the Lion OS. though it was only a prototype but a very realistic one for production. I believe it to be the IMac I and my father both got our hands on earlier this year.:apple:
colmaclean
May 3, 07:44 AM
UK Store has no price on the iMac and the links are dodgy. It took them 3 hours to do that??? :confused:
*LTD*
Apr 22, 05:00 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
nah there r better looking HTC out there by now, the new one they got (forgot its name) with the slide out keyboard is pure sex ^^
If it has a slide-out keyboard it's already fail.
nah there r better looking HTC out there by now, the new one they got (forgot its name) with the slide out keyboard is pure sex ^^
If it has a slide-out keyboard it's already fail.
Some_Big_Spoon
Jul 10, 08:45 PM
I'm with you 150%. I love pages in that it just lets me create:fast. I don't like that it makes assumptions (or more, I don't like the assumtions that it makes) as to what I want to do. Your example of the dropped in graphic is dead-on. I dropped in the graphic, so probably I want the graphic. I may want to do more with the graphic, but I may not. iWeb does the same thing, and the pre-1.1 template-only-no-blank-pages thing just made it even worse.
I'd like a tiered level Pages. Maybe an "expert mode" or something that just places things, then has better designed menus and "inspectors" to let me do what I want with it. I find the inspectors to not be well laid out or logical. Why is the text broswer in a completely different dialog than other text attributes, i.e. paragrapgh style, color, etc.? Only Apple knows. If you want to do seperate dialogs, at least give me the option to merge or tab like InDesign.
My only two beefs with Pages is the fact that its toolset is everywhere. You've got some toolbars which only really get you to some space hogging side views and inspectors which take up tons of space just for the one or two things I need to hit. Second, it needs a built in macro language - even if its based off AppleScript (i.e. an AS menu would do then). Having AppleScript support but not accessible within the app itself makes it much harder to deal with.
For example when I put in a graphic, I want to make it 2'' wide, shadow, move with text, wrap to the left with a black border. That's 4-5 panels I have to go through each time I add a pic. I add about 50 or so pics per doc.
So first I'd love if they could organize the menus, toolbars, inspectors, and such a lot better. Its just so haphazard. Next the ability to script repetitive actions.
I'd like a tiered level Pages. Maybe an "expert mode" or something that just places things, then has better designed menus and "inspectors" to let me do what I want with it. I find the inspectors to not be well laid out or logical. Why is the text broswer in a completely different dialog than other text attributes, i.e. paragrapgh style, color, etc.? Only Apple knows. If you want to do seperate dialogs, at least give me the option to merge or tab like InDesign.
My only two beefs with Pages is the fact that its toolset is everywhere. You've got some toolbars which only really get you to some space hogging side views and inspectors which take up tons of space just for the one or two things I need to hit. Second, it needs a built in macro language - even if its based off AppleScript (i.e. an AS menu would do then). Having AppleScript support but not accessible within the app itself makes it much harder to deal with.
For example when I put in a graphic, I want to make it 2'' wide, shadow, move with text, wrap to the left with a black border. That's 4-5 panels I have to go through each time I add a pic. I add about 50 or so pics per doc.
So first I'd love if they could organize the menus, toolbars, inspectors, and such a lot better. Its just so haphazard. Next the ability to script repetitive actions.
NightFox
Mar 31, 12:41 PM
Maybe it is universal - perhaps in Lion every OS application/Finder window toolbar is going to be in pimp-style leather? :o
.jpg "on a each and a barbecue")
sth
May 3, 08:03 AM
How can it be TFT and IPS?!! That makes no sense quite honestly... Pish Posh...
TN/IPS/VA/... are different subcategories of TFT panels, which are in turn a subcategory of LCD displays.
TN/IPS/VA/... are different subcategories of TFT panels, which are in turn a subcategory of LCD displays.
stroked
Apr 27, 03:16 AM
Maybe you should just keep your daughter out of public bathrooms. The reality is that she has already shared a public bathroom with a transgender person, a lesbian, a criminal, someone who is a different ethnicity than she is, etc....And apparently she is still whole.
Are you going to interrogate everyone who shares a bathroom with her? How do you know some deranged female serial killer isn't in there with her?
I can understand your need to protect your daughter, but your ignorance and prejudice will hurt her more than sharing a bathroom with a transgender will.
ignorance, really? I was expecting that a lot sooner, because you people think, that everyone that disagrees with your life style is an ignorant bigot.
a different ethnicity, What makes you think I have a problem with that? Why are you trying to bring up the race card? Were not talking about lesbians or criminals either.
It might be possible to fool me when it comes to a transvestite, but it is hard to hide big hands, an adams apple, and wide shoulders, among other things.
I will teach her the morals that I believe in, and she will not be hurt at all. Believe it or not, there are a lot of woman, with conservative values, living happy, productive lives.
Are you going to interrogate everyone who shares a bathroom with her? How do you know some deranged female serial killer isn't in there with her?
I can understand your need to protect your daughter, but your ignorance and prejudice will hurt her more than sharing a bathroom with a transgender will.
ignorance, really? I was expecting that a lot sooner, because you people think, that everyone that disagrees with your life style is an ignorant bigot.
a different ethnicity, What makes you think I have a problem with that? Why are you trying to bring up the race card? Were not talking about lesbians or criminals either.
It might be possible to fool me when it comes to a transvestite, but it is hard to hide big hands, an adams apple, and wide shoulders, among other things.
I will teach her the morals that I believe in, and she will not be hurt at all. Believe it or not, there are a lot of woman, with conservative values, living happy, productive lives.
Nobita
Apr 13, 08:00 PM
at&t ?, Verizon ? or both?
It says both in the story.
It says both in the story.
jessica.
Sep 15, 07:35 AM
og's
251762
You have really small feet. ;)
251762
You have really small feet. ;)
Surely
Jan 30, 02:12 AM
I bought a round trip ticket for my mother to come out here for a two week visit. It was very spur of the moment, and I'm glad she agreed to it.
http://www.boncherry.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/20090421-virgin-america-airplane.jpg
http://www.boncherry.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/20090421-virgin-america-airplane.jpg
Brien
Mar 14, 10:58 AM
Called Brea this morning (around 8 AM). They don't know if they are getting any today (I swear, retail employees don't know anything about anything), but there's already a line about 100 people deep. Yeesh.
Surely
Apr 28, 07:19 PM
.
Hey, Jonny I've for CEO!!!! Not.
Looks like his brain went to England but he left his body behind to do some last minute 'designs'. Nice attention to detail, all you had to do was change the color, genius. :rolleyes:
Yes, that's all they had to do. It was that simple......that's why it came out so quickly.:rolleyes:
I've ≠ Ive.
Hey, Jonny I've for CEO!!!! Not.
Looks like his brain went to England but he left his body behind to do some last minute 'designs'. Nice attention to detail, all you had to do was change the color, genius. :rolleyes:
Yes, that's all they had to do. It was that simple......that's why it came out so quickly.:rolleyes:
I've ≠ Ive.
coder12
Apr 28, 11:55 AM
Anyone else find these stories on market share to be completely boring?!?
Can MacRumors setup a Page 3 section to put these on and keep the interesting rumors on the first page (new Macs, new iOS, etc)?
Until Apple announces they are stopping production of the iPhone due to low sales.....I don't care who sells the most. :rolleyes:
-Kevin
Thank you! I was thinking the same thing here...
Can MacRumors setup a Page 3 section to put these on and keep the interesting rumors on the first page (new Macs, new iOS, etc)?
Until Apple announces they are stopping production of the iPhone due to low sales.....I don't care who sells the most. :rolleyes:
-Kevin
Thank you! I was thinking the same thing here...
ChrisGonzales90
Jun 7, 12:12 AM
Now that I think of it Shouldn't 11 year olds be outside skateboarding or playing softball or something? They have no right to be using and abusing technology
NATO
Apr 12, 09:43 AM
TheRegister seems to reckon it's not due until 2012:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/12/iphone_delay/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/12/iphone_delay/
FtrV8
Apr 22, 04:15 PM
Redesign that quick? But than again, a delay till September might be the reason. Who know, sure looks bad ass though.
FloatingBones
Nov 23, 12:46 AM
That's not why I called him a Communist. I call him a Communist because he acts like a 1-person dictator.
He's the CEO of a company: accountable to the Board of Directors and the stockholders of the publicly-traded company. There's no comparison between that and a communist dictator. Goofy.
Anyone who can provide a rational reason why these two things are comparable, please chime in.
Flash for iOS is no more of a security risk than it is for OSX in general or any other plugin from PDF readers to Javascript.
That's a terrible argument for having bundled Adobe products on iOS.
Adobe products are a large risk on Mac OS X. It's unbelievable to me that Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If you only view PDF files, you shouldn't even have Adobe Reader installed on your OS X computer. Apple Preview is better, faster, and far less bug-prone.
Steve Jobs "reason" for not including Flash is supposedly mostly about performance not security risks.
It's about both the performance and the security risks.
It's also about the identity-leaking through Flash cookies. Perhaps you missed that security discussion: more than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt). Flash cookies do not honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser; many users don't even know that Flash maintains its own set of cookies.
It's about the quirky UI interactions with Flash. Scrolling works differently when the mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that is displayed in a flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
Then why are they allowing Flash in regular OSX?
Software is much more tightly-controlled on iOS devices. There is a file system firewall between every app. Third-party apps must be submitted to Apple before they can be distributed, and Apple has the capability to remotely disable any third party app that begins to exhibit a malware-like behavior in the field.
Some of those controls are about advances in OS development since Mac OS X. Some have to do with the nature of the device: handhelds are more appliances than laptops.
One other reason to ban Flash on iOS: Flash apps can be packaged as iOS apps. This should be safe because of the way that iOS apps are firewalled from each other and the kill switch that Apple can use if an app is found to be rogue.
There are fundamental differences between iOS devices and laptops/desktops. Also, Apple no longer ships Adobe Flash on their newest computers. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1034486) I'm guessing that Apple will ship Flash on no computers starting with the release of OS X 10.7 next year.
By your logic that would mean that Microsoft must be the most incompetent company out there.
I don't believe you read that headline carefully: Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm).
On the contrary, it indicates they are POPULAR.
No reason to shout.
Perhaps it indicates they have some fundamental problems in their software engineering. Did you read the podcast transcript about the latest Adobe bug? Adobe Reader has the same zero-day glitch as Flash. How does a PDF viewer get executable bugs like this?
How often does Apple update their security? I guess they're clueless too by your account. You won't admit that, however because you have an emotional investment in Apple.
Apple updates their software when updates are needed.
The point is that quarterly updates are far too infrequent. Did you read the transcript of the Security Now! podcast? Given the continuing number of Adobe zero-day bugs, Gibson asks:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
That is not what I said or what I proposed.
You proposed that Apple include Flash with iOS Safari and that users could turn it on. How you can possibly ensure that not a single iOS user will not lose anything the next time there's a zero day Adobe bug (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). You can't.
He's the CEO of a company: accountable to the Board of Directors and the stockholders of the publicly-traded company. There's no comparison between that and a communist dictator. Goofy.
Anyone who can provide a rational reason why these two things are comparable, please chime in.
Flash for iOS is no more of a security risk than it is for OSX in general or any other plugin from PDF readers to Javascript.
That's a terrible argument for having bundled Adobe products on iOS.
Adobe products are a large risk on Mac OS X. It's unbelievable to me that Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If you only view PDF files, you shouldn't even have Adobe Reader installed on your OS X computer. Apple Preview is better, faster, and far less bug-prone.
Steve Jobs "reason" for not including Flash is supposedly mostly about performance not security risks.
It's about both the performance and the security risks.
It's also about the identity-leaking through Flash cookies. Perhaps you missed that security discussion: more than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt). Flash cookies do not honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser; many users don't even know that Flash maintains its own set of cookies.
It's about the quirky UI interactions with Flash. Scrolling works differently when the mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that is displayed in a flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
Then why are they allowing Flash in regular OSX?
Software is much more tightly-controlled on iOS devices. There is a file system firewall between every app. Third-party apps must be submitted to Apple before they can be distributed, and Apple has the capability to remotely disable any third party app that begins to exhibit a malware-like behavior in the field.
Some of those controls are about advances in OS development since Mac OS X. Some have to do with the nature of the device: handhelds are more appliances than laptops.
One other reason to ban Flash on iOS: Flash apps can be packaged as iOS apps. This should be safe because of the way that iOS apps are firewalled from each other and the kill switch that Apple can use if an app is found to be rogue.
There are fundamental differences between iOS devices and laptops/desktops. Also, Apple no longer ships Adobe Flash on their newest computers. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1034486) I'm guessing that Apple will ship Flash on no computers starting with the release of OS X 10.7 next year.
By your logic that would mean that Microsoft must be the most incompetent company out there.
I don't believe you read that headline carefully: Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm).
On the contrary, it indicates they are POPULAR.
No reason to shout.
Perhaps it indicates they have some fundamental problems in their software engineering. Did you read the podcast transcript about the latest Adobe bug? Adobe Reader has the same zero-day glitch as Flash. How does a PDF viewer get executable bugs like this?
How often does Apple update their security? I guess they're clueless too by your account. You won't admit that, however because you have an emotional investment in Apple.
Apple updates their software when updates are needed.
The point is that quarterly updates are far too infrequent. Did you read the transcript of the Security Now! podcast? Given the continuing number of Adobe zero-day bugs, Gibson asks:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
That is not what I said or what I proposed.
You proposed that Apple include Flash with iOS Safari and that users could turn it on. How you can possibly ensure that not a single iOS user will not lose anything the next time there's a zero day Adobe bug (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). You can't.
Mystikal
Mar 15, 08:55 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Fashion Island - around 7 people in line or so?
Fashion Island - around 7 people in line or so?
einmusiker
Dec 31, 12:25 AM
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
ok, I'm sorry but how the hell do you know what I do or don't understand about nutrition?? your presumptions are offensive
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
ok, I'm sorry but how the hell do you know what I do or don't understand about nutrition?? your presumptions are offensive
No comments:
Post a Comment