KnightWRX
Dec 30, 10:43 PM
Under normal circumstances, you're more or less right.
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.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
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.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
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 going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
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.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
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.
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.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
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.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
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 going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
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.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
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.
iMikeT
Oct 18, 05:59 PM
I wish I had the money to invest a couple of months ago when Apple's stock was ~$50.:(
Moyank24
Apr 25, 04:44 PM
Moyank24 because she is a woman who won't give me cheap sammiches. Sounds wolfish to me. :D
I'll change my vote if any good evidence shows up.
I am completely and utterly shocked by this vote.
/sarcasm
And forget about cheap sandwiches...you're paying double for lapdances!
I'll change my vote if any good evidence shows up.
I am completely and utterly shocked by this vote.
/sarcasm
And forget about cheap sandwiches...you're paying double for lapdances!
WildCowboy
Oct 18, 04:51 PM
Still not sure where you're getting this "less than half the total" figure... :confused:
This quarter, Macs accounted for $2.213 billion in revenue. iPods accounted for $1.559 billion, plus another $452 million in music-related revenue, for a total of $2.011 billion. So, even without counting Mac peripherals and software, music revenue was less than Mac revenue.
Last quarter, Mac revenue was $1.866 billion, while iPods sold $1.497 billion, plus another $457 million in other music-related revenue, for a total of $1.954 billion for the music end.
This quarter, Macs accounted for $2.213 billion in revenue. iPods accounted for $1.559 billion, plus another $452 million in music-related revenue, for a total of $2.011 billion. So, even without counting Mac peripherals and software, music revenue was less than Mac revenue.
Last quarter, Mac revenue was $1.866 billion, while iPods sold $1.497 billion, plus another $457 million in other music-related revenue, for a total of $1.954 billion for the music end.
Yvan256
Jul 28, 01:26 PM
"Forget about Zune, look at this new operating system we're releasing this year. It's called Vista. It has this new search feature called Floodlight. When you search for something it instantly floods you with results from your hard drive."
"Floodlight"... good one. :D
"Floodlight"... good one. :D
appleguy
Aug 18, 03:58 AM
I have had Leopard running tonight
it feels so much nicer and faster on my G4 1.4 Mac Mini (w 1GB of RAM)
anyone got any questions??
it feels so much nicer and faster on my G4 1.4 Mac Mini (w 1GB of RAM)
anyone got any questions??
don.keishlong
Apr 14, 02:47 PM
Aww how cute! iOS has experienced its first step on the road to fragmentation!
LightSpeed1
Apr 28, 09:06 PM
As time moves forward, well start to see a lot of this.
johndallas999
May 4, 09:35 AM
pfft, this should not be front page news, hell not even second page... just a bunch of hearsay from a CR that knows nothing about it and speculates BS.
No kidding! You'd think this whole site was just based on "rumors". Jeeze!
No kidding! You'd think this whole site was just based on "rumors". Jeeze!
KeareB
Oct 18, 06:18 PM
"Q on Mac Pro demand. A: Very positive reaction to Mac Pro. Still feel there is a delay in purchasing related to Creative Suite (Universal)"
They said the same thing about pro desktop sales when we were waiting on a carbon version from Adobe. Then, it was released and Pro sales didn't increase. Too bad you can't put Xeon in a MBP :P
I think this is different. Our company is not buying any Intel-based macs until Adobe releases Universal CS, and I don't know why anyone would spend $$ on new hardwre now only to take a performance hit, vs. a performance increase and better hardware bang for the buck by waiting 6-9 months.
They said the same thing about pro desktop sales when we were waiting on a carbon version from Adobe. Then, it was released and Pro sales didn't increase. Too bad you can't put Xeon in a MBP :P
I think this is different. Our company is not buying any Intel-based macs until Adobe releases Universal CS, and I don't know why anyone would spend $$ on new hardwre now only to take a performance hit, vs. a performance increase and better hardware bang for the buck by waiting 6-9 months.
maclaptop
Apr 12, 11:10 AM
If enough people take a guess on the release date of the next iPhone, someone is going to be right!
I tend to believe All Things Digitals reporting since they are in bed with Apple and have been for years. Between Walt Mossberg & David Pogue, Steve's two hand picked suck ups, the rumors are fed direct to them. Lately to keep the scepticism at bay, either of those two have one of their minions write the article which keeps the other two flying under the radar. When the big announcements hit, then Walt takes it, writing a gushing article.
That said I'm very glad to see the date pushed back. Apple needs the extra time to get this one done right. I eagerly await the 5. Its Apples chance to build a really good smartphone. If they include a phone that works well, a proper 4" display, the new model will set an excellent standard. If it includes these basics I plan to order one asap.
I tend to believe All Things Digitals reporting since they are in bed with Apple and have been for years. Between Walt Mossberg & David Pogue, Steve's two hand picked suck ups, the rumors are fed direct to them. Lately to keep the scepticism at bay, either of those two have one of their minions write the article which keeps the other two flying under the radar. When the big announcements hit, then Walt takes it, writing a gushing article.
That said I'm very glad to see the date pushed back. Apple needs the extra time to get this one done right. I eagerly await the 5. Its Apples chance to build a really good smartphone. If they include a phone that works well, a proper 4" display, the new model will set an excellent standard. If it includes these basics I plan to order one asap.
astroot
Apr 14, 08:24 AM
I currently have a black 3GS, and have been waiting since day 1 for the white iPhone 4. I will buy this immediately.
Since iPhone 5 will probably just be a spec bump and maybe a little bigger screen, I'm not all that concerned about it.
Since iPhone 5 will probably just be a spec bump and maybe a little bigger screen, I'm not all that concerned about it.
*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.
superericla
Apr 15, 03:26 PM
I'm getting much less ram usage and better battery life with this update as comparison to without.
anonymous5332
Apr 14, 08:58 AM
Panic (http://www.panic.com/) developer Cabel Sasser (http://twitter.com/cabel) noticed a strange bug in the iTunes App Store this evening. As part of the hardware requirements on several new apps, a placeholder name "ix.Mac.MarketingName" has appeared on several apps' iTunes listings.
Let's look at this from the developer's point of view. If it's not an accidental glitch � it must be a placeholder for something not yet released. We [developers] use such placeholders/variables in templates all the time and don't put dots at random places. Usually when we put a dot after something it means that we are talking about particular trait or side of the object. E.g: person.age means 'age*of the person'.
In this case ix.mac.marketing is likely to imply:
Zac Efron Tries To Make Jorts
boy and girl holding hands
boy and girl holding hands
Zac Efron sighting
Let's look at this from the developer's point of view. If it's not an accidental glitch � it must be a placeholder for something not yet released. We [developers] use such placeholders/variables in templates all the time and don't put dots at random places. Usually when we put a dot after something it means that we are talking about particular trait or side of the object. E.g: person.age means 'age*of the person'.
In this case ix.mac.marketing is likely to imply:
eemsTV
Apr 14, 10:12 PM
I'm a proud owner of a rooted Droid X, waiting for the Bionic to come out, once I saw this, I admit, I was taken with the sexiness of the phone. I'd be willing to get rid of my rooted sweet Android phone for the white. I'm such a nerd.
Hoping this phone has a spec update like the 3GS from 3G, that would be fantastic.
Steve guys are entrepreneurs geniuses.
Hoping this phone has a spec update like the 3GS from 3G, that would be fantastic.
Steve guys are entrepreneurs geniuses.
Megakazbek
Apr 13, 06:36 AM
Waiting for you to change the tone when Apple comes out with widgets and custom personalization.
You sound like I am against it.
You sound like I am against it.
SpyderFCS
May 3, 07:37 AM
The iMac page is updated on the US site.
http://www.apple.com/imac/
http://www.apple.com/imac/
Mac21ND
Mar 31, 10:45 AM
WOW! It looks like wIndows 3.1! :eek:
I know - it's funny how things come full circle.
Mac OS X was all about color and Aqua.
Then, it started moving back to clean, iTunes style windows. OS 9 gray started replacing the "pinstripes" that were with Aqua and the dock became 3D.
Now we're back.
Honestly, I don't mind it. I work on my Mac all day and it's nice to have some more friendly looking programs. I don't see a huge difference in UI differences that it's going to cause me (at least) any inefficiencies; but to each there own.
I know - it's funny how things come full circle.
Mac OS X was all about color and Aqua.
Then, it started moving back to clean, iTunes style windows. OS 9 gray started replacing the "pinstripes" that were with Aqua and the dock became 3D.
Now we're back.
Honestly, I don't mind it. I work on my Mac all day and it's nice to have some more friendly looking programs. I don't see a huge difference in UI differences that it's going to cause me (at least) any inefficiencies; but to each there own.
kingtj
Oct 24, 09:08 AM
Yep, my thoughts too. (And again, you have to wonder why over 20 people already voted this story negative.....)
But I like my Macbook Pro 15" that I got a month or so after it came out. I still use all the time and it works for me. I didn't really see the big deal about the "lacking features" back then, and I still don't think they're a big deal now.
1. FW800? Yeah, nice to have ... but honestly, the only time I plugged anything into my MBPro's FW port, it was just a cable bridged between it and my desktop to xfer over a bunch of data one time. (My portable hard drive is USB 2.0 since I also use a Windows PC that has no firewire port on it.)
2. Dual-layer burner? Are people honestly doing much DL disc burning? I don't, because the media still costs WAY too much! I bought a total of one 15-pack of DL media once, and that was just to make backup copies of a few specific DVDs like iLife '06 that couldn't fit on a single layer DVD-R. Then, I found out that the DL discs I did make are very picky about which drives they'll read in afterwards. Plus, even the *slightest* blemish on one before you burn to it results in a disc with errors. DL media is hyper-sensitive to scratches.
3. I upgraded my MBPro to 2GB as soon as I got it. Works for me, and as more apps become universal, the need for more RAM is reduced. The real "RAM hog" is Rosetta.
IMHO--A solid upgrade. Same price point but more memory, more video ram, fw 800, dual layer burner.
I'm jealous! I have a the original Macbook Pro. But my laptop was just fine yesterday so I won't be upgrading til the next major upgrade.
But I like my Macbook Pro 15" that I got a month or so after it came out. I still use all the time and it works for me. I didn't really see the big deal about the "lacking features" back then, and I still don't think they're a big deal now.
1. FW800? Yeah, nice to have ... but honestly, the only time I plugged anything into my MBPro's FW port, it was just a cable bridged between it and my desktop to xfer over a bunch of data one time. (My portable hard drive is USB 2.0 since I also use a Windows PC that has no firewire port on it.)
2. Dual-layer burner? Are people honestly doing much DL disc burning? I don't, because the media still costs WAY too much! I bought a total of one 15-pack of DL media once, and that was just to make backup copies of a few specific DVDs like iLife '06 that couldn't fit on a single layer DVD-R. Then, I found out that the DL discs I did make are very picky about which drives they'll read in afterwards. Plus, even the *slightest* blemish on one before you burn to it results in a disc with errors. DL media is hyper-sensitive to scratches.
3. I upgraded my MBPro to 2GB as soon as I got it. Works for me, and as more apps become universal, the need for more RAM is reduced. The real "RAM hog" is Rosetta.
IMHO--A solid upgrade. Same price point but more memory, more video ram, fw 800, dual layer burner.
I'm jealous! I have a the original Macbook Pro. But my laptop was just fine yesterday so I won't be upgrading til the next major upgrade.
Orme
May 2, 10:45 AM
I don't know if this is relevant but the shipping on the basic models say 24 hours but when I select the quad i7 option the shipping extends to 3 days.. When I selected the quad i7 option last night it said shipping only 2 days.. so it has changed by + 1 day :confused::rolleyes:
MICHAELSD
Jun 6, 10:09 PM
Sorry, Shaniqwa was the first name I could think of when I thought of 8 kids and irresponsible parenting. My apologies.
I LOL'd at this. Not that I think you're wrong. Let's not start a racism debate over this, guys.
I LOL'd at this. Not that I think you're wrong. Let's not start a racism debate over this, guys.
jclardy
Apr 14, 06:35 AM
You don't need Rosetta, iOS is Intel 64 native. You get a copy with Xcode called the Simulator.
The problem is that all iOS app store binaries are ARM and not x86. Devs could provide a second build for the simulator but they would have to do it for all of their old apps.
Maybe there will be a touchscreen MBA with both an intel and an arm processor that can run iOS apps in fullscreen alongside other Mac apps...
The problem is that all iOS app store binaries are ARM and not x86. Devs could provide a second build for the simulator but they would have to do it for all of their old apps.
Maybe there will be a touchscreen MBA with both an intel and an arm processor that can run iOS apps in fullscreen alongside other Mac apps...
MacSlut
May 4, 06:01 PM
Wow. I knew exactly what I did. I was fishing for an official response and noted I had planned, like every other year, to upgrade to the newest phone this summer. Instead of detailing exactly why the date was moved, I was told about Apple's plans not to release during June/July. I too purchased the iPhone 4 as soon as it was available, and in fact had it in my hands on the 23rd.
I don't know where this got off track onto how and when I pay my bill, but you don't need to jump on me for forwarding an email.
So now this is an email you received? An AT&T rep actually put it in writing? Is this what you're now saying?
Where this got "off track" or rather on the track it should've been on in the first place is that clearly if your upgrade was pushed back it was from any number of things people have posted about for years now on the matter: bill payment, length of being a customer, level of account, etc... Really, this comes up every year.
Your story is making less and less sense, and here's where actually thinking first comes in handy:
If a customer service rep told you that the iPhone had been delayed then either this was public knowledge, thus why forward the email to MacRumors, or this wasn't public knowledge, thus why would a first contact customer rep even know this let alone say anything about it?
Sorry if it seems like I, and others, are jumping on you, but your story is BS, and you either know it, or should know it. Take a look at the coverage it's gotten. It's on most of the Apple coverage sites including some read by investors and analysts.
Do we really need news being polluted with this? If you're an honest person, you should now, confronted with logic, common sense, and the actual truth, contact those who picked up your story.
Clearly your upgrade wasn't delayed because of the iPhone being released later, and you know it.
I don't know where this got off track onto how and when I pay my bill, but you don't need to jump on me for forwarding an email.
So now this is an email you received? An AT&T rep actually put it in writing? Is this what you're now saying?
Where this got "off track" or rather on the track it should've been on in the first place is that clearly if your upgrade was pushed back it was from any number of things people have posted about for years now on the matter: bill payment, length of being a customer, level of account, etc... Really, this comes up every year.
Your story is making less and less sense, and here's where actually thinking first comes in handy:
If a customer service rep told you that the iPhone had been delayed then either this was public knowledge, thus why forward the email to MacRumors, or this wasn't public knowledge, thus why would a first contact customer rep even know this let alone say anything about it?
Sorry if it seems like I, and others, are jumping on you, but your story is BS, and you either know it, or should know it. Take a look at the coverage it's gotten. It's on most of the Apple coverage sites including some read by investors and analysts.
Do we really need news being polluted with this? If you're an honest person, you should now, confronted with logic, common sense, and the actual truth, contact those who picked up your story.
Clearly your upgrade wasn't delayed because of the iPhone being released later, and you know it.
No comments:
Post a Comment