How's yours compare?
Posted on 07/15/2010 12:03:59 PM PDT by Tank-FL
Edited on 07/15/2010 12:11:01 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
LOL @ ozzymandus & humblegunner
He's probably right. Monopolies are always good investments.
I think I’ll wait for the Windows 7 Phone coming out this fall.
I heard it and what he said, basically, was that he really hated the government interfering in our lives, including business. This is similar to what happened to Toyota and the phony stuck gas peddles and that was his point: The government should keep their face out of it and the news media should quit being the government’s stooges.
“Rush said his iPhone works. Hardly an “impassioned defense”. You Rush-haters are really reaching. I suggest you boycott Apple.”
I’m tired...rally exhausted...but you made me laugh.... Thanks.
Apple products are for creative people...end of story.
Everyone else has to push a start button to log off....which to me,...
says it all. :)
FCC Regulations...
How's yours compare?
The regulations are here:
FCC communications Regulations
And they are byzantine.
However, I find that several years ago, under "de-regulation" they dropped the requirement to supply the broadcast logs to the FCC. EXCEPT, they must log political ads and proofs:
"Occasionally, I still get questions about program logs. However, there is no longer any requirement to keep program logs or records of material that is broadcast, whether it is commercial matter or programming. The exceptions to this, of course, are the public file requirements for the quarterly report of issues and programs and the political file required in each station’s public file. However, the public file is separate from either the station log or a program log, neither of which the public has a right to see."
However, many stations are maintaining such logs and retaining them because they become important ammunition when re-licensing comes around. They have been instrumental in many stations ability to retain their licenses in the face of community group challenges claiming non-representation or claims of discriminatory advertising.
Whenever Rush steps out of his comfort zone, politics, he is on shaky ground. Like a newly minted member of the executive ranks visiting his first golf courses, he will gush inane platitudes about golf, the game, the equipment, the courses, the players, etc. Likewise, his knowledge of electronic technology is about on par with a teenager’s expertise on pimple creams: “no dad, the $40 one really works, really.”
Apple may have the best product, the I Phone may not be defective, but if one is getting the “word” from Rush on computers, it is a religious “word”, not a technical one.
Not to argue, but AAC, is a better open standard, with far higher quality than MP3... and the Apple iTunes, iPod, iPad, and iPhones use it without restricted formats.
Not to argue, but AAC, is a better open standard, with far higher quality than MP3... and the Apple iTunes, iPod, iPad, and iPhones use it without restricted formats.
Brings to mind a question,,how much money does GOOGLE have to make before they’re deemed a complete failure. Their quarterly earnings would make GM,GE etc very hot,,,,the stock fell bout 20 bucks after the close Thurs.
Brings to mind a question,,how much money does GOOGLE have to make before they’re deemed a complete failure. Their quarterly earnings would make GM,GE etc very hot,,,,the stock fell bout 20 bucks after the close Thurs.
The problem with google is, of course, that most of their business can be lost by the placement of a computer cursor a few pixels from their search box.
When, and it is when not if, some better genius develops a better search algorithm, and users abandon google like they did alta vista before google and others, the game will be on.
Right, so there’s no requirement to tell the FCC who your advertisers are, except for political adverts.
This conclusion is apparently based on Toyota's investigation of itself. There's a big difference between Toyota's assertion that "some" cases were the driver's fault, and Rush's claim that "nearly all" cases were the driver's fault. As much as I enjoy listening to Rush, there are some occasions when he doesn't have his facts straight.
The fact remains that Toyota DID have a software problem in which the brake system wasn't configured to override a wide open throttle. They have been quietly correcting that issue in their vehicles as part of the recall process and general maintenance.
I agree, however, that Schumer has no business grandstanding either situation, especially the iPhone controversy, since people don't generally die when their phone drops a call.
Remember that big out of control car case on the freeways in Southern California. A CHP officer finally got in front of the car and slowed it down.
The driver had their foot on the gas the whole time. The ownboard computer betrayed the owner, trying to game the system.
This one incident caused folks to go absolutely postal against Toyota.
I do believe Toyota had a problem, but in the end I don’t think more than a few instances involved serious harm or death. We’re probably talking less than ten out of hundreds of thousands of cars.
Ford had a recall about trucks that were prone to burn up. Did you hear about that? Chevy had a big recall involving hundreds of thousands of cars. Did we hear about that?
Look, as long as things are kept in perspective, it’s okay to criticize these auto manufacturers. It keeps them in line. In a segment of our society where 25-40 thousand people die each year in auto accidents, it’s tough for me to get all jacked up about ten or even one hundreds deaths.
I do want to see a Toyota fix things. I don’t want to see Toyota destroyed over it. And make no mistake about it, that’s what this was all about.
Government Motors needed shoring up, and all the stops were pulled out to facilitate that.
I’m not convinced Toyota deserved 1/10,000th the criticism they received.
You are correct. What was once required, is no longer. Why did you not simply say that the regulations were changed, if you were already aware of that as a fact? I would have accepted your correction instead of playing this idiotic "gotcha" game?
The fact remains, re-iterated this week by Rush Limbaugh, that he is not paid by Apple to push their products, nor does he receive them gratis from Apple; he buys them. Unless you believe that Rush is in the habit of lying about the products he chooses to endorse, and there is no evidence that he does about any other in such a fashion, nor does he talk about any other product like he does his appreciation—or his few occasional problems, which he has discussed on the air—of his Apple products in his commentary like a "product placement ad" just dropped into his commentary, I think that settles it.
The wierd part was that he didn’t run and get his little internet gang like he usually does.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.