If its just for home, get the home. Dont listen to these MAC cock suckers. Windows 7 is the best operating system out there and best of all time. Heres more detail descriptions of each version: http://en.wikipedia....dows_7_editions
Copied and pasted directly from the FAQ page of US Geological Survey:
"Q: Why are we having so many earthquakes? Has earthquake activity been increasing? Does this mean a big one is going to hit? OR We haven't had any earthquakes in a long time; does this mean that the pressure is building up?
A: Although it may seem that we are having more earthquakes, earthquakes of magnitude 7.0 or greater have remained fairly constant throughout this century and, according to our records, have actually seemed to decrease in recent years.
There are several reasons for the perception that the number of earthquakes, in general, and particularly destructive earthquakes is increasing.
1) A partial explanation may lie in the fact that in the last twenty years, we have definitely had an increase in the number of earthquakes we have been able to locate each year. This is because of the tremendous increase in the number of seismograph stations in the world and the many improvements in global communications.
In 1931, there were about 350 stations operating in the world; today, there are more that 4,000 stations and the data now comes in rapidly from these stations by telex, computer and satellite. This increase in the number of stations and the more timely receipt of data has allowed us and other seismological centers to locate many small earthquakes which were undetected in earlier years, and we are able to locate earthquakes more rapidly.
The NEIC now locates about 12,000 to 14,000 earthquakes each year or approximately 50 per day. Also, because of the improvements in communications and the increased interest in natural disasters, the public now learns about more earthquakes. According to long-term records (since about 1900), we expect about 18 major earthquakes (7.0 - 7.9) and one great earthquake (8.0 or above) in any given year. However, let's take a look at what has happened in the past 32 years, from 1969 through 2001, so far. Our records show that 1992, and 1995-1997 were the only years that we have reached or exceeded the long-term average number of major earthquakes since 1971. In 1970 and in 1971 we had 20 and 19 major earthquakes, respectively, but in other years the total was in many cases well below the 18 per year which we may expect based on the long-term average.
2) The population at risk is increasing. While the number of large earthquakes is fairly constant, population density in earthquake-prone areas is constantly increasing. In some countries, the new construction that comes with population growth has better earthquake resistance; but in many it does not. So we are now seeing increasing casualties from the same sized earthquakes.
3) Better global communication. Just a few decades ago, if several hundred people were killed by an earthquake in Indonesia or eastern China, for example, the media in the rest of the world would not know about it until several days, to weeks, later, long after such an event would be deemed “newsworthy”. So by the time this information was available, it would probably be relegated to the back pages of the newspaper, if at all. And the public Internet didn't even exist. We are now getting this information almost immediately.
4) Earthquake clustering and human psychology. While the average number of large earthquakes per year is fairly constant, earthquakes occur in clusters. This is predicted by various statistical models, and does not imply that earthquakes that are distant in location, but close in time, are causally related. But when such clusters occur, especially when they are widely reported in the media, they are noticed. However, during the equally anomalous periods during which no destructive earthquakes occur, no one deems this as remarkable.
A temporal increase in earthquake activity does not mean that a large earthquake is about to happen. Similarly, quiescence, or the lack of seismicity, does not mean a large earthquake is going to happen."
NOT A RACIST AT ALL. I AM ALL IN FAVOR OF HIM BUYING A CRICKET OR SOCCER TEAM ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD....JUST DON'T WANT TO SEE HIM BUYING AN AMERICAN FRANCHISE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GO KROENKE..... DO WHATEVER IT TAKES.....
That's one of the most bigoted posts and bigoted articles Ive ever read. Muslims don't want to change the American way of life. Muslim Extremists (Al-Qaeda) do. And how do you know about there being a muslim prayer? Hows that different from hundreds of other stadiums that ask thousands of their fans to participate in their christian prayer regardles of their own beliefs? So now you are offended because the tables are turned on you now?
Shahid's first name means that he is a proud muslim who is willing to die than denounce his religion. How's that any different from any religious christian? It's racist comments like yours and racist articles like the link you provided that continue the ignorant, baseless opinions of the muslim world of today because you are too lazy to use the proper wordings and fail to put forth the effort to do the proper research on the garbage that comes out of your mouth.
You can cite the bad line he played behind all you want...the guy was never as good as the praise he got. At this point in his career, he is damaged goods.
No to the bullshit mentorship. First of all..jake and vinny mentored him. He is now the starter...the mentoring part is over! Yes we need a backup...but please..stop throwing names out there. Bulger is done in this league.
Exactly. I dont care about another version of Jake Delhomme.
The whole mentoring thing is being blown way out of proportion by our fan base. And like you said Moore was here when Jake and Vinny was (you can throw in McCown too). Not every young QB needs someone older to hold thier hand 24/7. Just look at Flacco. People act like Moore can't do sh*t on his own.
Why would you want your backup quarterback to be "non-threatening"?
Hunter Cantwell seems to fit that bill. Maybe we're set at the backup quarterback spot.
I agee. I dont understand the mentality that we should bring in someone who wouldnt threaten Moore. If Moore is the best, then he'll show he is no matter what and the other guy will be the backup. This same mentality is also why we didnt have a competant backup to Jake for years. Theres nothing wrong with having 2 good QBs on your roster.
Carr didn't improve each year he was in the league. He actually declined a little bit his final 2 years at houston. Meanwhile Campbell has improved in alot of areas since being in the league. Completion percentage, Touchdowns, Yards, QB rating. I want to keep repeating this because alot of the same people are still comparing the two when there is no comparison. And also Campbell >>> McCown. McCown only wishes he had a career with Campbell's numbers. Yeah McCown was with some sucky teams, but Campbell was with a sucky Redskins team his whole career and a terrible o-line.
Why do people want a veteran backup QB that can't play or help if Moore goes down (McCown)? Didn't we just get rid of one QB like that? And acquiring Campbell has nothing to do with lack of confidence in Moore. We're just trying to improve our team in case Moore goes down or (which is very unlikely) he blows up in our faces. If Moore's confidence is so fragile that it'll hurt him if we brought in Campbell, then he really doesn't deserve to be a QB in this league. He should see we're only making moves to help our team and that he's our guy. You can look at it this way, competition brings out the best in people and Moore is a competitor. If anything, the competition will make him better!
And as far as the comment about we wouldn't keep Campbell on the bench if we traded for him...If we traded a 4th for him, that'll be like us drafting a young QB thats going to be sitting on the bench anyway. Why not get someone thats better than any other QB in the draft right now and is ready to play if the starter should go down? Besides we may still draft another one later in the draft for the 3rd spot depending how many picks we get if we move around.
ESPN's Adam Schefter confirms that the Panthers are not in pursuit of Donovan McNabb.
Nor are the Cardinals or 49ers, Schefter reconfirms, though he believes they "should be." The Eagles would love for another team to join the bidding, because as it stands Oakland seems like the only team seriously considering a move for their 33-year-old passer. The Panthers are fairly certain to invest a pick in a QB later this month, but Matt Moore may not face real competition.
every year brings top talent. so do you get rid of everyone every year to keep this talent? People mistake what the fo is doing as a philosophy of doing things when in fact is is a TACTIC. if this was they way they did things they would have done this more than once. it is as simple yes or no question. if i told you a team unloaded their entire dline and replaced them with guys with a culmative 1-1 1/2 year of starting experience (even if they have shown flashes) would you say that that team was better off for the upcoming season?
If you're top talent exceeds the aging vet, then yes get rid of the aging vet.
Lewis: Overrated by fans. Good in rotation, but not so good as a starter. He wasn't going back to being a rotational guy.
Kemo: Way overrated by the fans. Was only good for standing in one place.
We have guys like Tank Tyler and Louis Leonard that showed signs that they could get the job done and better than those two.
Peppers: was our best d-lineman, but didn't want to stay. We have Charles Johnson and first rounder Everette Brown to take his place. We will be fine.
Diggs: Was solid but we have either James Anderson, who has shown he can be just as solid, or Dan Connor (who was the leading tackler for Penn State) that could also be just as solid if not better.
Hoover: Was solid but we drafted the best FB in 2009 draft last year to take his spot.
If Hurney expected a live show on WFNZ to be a remotely positive thing, I'd say he's totally clueless.
Every year the Panther's have had a losing season (every other year that is), there has been an excuse. Smitty got hurt, Jake had surgery, RBs got hurt....
Last year we ended up at .500 (would have been 7-9 had the Saints not rested their starters on week 17). What was the excuse? There was none.
And when you don't have an excuse, people will find reasons for behavior they don't like on their own.
Arguably it all started in the off-season. Ridiculous contract to Jake and Peppers. ZERO free agency moves worthy of note. Stupid draft day decisions (trading 1st rounds for 2nds). The when the season got going, we had Lackluster D play, and the softness on Delhomme's breakdown... these are all coaching/front office decisions.... and we can squarely put the outcome of 2009 at Hurney and Fox's feet.
All the while they gave us lip service that "it is what it is".
So if he's getting beat up... good. He needs to hear what people are thinking. Because his and Fox's PR programming isn't working. He needs to learn to be straight up with us.
Wish he did this last year. He didn't have the answers to the stupid moves they made. Now that JR has set things straight, Hurney is kind of like the puppet and knows all the answers that have been feed to him by JR when he couldn't find them himself.