And this type of illiterate rapid foaming at the mouth type of post is what you get when you watch too much Keith Olbermann...
Somebody get this Son0fsocal a real education please!
You forgot to add Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity to this list. His rant sounds like some of the same half-truths and outright lies all three of these clowns tell.
The iPhone was launched in South Korea late last year, and SK is a CDMA-only market.
The iPhone for South Korea is no different internally than any other iPhone save for China. All 3 carriers apparently have CDMA(2G) networks but 2 of the 3 have 3GSM networks, too. There is no GSM(2G) network that I can see. S. Korea got smart and switched from CDMA to 3GSM.
It should be remembered that Verizon was the first to be offered the iPhone. And we all know, they turned it down, primarily because they wouldn't agree to Jobs' demand to lower priced data plans. Now they have another opportunity and it looks like they are letting that slip through their finger tips as well.
I wonder about this. The notion that Verizon had first dibs on iPhone but turned it down has been written about a great deal in articles, blogs, and internet forums, so much so that it is accepted as fact.
Did it really happen that way? I'm not sure that I've ever seen any evidence that it did, just speculation stated so frequently that it's assumed to be true. It's never been denied by either Apple or Verizon, either, but I don't know how much you can draw from that.
It could very well be that Apple did in fact present iPhone first to Verizon, but primarily as a bargaining tool with AT&T. Does anybody here really believe that Apple and Verizon could have reached an agreement in 2006-07 for iPhone on VZW? Not me. At that time, Verizon demanded complete control over their network. Apple, as we all know, still demands a great deal of control over iPhone. I'm not convinced that even today they can work together, let alone back then.
I think this issue is more a factor than even the technical issue of CDMA vs GSM. There is no doubt that Apple could design and build a CDMA iPhone if they wanted to. I'd be very surprised if they didn't have CDMA prototypes in their labs as we speak. I'm just not convinced that they can come to agreeable terms with Verizon.
I think Verizon must have ticked off Jobs. We might not see the iPhone on Verizon for years.
Yes, I would take very seriously Cook's statement that AT&T is a "great partner". I think as long as AT&T shows Apple its willingness to improve service to its customers (which after all, reflects well on Apple) they will stick with AT&T.
Verizon is kind of a scummy partner from Apple's POV (or maybe ANY vendor's). They see themselves very much as being The Dog, with any vendor - even Apple - as The Tail. I suppose it's needless to say that Apple sees things, uh, differently, and they need a partner willing to more or less accept their rightful place in The Apple Universe.
The key point here is the observation that the iPhone business is the "most lucrative" end of things. Therefore, Apple won't continue to get that great wireless plan from AT&T if it yanks the iPhone away from them. And without that plan, Apple won't sell as many of its higher-priced iPads, which the company strongly intends to make a de facto new platform standard. They want to flood the market with as many of those things as they can, as quickly as they can, muscling competition aside before they can get entrenched.
I switched carriers from time to time, but I never looked at Verizon/Sprint network. Anyway, the AT&T coverage is not bad in the Seattle area. Typically, I use 2 to 3 gigs of data per month. Sorry if I clog up the network. It was pretty bad when I was in Vegas last year tho.
Yes, I will get an iPad when it's available. With all the Verizon's ad campaign, it makes me dislike them.
The problem with that is somebody is going to repeat something that is not right because of what we said.
And we wonder why we can't trust the internet?
If I am wrong, I'll remove my post, support yours and even admit my error if you want. I don't really care how you do it. But if you are wrong, why help perpetrate further misunderstandings.
If people believe all that they read on the internet (or anywhere else, for that matter) it's their problem, no? Perhaps they even deserve the consequences.
What am I, what are you, 'internet quality police?' Where do you/I start? Where do you/I stop? Do you go back and correct every one of your prior misstatements on every possible issue that you may have contributed to when you discover you may have been wrong? What about the ones where you don't even know that you may have been responsible for spreading b-s?
Pardon me for saying so, but your p.o.v on this sounds to me both naive and condescending.
PS: There, solipsism, above provided the correct information. Problem solved. Hope you get a good night's sleep now! :-)
The iPhone was launched in South Korea late last year, and SK is a CDMA-only market.
The iPhone 3G and 3GS have UMTS/HSDPA (3G) as well as GSM/Edge capabilities and this is available in SK as well as CDMA It is very confusing with all of these acronyms but from what I gather UMTS/HSDPA can carry voice as well as data and is the next logical step up from GSM as most devices have backwards compatibility. ie iPhone will drop back to GSM when 3G is not available, when this happens your iphone displays the "edge" badge in the TRH corner rather than "3G".
I am not sure if Korea will keep its CDMA network running or if it will be replaced by UMTS/HSDPA in the long run.. I know CDMA was turned off in Australia a few years ago and replaced by UMTS/HSDPA, GSM will also be on the way out there too in the next few years.
I think Verizon will be without iP-anything until they get a decent UMTS/HSDPA nertwork up and running.
Anyway, thats the general gist.. please correct me if you think I'm wrong
I wonder about this. The notion that Verizon had first dibs on iPhone but turned it down has been written about a great deal in articles, blogs, and internet forums, so much so that it is accepted as fact.
Verizon is clearly quoted as saying no over sharing carrier revenue and Apple control of distribution. The only question is were the talks conducted sequentially - first Verizon, then Cingular/AT&T - or in parallel.
Note: I think the reporter, Leslie Cauley, was also first to report the 5-year exclusivity, while everyone else had quoted "multi-year"; I didn't look for the link. The 5-year contract was supposedly ripped up or amended later that year when Apple wanted to switch to the upfront subsidy model for the 3G in 2008, thus resulting in the 3-year exclusive.
either way the rest of the world, at least where I have gone has always used sim cards =, and that may not be all places but i think Verizon wireless network is a aging beast in terms of being mobile. I mean i can travel from cali to england and get a data plan there and still be mobile. but not with Verizon I'm sure I would have to pay some sort of international fee or something which would probably cost more than just getting a cheap data plan on the road from which ever country I visit, which means more to me. but thats MHO
It's this simple... Apple will never support CDMA.
what they said people keep crying CDMA .....why? its not WORLD....if you want to be big you have to be World....not just U.S. We have been the odd ball in this area for so long its finally good to see we are catching on now.....
I think ATT realizes that we are witnessing a history making shift with mobile devices, and it's better to be on board now rather than later. The temporary setback of networks being bogged down is worth it when you'll be able to offer all of your new subscribers WiMax/4G in a couple years and greatly improve their experiences, and your image.
I think the data plan concessions, if that's what you want to call them, were a no brainer for AT&T. I already have an unlimited iPhone plan and am still considering an iPad because I commute 3 hours per day on the commuter rail. Quite cleverly I cannot simply swap the SIM so why not offer great deals on the iPad plans? I average about 135 MB per month so I can easily get by with the cheaper $15 plan.
The bottom line is that except for emails which will go to both devices, I will essentially be giving AT&T 50% more revenue per month for almost the same bandwidth. I suspect that AT&T saw that there were quite a few current iPhone users in the very same boat.
The iPhone 3G and 3GS have UMTS/HSDPA (3G) as well as GSM/Edge capabilities and this is available in SK as well as CDMA It is very confusing with all of these acronyms but from what I gather UMTS/HSDPA can carry voice as well as data and is the next logical step up from GSM as most devices have backwards compatibility. ie iPhone will drop back to GSM when 3G is not available, when this happens your iphone displays the "edge" badge in the TRH corner rather than "3G".
I am not sure if Korea will keep its CDMA network running or if it will be replaced by UMTS/HSDPA in the long run.. I know CDMA was turned off in Australia a few years ago and replaced by UMTS/HSDPA, GSM will also be on the way out there too in the next few years.
I think Verizon will be without iP-anything until they get a decent UMTS/HSDPA nertwork up and running.
Anyway, thats the general gist.. please correct me if you think I'm wrong
I wonder about this. The notion that Verizon had first dibs on iPhone but turned it down has been written about a great deal in articles, blogs, and internet forums, so much so that it is accepted as fact.
Did it really happen that way? I'm not sure that I've ever seen any evidence that it did, just speculation stated so frequently that it's assumed to be true. It's never been denied by either Apple or Verizon, either, but I don't know how much you can draw from that.
It could very well be that Apple did in fact present iPhone first to Verizon, but primarily as a bargaining tool with AT&T. Does anybody here really believe that Apple and Verizon could have reached an agreement in 2006-07 for iPhone on VZW? Not me. At that time, Verizon demanded complete control over their network. Apple, as we all know, still demands a great deal of control over iPhone. I'm not convinced that even today they can work together, let alone back then.
I think this issue is more a factor than even the technical issue of CDMA vs GSM. There is no doubt that Apple could design and build a CDMA iPhone if they wanted to. I'd be very surprised if they didn't have CDMA prototypes in their labs as we speak. I'm just not convinced that they can come to agreeable terms with Verizon.
Jesus. I don't know how this idea of Apple approaching Verizon first about the iPhone has persisted despite obvious evidence to the contrary.
The most telling: Ivan Seidenberg, Verizon's CEO, said this in early 2009 - "Apple never seriously considered making a CDMA version of the iPhone because it didn't have as wide a distribution opportunity."
Seems like a pretty direct response contradicting the idea that Apple approached Verizon first and Verizon turned it down... from the horse's mouth, so to speak.
The iPhone for South Korea is no different internally than any other iPhone save for China. All 3 carriers apparently have CDMA(2G) networks but 2 of the 3 have 3GSM networks, too. There is no GSM(2G) network that I can see. S. Korea got smart and switched from CDMA to 3GSM.
no
until verizon brings apple to court apple will never partner with verizon
sprint and t mobile are next
or google or apple it self as a carrier
VERIZON GOES OUT OF ITS WAY FOR 10 YRS AT LEAST TO UNDERMINE AND NOT SUPPORT ANY APPLE ANYTHING I am living proof of this poor acting.
there teck dept call centers has one mac person in one call center out of the whole network
ONE MAC PERSON who told me that i can;t get free wifi like the winrel idiots because VERIZON DOES NOT SUPPORT MAC !!!
So Apple, a company known for making the BEST hardware and software on this planet and charges the right price for and degrades those for making cheap junky creaky plastic machines with less than ideal crashy systems calling them CHEAP....
Chooses the CHEAP, buggy, crashy, creaky static sounding wireless carrier as the backbone for their MAGICAL device.
Is it me or do I see something wrong with this.
No, you know what. I want to Buy a Mercedes E class car with all it's goodness but I really want a ratty Chinese built 4 cylinder under the hood. Yea, that's the ticket. I'll get it because it's cheap and I'll tell people it's a Mercedes because it is, just won't let them ride with me because well that might get embarrassing.
All joking aside the unit is Magical, sure and so will the 3G service when it works.
Now back to Apple. Wanna do something about the aging Centrino system on the laptops? Cause the new Lenovo's are looking much better than the AL sitting in your garage. Your still a computer company, let's keep our eyes on the target while bringing the group closer towards it.
Actually, I have done or attempted to do so everytime I have been duly informed of an error. I don't permit myself to run from my mistakes when notified and I don't allow my students/trainees to do so either.
I personally don't knowingly spread BS*, certainly not in my educating capacity. Having spent years researching, I don't like to reference data without confirmation or declaring my sources. If you look carefully at my postings you will see a lot of conditional tenses and links to declarations. I try to read the links supplied by the authors here before enter the fray.
In tests I administer, I will give full marks if a student/trainee acknowledges that he/she can't answer a question at the moment, but tells me exactly where to find it; or if he/she brings me the answer immediately following the exam, I will give full marks for the answer. I return all the exam papers and request that all wrong answers be corrected and returned. Doing so and I will award additional half marks for the corrected effort. And by the way, you prove me wrong, you get my acknowledgement of "I stand corrected," and credit. That way we all know what is correct, not just what is wrong.
*Re:
In that case I plead ignorance. And I am quite ignorant on most subjects. But when I am informed of such, I make an effort to become more knowledgeable and thus help diminish one of the [I]Three Friends of [my] Stupidity, i.e., Ignorance, Fear and Habit.?
One last point. If I were the "'internet quality police?' of this site, where would I start?
Well I would ask that anyone that posted information in error would voluntarily correct or delete it. More important, that they acknowledge it; recognizing and correcting an error is one of the best ways to learn. For those who deliberately manipulate information, I would red flag their postings; and personally add the guilty individuals to my 'ignore' list.
Now you may say that this is overkill. However, it would be nice if at the end of the day, I have been fully and properly informed. I can be more confident that if I use the information that I deemed does not make me look stupid. I have learned something. And being able to use it in my teaching, I become even more learnedly.
Comments
And this type of illiterate rapid foaming at the mouth type of post is what you get when you watch too much Keith Olbermann...
Somebody get this Son0fsocal a real education please!
You forgot to add Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity to this list. His rant sounds like some of the same half-truths and outright lies all three of these clowns tell.
The iPhone was launched in South Korea late last year, and SK is a CDMA-only market.
The iPhone for South Korea is no different internally than any other iPhone save for China. All 3 carriers apparently have CDMA(2G) networks but 2 of the 3 have 3GSM networks, too. There is no GSM(2G) network that I can see. S. Korea got smart and switched from CDMA to 3GSM.
It should be remembered that Verizon was the first to be offered the iPhone. And we all know, they turned it down, primarily because they wouldn't agree to Jobs' demand to lower priced data plans. Now they have another opportunity and it looks like they are letting that slip through their finger tips as well.
I wonder about this. The notion that Verizon had first dibs on iPhone but turned it down has been written about a great deal in articles, blogs, and internet forums, so much so that it is accepted as fact.
Did it really happen that way? I'm not sure that I've ever seen any evidence that it did, just speculation stated so frequently that it's assumed to be true. It's never been denied by either Apple or Verizon, either, but I don't know how much you can draw from that.
It could very well be that Apple did in fact present iPhone first to Verizon, but primarily as a bargaining tool with AT&T. Does anybody here really believe that Apple and Verizon could have reached an agreement in 2006-07 for iPhone on VZW? Not me. At that time, Verizon demanded complete control over their network. Apple, as we all know, still demands a great deal of control over iPhone. I'm not convinced that even today they can work together, let alone back then.
I think this issue is more a factor than even the technical issue of CDMA vs GSM. There is no doubt that Apple could design and build a CDMA iPhone if they wanted to. I'd be very surprised if they didn't have CDMA prototypes in their labs as we speak. I'm just not convinced that they can come to agreeable terms with Verizon.
It could very well be that Apple did in fact present iPhone first to Verizon, but primarily as a bargaining tool with AT&T.
That seems the most likely scenario to me.
I think Verizon must have ticked off Jobs. We might not see the iPhone on Verizon for years.
Yes, I would take very seriously Cook's statement that AT&T is a "great partner". I think as long as AT&T shows Apple its willingness to improve service to its customers (which after all, reflects well on Apple) they will stick with AT&T.
Verizon is kind of a scummy partner from Apple's POV (or maybe ANY vendor's). They see themselves very much as being The Dog, with any vendor - even Apple - as The Tail. I suppose it's needless to say that Apple sees things, uh, differently, and they need a partner willing to more or less accept their rightful place in The Apple Universe.
The key point here is the observation that the iPhone business is the "most lucrative" end of things. Therefore, Apple won't continue to get that great wireless plan from AT&T if it yanks the iPhone away from them. And without that plan, Apple won't sell as many of its higher-priced iPads, which the company strongly intends to make a de facto new platform standard. They want to flood the market with as many of those things as they can, as quickly as they can, muscling competition aside before they can get entrenched.
Yes, I will get an iPad when it's available. With all the Verizon's ad campaign, it makes me dislike them.
The problem with that is somebody is going to repeat something that is not right because of what we said.
And we wonder why we can't trust the internet?
If I am wrong, I'll remove my post, support yours and even admit my error if you want. I don't really care how you do it. But if you are wrong, why help perpetrate further misunderstandings.
If people believe all that they read on the internet (or anywhere else, for that matter) it's their problem, no? Perhaps they even deserve the consequences.
What am I, what are you, 'internet quality police?' Where do you/I start? Where do you/I stop? Do you go back and correct every one of your prior misstatements on every possible issue that you may have contributed to when you discover you may have been wrong? What about the ones where you don't even know that you may have been responsible for spreading b-s?
Pardon me for saying so, but your p.o.v on this sounds to me both naive and condescending.
PS: There, solipsism, above provided the correct information. Problem solved. Hope you get a good night's sleep now! :-)
The iPhone was launched in South Korea late last year, and SK is a CDMA-only market.
The iPhone 3G and 3GS have UMTS/HSDPA (3G) as well as GSM/Edge capabilities and this is available in SK as well as CDMA It is very confusing with all of these acronyms but from what I gather UMTS/HSDPA can carry voice as well as data and is the next logical step up from GSM as most devices have backwards compatibility. ie iPhone will drop back to GSM when 3G is not available, when this happens your iphone displays the "edge" badge in the TRH corner rather than "3G".
I am not sure if Korea will keep its CDMA network running or if it will be replaced by UMTS/HSDPA in the long run.. I know CDMA was turned off in Australia a few years ago and replaced by UMTS/HSDPA, GSM will also be on the way out there too in the next few years.
I think Verizon will be without iP-anything until they get a decent UMTS/HSDPA nertwork up and running.
Anyway, thats the general gist.. please correct me if you think I'm wrong
It is not that I am refusing to switch to AT&T - I just can't switch until I can get coverage.
Have you considered moving?
I wonder about this. The notion that Verizon had first dibs on iPhone but turned it down has been written about a great deal in articles, blogs, and internet forums, so much so that it is accepted as fact.
I believe this USA Today article is the original source link: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/20...n-iphone_x.htm
Verizon is clearly quoted as saying no over sharing carrier revenue and Apple control of distribution. The only question is were the talks conducted sequentially - first Verizon, then Cingular/AT&T - or in parallel.
Note: I think the reporter, Leslie Cauley, was also first to report the 5-year exclusivity, while everyone else had quoted "multi-year"; I didn't look for the link. The 5-year contract was supposedly ripped up or amended later that year when Apple wanted to switch to the upfront subsidy model for the 3G in 2008, thus resulting in the 3-year exclusive.
It's this simple... Apple will never support CDMA.
what they said people keep crying CDMA .....why? its not WORLD....if you want to be big you have to be World....not just U.S. We have been the odd ball in this area for so long its finally good to see we are catching on now.....
I think ATT realizes that we are witnessing a history making shift with mobile devices, and it's better to be on board now rather than later. The temporary setback of networks being bogged down is worth it when you'll be able to offer all of your new subscribers WiMax/4G in a couple years and greatly improve their experiences, and your image.
I think the data plan concessions, if that's what you want to call them, were a no brainer for AT&T. I already have an unlimited iPhone plan and am still considering an iPad because I commute 3 hours per day on the commuter rail. Quite cleverly I cannot simply swap the SIM so why not offer great deals on the iPad plans? I average about 135 MB per month so I can easily get by with the cheaper $15 plan.
The bottom line is that except for emails which will go to both devices, I will essentially be giving AT&T 50% more revenue per month for almost the same bandwidth. I suspect that AT&T saw that there were quite a few current iPhone users in the very same boat.
For AT&T it was a no brainer, it's almost gravy.
The iPhone 3G and 3GS have UMTS/HSDPA (3G) as well as GSM/Edge capabilities and this is available in SK as well as CDMA It is very confusing with all of these acronyms but from what I gather UMTS/HSDPA can carry voice as well as data and is the next logical step up from GSM as most devices have backwards compatibility. ie iPhone will drop back to GSM when 3G is not available, when this happens your iphone displays the "edge" badge in the TRH corner rather than "3G".
I am not sure if Korea will keep its CDMA network running or if it will be replaced by UMTS/HSDPA in the long run.. I know CDMA was turned off in Australia a few years ago and replaced by UMTS/HSDPA, GSM will also be on the way out there too in the next few years.
I think Verizon will be without iP-anything until they get a decent UMTS/HSDPA nertwork up and running.
Anyway, thats the general gist.. please correct me if you think I'm wrong
Me, correct you?
No, thanks for a very informative post.
I wonder about this. The notion that Verizon had first dibs on iPhone but turned it down has been written about a great deal in articles, blogs, and internet forums, so much so that it is accepted as fact.
Did it really happen that way? I'm not sure that I've ever seen any evidence that it did, just speculation stated so frequently that it's assumed to be true. It's never been denied by either Apple or Verizon, either, but I don't know how much you can draw from that.
It could very well be that Apple did in fact present iPhone first to Verizon, but primarily as a bargaining tool with AT&T. Does anybody here really believe that Apple and Verizon could have reached an agreement in 2006-07 for iPhone on VZW? Not me. At that time, Verizon demanded complete control over their network. Apple, as we all know, still demands a great deal of control over iPhone. I'm not convinced that even today they can work together, let alone back then.
I think this issue is more a factor than even the technical issue of CDMA vs GSM. There is no doubt that Apple could design and build a CDMA iPhone if they wanted to. I'd be very surprised if they didn't have CDMA prototypes in their labs as we speak. I'm just not convinced that they can come to agreeable terms with Verizon.
Jesus. I don't know how this idea of Apple approaching Verizon first about the iPhone has persisted despite obvious evidence to the contrary.
The most telling: Ivan Seidenberg, Verizon's CEO, said this in early 2009 - "Apple never seriously considered making a CDMA version of the iPhone because it didn't have as wide a distribution opportunity."
Seems like a pretty direct response contradicting the idea that Apple approached Verizon first and Verizon turned it down... from the horse's mouth, so to speak.
http://www.9to5mac.com/Verizon-CEO-iPhone
Verizon is the "nation's largest wireless provider" just like there's a fungus in Oregon that's perhaps the world's largest living organism.
verizon is a fungus ??
The iPhone for South Korea is no different internally than any other iPhone save for China. All 3 carriers apparently have CDMA(2G) networks but 2 of the 3 have 3GSM networks, too. There is no GSM(2G) network that I can see. S. Korea got smart and switched from CDMA to 3GSM.
no
until verizon brings apple to court apple will never partner with verizon
sprint and t mobile are next
or google or apple it self as a carrier
VERIZON GOES OUT OF ITS WAY FOR 10 YRS AT LEAST TO UNDERMINE AND NOT SUPPORT ANY APPLE ANYTHING I am living proof of this poor acting.
there teck dept call centers has one mac person in one call center out of the whole network
ONE MAC PERSON who told me that i can;t get free wifi like the winrel idiots because VERIZON DOES NOT SUPPORT MAC !!!
ATT has been a good friend to apple
apple may sell less
but apple sleeps at night soundly
fuck verizon
allday long MF
ATT did a great thing with low cost plans
and they made two camps now
a phone camp
and a data camp
smart beans
Chooses the CHEAP, buggy, crashy, creaky static sounding wireless carrier as the backbone for their MAGICAL device.
Is it me or do I see something wrong with this.
No, you know what. I want to Buy a Mercedes E class car with all it's goodness but I really want a ratty Chinese built 4 cylinder under the hood. Yea, that's the ticket. I'll get it because it's cheap and I'll tell people it's a Mercedes because it is, just won't let them ride with me because well that might get embarrassing.
All joking aside the unit is Magical, sure and so will the 3G service when it works.
Now back to Apple. Wanna do something about the aging Centrino system on the laptops? Cause the new Lenovo's are looking much better than the AL sitting in your garage. Your still a computer company, let's keep our eyes on the target while bringing the group closer towards it.
Actually, I have done or attempted to do so everytime I have been duly informed of an error. I don't permit myself to run from my mistakes when notified and I don't allow my students/trainees to do so either.
I personally don't knowingly spread BS*, certainly not in my educating capacity. Having spent years researching, I don't like to reference data without confirmation or declaring my sources. If you look carefully at my postings you will see a lot of conditional tenses and links to declarations. I try to read the links supplied by the authors here before enter the fray.
In tests I administer, I will give full marks if a student/trainee acknowledges that he/she can't answer a question at the moment, but tells me exactly where to find it; or if he/she brings me the answer immediately following the exam, I will give full marks for the answer. I return all the exam papers and request that all wrong answers be corrected and returned. Doing so and I will award additional half marks for the corrected effort. And by the way, you prove me wrong, you get my acknowledgement of "I stand corrected," and credit. That way we all know what is correct, not just what is wrong.
*Re:
In that case I plead ignorance. And I am quite ignorant on most subjects. But when I am informed of such, I make an effort to become more knowledgeable and thus help diminish one of the [I]Three Friends of [my] Stupidity, i.e., Ignorance, Fear and Habit.?
One last point. If I were the "'internet quality police?' of this site, where would I start?
Well I would ask that anyone that posted information in error would voluntarily correct or delete it. More important, that they acknowledge it; recognizing and correcting an error is one of the best ways to learn. For those who deliberately manipulate information, I would red flag their postings; and personally add the guilty individuals to my 'ignore' list.
Now you may say that this is overkill. However, it would be nice if at the end of the day, I have been fully and properly informed. I can be more confident that if I use the information that I deemed does not make me look stupid. I have learned something. And being able to use it in my teaching, I become even more learnedly.
? http://www.gandalf.it/stupid/
what a odd post
stop the soul searching dude
you rock
your posts are always cool
peace 9