
OK, this might be mean of me to say, but here in Oz I called my monopoly 3.5G telco (Telstra) and asked them to disable my phone's data service. I left SMS and MMS active, because they're not accident prone. It took 5 minutes which included hold time and a friendly chat with the operator.
I tried doing this with Verizon. I was able to get data service disabled, but in order to do so I also had to block MMS messages, which are included with the text message plan. There was no other option. Not having to deal with random $2 charges is worth the lack of MMS for me (since I don't send them very often), but I still found it ridiculous that they couldn't be blocked separately.
Yep, but BestBuys salesdroids are not aimed at people building hackintoshes.
I once had a conversation with a department head at Caltech who told me that, thanks to their endowments, they could easily afford to charge a much smaller tuition, and that like 70% of their students were given fairly good financial packages, but if they lowered their base price and charged less than other universities, people would assume that they were of lesser quality. Since the value of a degree (not of an education) is in how other people view it, cutting their prices would be a great detriment to their graduates.
As long as the system is in place, and as long as there are more people who want to go to good schools than those schools can accommodate, it is in their best interests to keep their sticker prices high. They only have reason to show you the price you will pay if nobody is considering them because they are too expensive.
The first phone I ever used was a Nokia. The standard black-and-white screen, as stylish as a deformed paving stone, and no antenna Nokia phone.
And you know what? I loved the damn thing. I'm not a huge texter, but texting on that phone was snappy. Instant response from the keys. Nowadays I try to text on my shitty Samsung and it drops key presses so "Hey what's up?" comes out something like "Hfyw hat s up!". I don't think it's a good thing that I type faster than my phone could keep up, when a dinky little budget Nokia phone did just fine 5 years ago.
Not true. A third-person over-the-shoulder camera can accommodate pretty much the same approach to aiming as a first-person camera, while still providing a phenomenal (literally) avatar with which gamers can subjectively identify (or can objectify, in the same way that cinema moves between those two operations).
Until you try to take cover behind a box and start wondering whether you'll be shooting right into the box because the tip of your gun is behind it or whether you'll shoot the target in your unobstructed crosshair. If it's the former have fun drawing imaginary lines between your model's gun and the target all the time.
Granted, even first person games suffer from this sometimes but it isn't nearly as bad.
How many Bavarian Illuminati does it take to screw in a lightbulb? Three: one to screw it in, and one to confuse the issue.