Pugwash

Like this:

Whatever happened to Java applets? How's Realplayer doing? No, Flash won't die, but its use could reduce to the point it can hardly be called alive.

It's the same as the iPhone, and that's why it'll be a huge success.

ps. Adobe make so much money off Mac users that it'd be commercial suicide to remove their support from OSX. Read what Adobe are saying about it. John Nack keeps stressing how necessary Mac users are to Adobe. They're getting scared they're losing Flash, but they know they've got Photoshop for quite some time now.

Let's end that one here and now. "Creative types" don't use Macs because they're hip. They use Macs because in the 80s, the creative revolution happened on Macs and underpinned the entire Mac ethos. Proportional fonts, colour balancing at an OS level, Postscript ... these were all things that only happened on the Mac until Windows 95, and even then proper colour synchronisation doesn;t fully exist on Windows. Creative types, the ones that can afford the expensive stuff, buy the best tools in the business. For most of the history of modern computing, the best return on investment for a creative has been a Mac. You buy the tools that make you the most money, plain and simple. Apple stopped being "Hip", in the way I think you mean, around 2005 or so when they really focussed on making a computer for homes. Education looks aren't "hip" and neither are family computers. The computer Mum uses in the kitchen is, as far as I understand it, as far away from "Hip" as it gets, and that's where Apple was focussing their marketing. The "I'm a Mac" adverts are designed to make a huge split between "Work is spreadsheets" and "Home is fun". Not Hip. Creatives use macs because they offer them the least speedbumps and roadblocks between them and their work, in spite of the fact that they're using 'domestic' computers. As for the iPhone, they may have been hip, but Fart Apps? Now they're mainstream. At what point does something stop being "elitist"? How many sales do they need before people realise almost everyone wants an iPhone, regardless of their major. Charlie Brooker, the man who single-handedly brought the shoreditch elitist [censored] you'd associate with being a hip-apple-guy - Nathan Barley, is finally getting a Mac because he's fed up of having to deal with his computer instead of the work he wants to do. That's what Macs do now. So can we please put the stupid outmoded "people only buy Macs because they're hip" [censored] to rest? It's time.

Good enough for me. I don't do pre-press any more, so I know my photos just need to be 'close enough'. People looking at my photos won't have calibrated screens so there's no need to go over the top with my colour settings. Having said that, at work, I have two calibrated 24" Apple monitors and they do the job nicely.

Or you'd own a Mac already. Making Linux sit up and beg is my day job. When I get home, I want a computer that doesn't get between me and my tasks, and for me that's a MacBook. Games? PS3 on a 42" HD TV, so no need for a PC there, either. The more I think of it, the more an iPad will suit 95% of my home computer use, which is web, email, Twitter and SSH. When I do the other 5%, photography, I need a bigger screen than my MacBook anyway, so I could trade that in for an iMac.

Um ... Not easily.

Most Flash-heavy sites offer iPhone versions without Flash. Give me some URLs you need flash for - some of your 30% - and I'll show you.

Ok, let's say Apple had thought of this and included Exchange support for the enterprise and ... wait, what's that? They did? Ok, let's imagine you needed a Spreadsheet but the iPad ... hang on, Apple has the Excel compatible Numbers available? Right, how are you going to run that without a USB port for a ... oh, bluetooth keyboards work? As does the dock keyboard? Well, ok, so I can run email, a word processor, a presentation tool and a spreadsheet with a keyboard on day one of the v1.0 release, but ... I got nothing. It's not designed as a Windows PC replacement, but you'll be surprised how much it can do.

The amount of sites that are unusable on the iPhone/iPad is incredibly small and it's shrinking daily. Seriously, it's significantly less than 30% that don't work on the iPhone/iPad.

The feminine hygiene jokes are already old hat. I mean come on, the most popular console out there is called a Wii.

Pre-orders are illegal in most states anyway. This process didn't hurt the iPhone. If you've used an iPhone, you'll see that bouncing between apps is really, really easy. Every application knows its state will be interrupted by an incoming phone call so all apps store their state and data on the fly. Of you copy the text, switch to mail, paste and swap back, it'll be as quick as true multi-tasking. The downside of no multi-tasking isn't app switching; it's background services, like Twitter, AIM and the like, and I don't think the iPad will have the iPhone's Push notifications. And on Javascript being the second-most prevalent after Flash, you've got it the wrong way round: Every modern browser supports Javascript. It's much more common than Flash by quite a significant margin. It's not a fair comparison though, because Javascript is a standard and Flash is a proprietary closed plug-in. Anyone writing a browser can write their own Javascript interpreter (and they all do) but only Adobe can build a Flash Plug-in. There's no Flash on Android, iPhone, Blackberry or Palm Pre, for instance, and three out of those four don't even have a closed app structure. No Flash is like no Floppy in the original iMac. You'll scream like blue murder that it's not there, but when you use it, you'll not miss it at all.

You can copy/paste from iWork to Mail. Why would you not be able to do that? Are you confusing multi-tasking with task-switching? It doesn't support Java. Are you confusing Java with Javascript? Imagine if they'd waited until they had FCC approval. We'd all have known about it then. When you put a device to the FCC for approval, it is no longer a secret. Apple had to do it this way to control the information. This is exactly how they released the iPhone, as it also required FCC approval. This wasn't an "early announcement" by any company's standards but Apple's. Apple are probably the only tech company out there that never show prototypes.

Now we're all apologised up and understanding one-another, that's a standard 21j movement. The problem with repairing movements is that it costs the same in parts and labour to fix up a $10 movement like yours as it does a $200 swiss movement. So, the cheapest way to fix it is to swap out the movement, which, again, is parts and labour. With a watch like that, I'd replace it with a better one. If you like that particular watch, then you should be looking for what's known as a UPO. Not $70 cheap, though.

I think $100 is decent, but I'm out of the loop. I'd pay it if I had your watch.

You can see the groove clearer on my exploded 1680 pic:

When I say an O-Ring goes there, I've never managed to fit one on. On the genuine Rolex, I believe there's an o-ring, but I've not seen one on a rep. I tried to fit one, but I couldn't fix the crystal on it.

Yes, an O-Ring goes there.

Today, it's been this:

As you can see, I made it back ok. The Zigmeister, amazing post. As usual, you're the man.

Wow, that's amazing work. Nice watch, etc.

Amazing watch ... apart from that insert/pearl. Still, it looks like a simple fix: replace the insert.

Looks like it could be a gen with a fake dial. Am I right?

I'm glad you asked. I don't get it myself. Sure, it's interesting, but I'm not sure I'd call the Model-T something to wax nostalgic over. The letter itself is a desperate act of a struggling mechanic a year and four months before the depravity of the great depression took hold and it makes me glad I'm alive today instead of back then. Still, to each his own, I suppose.