Arkady Renko

I have my concerns about Wallace. He seems to have attendance problems, and may have got caught up in the drug trade in the past. I think this video discussing his prospects says enough: (there's some bad language here, so NSFW)

Somehow I think a new deal will be negotiated.

I disagree on this. Receiver are not always able to jump or having to jump the extra inches adds the challenge of timing the jump correctly. Further catching a ball on your feet rather than when jumping means that you take less time to get moving and gain any YAC. If we follow your logic further, we would say that a 5'4" receiver is the same as a 5'10" receiver if there is 36" and 30" vertical respectively. Certainly height matters independent of top leaping ability.

Student loan interest is deductible, but it phases out unlike the mortgage deduction.

I know student loan interest deductions phase out at certain income levels, so that may be something to consider.

Don't worry about the side discussion. The Mac can handle all the important PC file extensions.

Lots of Rockism on this thread.

Yes, this is how it always works in OS X. It is also important to assure Steve that a .doc file created on Windows will open up fine in Microsoft Word without doing anything extra.

The NFL needs to give SOME incentive to teams to maximize their revenues, but at the same time there needs to be effective revenue sharing coupled with a salary cap that ensures competitive balance. There are plenty of options available to accomplish both without complete pain. The owners could give more guaranteed salary in the standard player contract in exchange for less league revenues. Luxury boxes could be treated just like any other seats in a stadium and split in the same way between the visiting and home teams. Signing bonuses could be included in the salary cap when paid... It should not be hard for "smart" owners in the NFL to find creative ways to reach compromises among themselves and with the players. Of course these same "smart" owners seem unable to negotiate something as simple as how much they get for the NFL Network on cable systems.

I disagree that they are useless. To the end user, Mac OS X is using file extensions that can be hid or unhid. The mechanics behind the scene are less important. You can switch file extension on the fly just by changing the file name without altering anything else if need be. And Steve was asking about whether the OS understood the standard file extensions that he uses on the PC and they do.

Newsflash: the NFL is not a free market. If it was, there would be like 7 teams in New York. Entrance is restricted and protects those in the larger markets.

OS X uses and understands file extensions.

The Jones, Krafts and Snyders of the league think that somehow it is unfair for them to share their revenues, however they should remember that the league protects their home markets from any competition and that the competitive balance is key to the popularity and growth of the league.

At 1 point, I thought there was an option year. I feel like there has been conflicting info on this topic.

I think there's something to the resale argument, but I wouldn't necessarily buy them for that reason. Anecdotally, I sold off a 8 year old Mac laptop several months ago for $175 on craigslist.

I have had a good experience with refurbs, but yeah, the savings drop when you compare it to the academic price.

I am a Mac user and have been for a long time (love it, but hate the people who treat what computer you own as a moral question). That being said, I have used Windows throughout jobs and school and even supported it at times. Whether switching is right for you, I think is an open question. It really depends on the person. If you used Windows your whole life, you are going to have a learning curve. I'd say that using the older Mac OSes will help, but even if you have old Mac experience, Mac OS X is a lot different. Do you want to spend time learning different programs, different interfaces, different ways of configuring your computer, etc.? If you are happy with Windows and don't have time to spend learning the Mac more, I'd give it careful thought before I plunked down around 1K for a MacBook. I like Mac OS X in that I prefer the programs, have a rock-solid reliable operating system that rarely requires any drivers to be individually installed. Still (although the problem is mitigated by the ability to use Windows on the Intel-based Macs) you are going to find less programs, less games and less peripherals. I get along fine and rarely need Windows, but I do not have any unusual software needs. Maybe you do. I am surprised by the disappointment with Safari and note that most people who do not use Safari use Firefox or its cousins (Bon Echo -- basically the same but optimized for the various processors, Camino, etc.) without a problem. Any chance that you have a friend who might lend you a Mac with Mac OS X on it? Having a week to try it out might be prudent. You will almost always pay a price premium, but how much of that there is a matter of interpretation. MacBooks are not strippers with built in cameras, DVD burners, lightweight, wide screens. If you are going to buy a Mac, I'd recommend buying refurbished MacBooks that start at 799 at the Apple Store. Their availability varies, but they feel like new ones and have the same warranty protections.

Chris Brown seemed to think that DE was unlikely until the middle rounds as well.

9 out of 9, which I guess equals 50. However, although I think I took it quickly, I forgot to run the timer.

In the article it talked about how a lot of the industry that was in Buffalo was because of the cheapness of Niagara Falls electricity. Now, obviously the economy has worsened, but I was wondering if this was no longer a benefit to the region.

Just make it a one foot rule like college and the game remains out to the sidelines.

Is electricity no longer cheap because of Niagara Falls anymore?

All right, alert me when we have crossed the 999th line of the 1000 lines before that one.

I don't really respect this show, but I think it's rather melodramatic to compare willing participants embarrassing themselves by admitting their secrets on TV for cash to people getting killed for sport on TV.

None of the above proposals actually are telling the NFL owners to do anything, they are just creating incentives (allowing an inherited team owner to avoid paying the estate tax and ensuring that NFL and its owners are not sued if they reject a franchise relocation). As the poster above stated, Congress overturned the courts in order to give the NFL owners more money by giving them an anti-trust exemption for pooling broadcast rights and blacking out unsold games, and the NFL owners have raided the public fisc by blackmailing municipalities with threats of moving. The NFL owners certainly do not have much problem with taxes being raised on citizens in order to built stadiums so overflowing with luxury boxes and other extravagance that fans are in effect being taxed so that they are priced out of seeing a game themselves. NFL owners don't seem to mind governments condemning homes and businesses to accommodate space for their new playpens... ...etc...