text:
|Thread Tools
|Search this Thread
|Display Modes
|Dec 15, 2012, 05:06 PM
Is the 768Gb drive really that stupid?
So first off, no denying it, its ball shrinkingly expensive and I WISH Apple offered a 256/512Gb option.
But I'm seeing alot of chatter that anyone getting the 768Gb is "being stupid". I'm about to buy an iMac and on the fence over what storage option to get but really it doesn't seem as stupid as everyone is making out...if I'm wrong please show me the way!
A) It is the only way to use Windows with SSD speed properly on the Mac. I've seen experiments with WinClone that work but honestly results seem varied and inonsistent and I don't really like messing around too much now that I'm off Windows. Some people have applications (or would like to futureproof future applications) that are Windows only and going back to HDD would suck for those apps.
B) Whilst expensive, it doesn't seem RIDICULOUS compared to competitors. e.g. the LaCie 512Gb SSD costs £600, implying a cost of £900 for 768Gb. So the Apple one is priced £140 more than this, which is a nice chunk but not a massive premium to pay for having it internal and BootCamp-able
C) Fusion drive looks great for certain users, but I feel like it's nowhere near the same as pure SSD levels. Once you go above the 128Gb SSD its a guessing game as to what will open fast what will open slow and thats very different from knowing everything you open will be blazing SSD speed. Also it doesn't seem to differentiate by datatype. If I watch a movie a few times Fusion will put that on the SSD where it will not benefit from the SSD speed, wasting space.
Not saying that Fusion drive is bad, but I'm saying there is definitely a difference between Fusion and full SSD. I'm also not saying the all SSD isn't massively expensive for what it is. I'm just saying in the absence of any other lower capacity option, I don't really think going all SSD is as "stupid" as many on these boards suggest, there are definitely some viable reasons to go with it?
Please fire away and correct me if I'm wrong and save me a bunch of cash!
|Dec 15, 2012, 05:13 PM
How do you feel about ripping that thing open and upgrading it yourself? It has been shown that you can add any of the currently available blade SSDs to that slot yourself if you are willing to do a little computer surgery. Check out the "Rip Those Macs Open" thread.
|Dec 15, 2012, 07:47 PM
But if you want Windows at SSD speeds, you need to pay the Apple tax. That's the only reason for why you would want to buy it, except of course if you can't stand having an external drive connected to your iMac.
|Dec 15, 2012, 07:54 PM
2012 27" iMac with 680mx | 2011 13" MBA 128gb | Samsung Note 4 | Samsung Tab S 10.5
|Dec 15, 2012, 08:04 PM
I think it's worth getting if the money is not a problem. I would of loved to spec it but just can't justify an additional £1050 on an already expensive machine. If you can then all I can say is enjoy!!!
MacBook Air 2012 # Old iPad 3 # iPhone 5 # Apple TV3 # Time Capsule 2TB # 2 x Pods # and finally received my 2012 27" iMac
|Dec 15, 2012, 08:10 PM
No .... it's not "stupid", "crazy", etc. to order the large SSD if your data needs can use it. Any single-slot that size will be in the same or greater price range, and you only have 2 slots available (blade, and SATA) if you want to keep it all inside the iMac. If you really think it through, the advantages will be obvious to you and there are several threads where users try to discuss it intelligently.
But ... others will call those who buy it all kinds of names, simply because they can't understand how other's needs can possibly be different from theirs.
So, don't worry about it. If you think it makes sense for you ... get it!
[flame suit on]
|Dec 15, 2012, 08:26 PM
it's dead stupid going to this ssd size, no one has that much data that they need it to run at ssd speeds, or at least one in a 100,000 does. Going with that option is like buying a Vaseline jar and saying come on apple... well you know.
|Dec 15, 2012, 08:30 PM
That's a new one ... add "dead stupid" to the list...
I rest my case!
Last edited by hfg; Dec 16, 2012 at 09:41 AM.
|Dec 15, 2012, 08:37 PM
Your assumption is dead stupid.
Whether its wise to spend that amount of money for the internal ssd is another matter, but its certainly subjective.
|Dec 15, 2012, 08:57 PM
Audio, videos and photo's don't noticeably gain that much from being on an ssd drive. Current hard drives are much faster than they used to be (in part due to the increased density). Having the os, an application or a database on an ssd is a must, audio and video simply isn't. Photo's are already pre-cached in whatever software one is using.
And at the end of the day whatever audio/video/photos are currently being processed by the user will be transferred over to the fast ssd side of the fusion drive (no audio, video or photo pro is processing ALL their library at the same time, at most they will be processing no more than 15-50 gb at a time), provided of course apple hasn't effed up another time with their software and the fusion drive does swap most used files as the hybrid seagate drives do. Apple being apple however and in their current stage of software development, or non development as the case might be, I very much doubt their implementation will be very good. More of a priority is maxing out ram than anything else.
Yes the 768 drive is very stupid, but I can't stop anyone who wants that jar of Vaseline from buying...
QUESTION: What's the deal with windows the ssd and the fusion drive in bootcamp? Does under bootcamp the windows installation go by default on the hd instead of the blade ssd? Is this correct? And if so, seriously apple?????
|Dec 15, 2012, 08:59 PM
It's not about whether it's stupid or smart. It's about whether it's worth it for you.
If your time is worth a lot, then there's definitely an argument for getting the Apple SSD. You're not really paying for the flash memory, you're paying for the convenience of having it pre-installed and 100% under warranty1 (I know there's some debate as to whether a user-installed SSD voids the warranty on other parts or not, but either way it means more hassle and time spent dealing with it).
Additionally, SATA SSDs over 512 GB are pretty scarce, and the prices go way up, often with older controllers that likely won't perform as well as the ones Apple uses. If you need a large SSD, the price of the internal drive looks more reasonable.
That said, a third party SSD is definitely something you should consider even if you don't want to do it yourself, it's likely that you could find a third party Apple shop to do the install for a fee, and you'd still save close to $1000 (256 GB SSDs are going for around $200, ballpark $100-150 for the install). Even when factoring in the worst case scenario of an uncovered defect in the future, you'd probably break even.
|Dec 15, 2012, 09:02 PM
Is immense! Just applying OS updates is damn near three hundred percent quicker (comparing my 2011 17" w/7200 rpm HDD to the 2012 rMBP with 768 SSD)--3 times as fast installing MS office updates, accessing and transferring data between externals and internal drive...and lastly, as the OP mentions, running other OS'es. No need to stress about how much (storage) you can allocate to the supplemental OS. It's awesome. Love having the most possible. And I tend to easily forget the cost issue after enjoying the workflow speed and efficiency. IMHO, SSDs have easily made the most marked/perceived performance increase to daily computing than any GPU, CPU, or massive amounts of RAM over the past couple decades. Everything you do is faster. Everything!
All that said, I didn't have the fusion drive option available on the laptop. I may have spent an extra thirty seconds thinking about it, ultimately settling on 768GB SSD. I'm glad I made the choice and as the OP has carefully laid out the pros in his/her workflow, I guarantee he/she will be just as happy as I, if not more
I'm actually going to do the exact same on the 27" iMac. Just holding off another month or two until they're available to check out and play with locally.
|Dec 15, 2012, 09:05 PM
£1040 is a heck of a lot of cash (that's just under $1700 for the US users) for storage especially seeing as we already pay bloated prices over here in the UK.
If money is no option and you really feel that you will benefit from the extra SSD space then go for it but I would personally much rather go for the 1TB fusion drive.
Up to you, your needs and your budget.
Just curious - with all your upgrades applied, how much is your machine going to cost?
|Dec 15, 2012, 09:07 PM
I have made my case in several other threads on the same topic, so I am not going to type it all again.
And, yes, that is exactly the problem with Windows! And, a larger SSD can solve it. I have previously demonstrated how to do that.
|Dec 15, 2012, 09:12 PM
I don't doubt the speed benefits, I too think ssds are the single most important thing one needs to have on a modern computer (that's why I was so pissed of with apple for offering the base imac with a paltry 5,400rpm drive in 2013 and not sticking at least a 32gb blade there (that costs them next to nothing) for a fusion drive.
What I do doubt is that anyone will notice any big difference if instead of the critical/most used data are on a 128-256gb ssd and the rest on an hd, they pay the inordinately high amount and go full ssd. What I pointed out was that very very few people have data that they will simultaneously access and manipulate spanning the whole capacity of the 768 drive. If some can come and tell me yeah I got 500gb of data I routinely edit, manipulate etc. at the same time I 'll concede. But that's like I said 1/100,000
The rmbp is another story because there apple, in their money grabbing force obsoleting wisdom have disallowed a blade+hd scenario.
So, let me get this right, apple by default won't put anything windows related on the blade ssd? I'd stick a seagate momentus if that's the case on the hd bay.
Oh, and btw, come to think of it, some of you guys may want to google ars technica's review of this seagate drives to see how very very close they come (given time) to actual ssd speeds. If apple hasn't ****ed up with the fusion drive, it's going to act the same, and could be even better. Caching to the ssd is the name of the game.
|Dec 15, 2012, 09:16 PM
I don't trust myself enough to successfully execute an SSD upgrade on a 2k+ machine without voiding my warranty. I've learned this from prior sad experience. So, I say, if you can afford the SSD, do it, and don't care/look back at what anyone thinks. If the SSD of your iMac has problems, apple will cover it, no problem. I'd be careful replacing stuff, on your own, on the inside.
I know people say/think it won't void your warranty, but come on, who's to say Apple won't cite a failed hardware test or non standard component on system damage if anything happens? I'm just not willing to risk it. Kudos to those brave/confident enough to do it. I'd say 1300 over retail is a lot less than 2k to replace a machine.
|Dec 15, 2012, 09:20 PM
so how exactly does it work under bootcamp, the storage that is?
(p.s. who'd have thought apple would have dropped the ball with their software development in bootcamp, after all their software development is so stellar these days...)
|Dec 15, 2012, 09:47 PM
Obviously apple has to have a way to open these up and repair them if they fail, but who knows what process they use to re-adhere the panel and glass.
If you can afford the SSD, buy it. If it is a little bit of a stretch, buy it. Buying a 512 SSD and dealing with the hassle of opening the machine up yourself, or paying someone to swap the internal drives just doesn't seem that cost effective when compared to the no hassle approach. Then again, some might view this upgrade as a challenge, but it is not for the faint of heart. Now if you had a pre-existing SSD that you wanted to install, that is a whole different ballgame. But in my opinion, I would rather just pay the extra and not deal with it.
|Dec 15, 2012, 09:57 PM
2012 27" iMac with 680mx | 2011 13" MBA 128gb | Samsung Note 4 | Samsung Tab S 10.5
|Dec 15, 2012, 10:35 PM
All I can say is
$1300 is darned steep
There are no 768GB SSDs that I know of...
Top of the line Samsung Pro 840 SSDs are $600 for 512G ... so as others have said, $900 for 768 means ~ $400 installation fee... I paid ~ $200 premium for 256G in my 2012 mini... but $1300 .... ouch
Why is there not a 512GB option is what is more interesting....
2011 MBA 11", 1.7GHz i5, Mountain Lion
iphone5, ipad Rmini, Apple TV, 24" LED
Late 2013 27" imac, 3.5GHz i7, 256 SSD, GTX775M 2G
Blackmagic Multidock - PT11HD HD Native TB AVID 16x16
|Dec 15, 2012, 10:58 PM
Actually, opening the iMac up isn't that bad. There in an excellent thread here where poster R.OG describes his experience with doing so with both the 21.5" and the 27" complete with pictures. Doing it without voiding any warranty is subject to discussion.
Just a few observations:
I am unaware of any other source for a blade type SSD larger than 512GB available today at any price, so $1300 may be a pretty good price today for the largest capacity in 1 of 2 possible drives inside the iMac. Just like cutting-edge large memory, fast processors, big diamonds ... a single large one is always more expensive than the collective cost of several smaller ones.
We all know about 512GB SSD SATA drives ... but if you need more in a single drive for the remaining internal connection, there is a 1TB SSD available from OCZ but it is $2500. They are in stock, and sold out quickly from Amazon, Newegg, and others.
There is the LaCie LittleBigDisk Thunderbolt 1TB SSD, and it is $1000 and is actually a pair of 512GB drives in RAID-0, it will be external to the iMac on your desk, and adds another wall-wart power supply and power cable running up to your iMac plus the thunderbolt cable. Yes, it is a better deal $/GB, but at the expense of being external with associated clutter. I have a DIY one and it works quite well, but I want my drives all internal if possible, and no noisy, hot, rotating hard disks inside my iMac.
I have used both all-SSD systems, and recently Fusion systems (DIY) and there is a difference. I prefer all-SSD (2TB) which I have been running for the past year in my Mac Pro. The Fusion drive is a nice compromise for now, but it is a compromise. In a couple of years or so, we all will be running all-SSD systems, but I want it today and it is possible and reasonably affordable today ... I won't wait 2 years to get it, something better will be available by then.
Actually, between OS X, Apps, Music, Data, etc. and Windows BootCamp, the 768GB drive will be pretty full, and I will still require an additional external 512GB SSD for my photo library. I will probably open up the iMac and put it internal at some point when I am more confidant it won't require early-failure warranty service (or a source of identical tape is identified).
Last edited by hfg; Dec 15, 2012 at 11:17 PM.
|Dec 15, 2012, 11:07 PM
|Dec 15, 2012, 11:22 PM
As well, I think Apple is now into the mature stage with their SSD solutions. This is their first foray into the fusion approach, and while compelling...it is two drives ultimately. That's twice as likely a failure rate. I'm intrigued by the FD system but I think I'll wait it out a couple years to see how it performs.
I think we are more or less on the same page. It's a big financial pill to swallow. In some cases though, I think it's ultimately the 'best' choice if one can afford it.
As well, these Apple Blades are performing in parity to the Samsung 840--@ $600/512gb. Not $400. And what is your time worth? Most 768gb drives are anywhere from $1000 to $1500 for 960gb Mercury Accelsior PCI express storage. It's not cheap when you get into the upper end of storage on SSD. It's also far from easy now to access the guts of an iMac. Neither of our two third party Apple repair shops will even put a different HDD in my 2011 iMacs. Because of some silly proprietary fan/temp sensor that is unavailable to third party HDD solutions in last year's iMac. I'm happy that I can still access that one if I need...but these days, it's pretty obvious Apple doesn't want us playing around inside any longer. Their design reminds me of the difference in car engines and the evolution over the past thirty years. I can still change any part I want in my '68 Datsun 2000---but my wife's Audi doesn't even look like it has an engine! It's a big piece of something on top that doesn't look anything like the old days--just an Audi billboard with an 800 number for service
I drive a 2004 Dodge. I can still change it's oil, plugs, cap and rotor...but I can't adjust the timing without a computer. You get the point. There are some of you out there...but you're getting fewer and farther between. It's an art to now be able to access an iMac, repair it, and successfully put it back together without damage. It's definitely not something I'm interested in spending my time on. I'd rather buy what I want up front.
Last edited by akdj; Dec 15, 2012 at 11:27 PM.
|Dec 15, 2012, 11:30 PM
As a shareholder i think you should max everything,and add extras...comes to total=$7,899.92
My i be the first to thank you ;-)
|Dec 15, 2012, 11:38 PM
For people that NEED over 512GB of internal SSD storage then i guess there is no choice but to pay the Apple tax and get the 768GB option ( i could mention OWC's blade SSD options but i don't trust them) Im guessing the price of the higher capacity SSD's will come down dramatically in the future, i bet ill have a 1TB SSD for much less then $1300 in the next 2 years. Till then a 512GB SSD plus the 128GB Blade from my fusion upgrade for a total of 640 GB will get me by.
2012 27" iMac with 680mx | 2011 13" MBA 128gb | Samsung Note 4 | Samsung Tab S 10.5
Last edited by torana355; Dec 15, 2012 at 11:53 PM.
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
|Thread Tools
|Search this Thread
|Display Modes
Linear Mode
|Similar Threads
|Thread Starter
|Last Post
|768GB SSD failure
|MacBook Pro
|Jun 27, 2013 08:21 PM
|Are all 768GB Flash Drive made by Samsung?
|MacBook Pro
|Mar 13, 2013 01:49 PM
|Stupid question - How do I see or find my fusion drive?
|Jan 19, 2013 09:11 AM
|Anyone going for the 768GB SSD?
|Dec 1, 2012 08:44 PM
|Review: rMBP 15.4" | 2.7Ghz i7 | 16GB Ram | 768GB Flash Drive
|MacBook Pro
|Jul 5, 2012 08:34 PM
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:27 PM.


text:
Spokane Arena announces 2014 NCAA Tournament ticket buying process | Events
Title (Max 100 Characters)
The Spokane Veterans Memorial Arena and Washington State University announced the buying process for tickets to the 2014 NCAA men's basketball championship Rounds of 64 and 32 on Monday.
"All guests who purchase tickets to the 2013 NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Championship – Spokane Regional … will be placed on a priority waiting list giving them the first opportunity to purchase tickets for the 2014 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Championship," a news release from the Spokane Arena read.
If you buy the 2013 women's tickets, you will be notified in late February 2013 via email with "details on how to purchase tickets" for the men's games in 2014. You can reserve as many women's tickets as you'd like, but you are only entitled to a maximum of four tickets if you are on the waiting list.
"Purchasing two 2013 Women's Basketball tickets will allow you access to two 2014 Men's Basketball tickets," the release said.
When you buy the all-session ticket for the women's games – which will cost $45 – you are getting access to all three games that will be held in the arena. There will be six games included with the men's all-session tickets.
You can buy tickets at www.spokanearena.com/ncaa, by phone at (509) 325-SEAT, at any TicketsWest outlet or at the Spokane Arena box office.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Over the last couple of years, there has become more awareness surrounding the importance of dietary fiber and the prevention of disease.
Why should I eat more fiber?
Dietary fiber can reduce the risk of certain diseases such as colon cancer, diverticular disease, and can also help lower cholesterol and improve symptoms from irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Additionally, fiber can also be beneficial in helping to manage common bowel problems.
If you have been experiencing bowel or hemorrhoidal problems, fiber along with other dietary modifications can often help improve conditions such as constipation, diarrhea, incontinence, hemorrhoids or anal fissures.
How much fiber should I eat?
Current dietary guidelines suggest that....


text:
Microsoft says my Windows 7 is pirated; now what am I suppose to do now?
by Lee Koo (ADMIN) - 3/8/13 3:38 PM
Microsoft says my Windows 7 is pirated; now what am I suppose to do?
We have a Windows 7 laptop at our office which has been in use for last couple of years. One fine morning, it started saying that our Windows 7 copy is not valid. We reinstalled Windows 7 using the key provided by the vendor at the bottom, and even tried Microsoft's toll-free number for support, but Microsoft said that it is a pirated version. But that is an OEM version with the sticker intact on that laptop. What are we supposed to do now? Please help.
--Submitted by Vishnu M.


text:
Jake's Corner
3/6/14 Simon Cowell Wants More Kids
Find me on Facebook: Jake Emily Poyet Webb
Thursday, March 6, 2014
In his first interview since the birth of his son, SIMON COWELL said, quote, "I was born to be a dad." He added, quote, "I wouldn't rule out [more children]! . . . I kind of think it's cool to have two . . . or three."
Yesterday we heard someone stole more than $200,000 worth of jewelry and other valuables from the home that KHLOE KARDASHIAN and LAMAR ODOM used to share. Someone also recently stole $50,000 in cash from the house. Now, Police reportedly believe the incidents are related, and there's even talk that Lamar's drug dealers did it because he owed them money. --Lamar supposedly owed TENS OF THOUSANDS of dollars to several dealers, and once he left for Spain to play basketball, they started texting him threats that they were going to break in and TAKE what he owed.
"People" magazine says KIM KARDASHIAN and KANYE WEST are getting married on May 24th. As we've already heard, it's going down in Paris, and it'll be a small ceremony. At least compared to Kim's last wedding. They're "only" inviting around 150 people, and their daughter North West, who'll be less than a month shy of her first birthday, will have a role in the ceremony.
3/5/14 Khloe's Home Burglarized
Find me on Facebook: Jake Emily Poyet Webb
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
On an Australian TV show, KATY PERRY admitted that she broke off the kiss with MILEY CYRUS during Miley's Bangerz Tour last month. She said, quote, "God knows where that tongue has been. We don't know. That tongue is so infamous!"
Even though she went to rehab earlier this year, a source says SELENA GOMEZ was drunk and stumbling around at an Oscar after-party. When Selena went to rehab, her rep said it was NOT for substance abuse. She checked out two weeks into a six-week program.
A Florida judge has ruled that video of JUSTIN BIEBER taking a URINE TEST after his DUI arrest WILL be released. But Justin's EQUIPMENT will be censored. There's no word when we'll see the clip. But police already did release pictures of Justin baring his tattoos so they could snap photos of them.
In her new book, JENNIE GARTH says she and SHANNEN DOHERTY never came to blows on the set of "90210", but they ALMOST did one time. LUKE PERRY and JASON PRIESTLEY had to separate them. Today, Jennie and Shannen are close friends.
Khloe Kardashian and Lamar Odom's former home in California was robbed of $250,000 worth of jewelry. Khloe noticed the jewelry was missing on Monday when she went with mother Kris Jenner to the home to clean it out for new owner Kaley Cuoco. The home has been empty for a month and Khloe believes it was an inside job… and could be anyone from house staff, assistants, filming crews, inspectors and movers. She now wants those with access to the home to take a lie detector test.
4/4/14 Scarlett Preggers?
Find me on Facebook: Jake Emily Poyet Webb
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
SCARLETT JOHANSSON is pregnant. Probably, anyway. There's been no official word from Scarlett's camp, but EVERYBODY is reporting it as fact, so I guess we're just gonna go with it. The father is French journalist Romain Dauriac. They got engaged last September. There's no word on Scarlett's due date, but TMZ claims she's FIVE MONTHS along, meaning she's more than halfway to the finish line. She's 29.
Maybe hookers, models and porn stars aren't all they're cracked up to be . . . because JUSTIN BIEBER is still hung up on SELENA GOMEZ. Yesterday, he posted two pictures of Selena all dressed up and heading to a post-Oscar party. And he captioned them, quote, "Most elegant princess in the world."
Somehow, this doesn't seem the least bit surprising. That film of an alleged three-way between JACK and BOBBY KENNEDY and MARILYN MONROE won't be going public after all. It was supposedly going to be auctioned off to settle a debt owed by its owner. But the word now is that the owner was able to pay that debt, so he's getting the movie back.
3/3/14 George Lopez Arrested
Find me on Facebook: Jake Emily Poyet Webb
Monday, March 3, 2014
ROBIN THICKE is taking his case to the people. He told his audience in Fairfax, Virginia the other night, quote, "For y'all that don't know, me and my wife separated . . . but I'm trying to get my girl back . . . She's a good woman." Then he sang "Lost Without U" for her.
A film that supposedly shows a THREE-WAY between JOHN F. KENNEDY, BOBBY KENNEDY and MARILYN MONROE is hitting the auction block tomorrow. The film is more than 50 years old, and a collector acquired it in the 1980s. But he sat on out of respect for Marilyn's ex-husband JOE DIMAGGIO, who was a friend of his. DiMaggio died in 1999. The tape was seized from the guy because of a $200,000 court judgment against him. The only way he can stop the auction is by coming up with the 200-grand. We should note that at this point, nobody seems to have concrete proof that this film is legit.
GEORGE LOPEZ got hammered at a Canadian casino last Thursday, and was arrested for public intoxication after passing out on the floor. No charges were filed against him. George later joked, quote, "I just did in Windsor, what JUSTIN BIEBER does in America."
PHILIP SEYMOUR HOFFMAN'S autopsy report is out, and as expected, he died of an accidental drug overdose. In addition to heroin, he had cocaine in his system . . . along with anti-anxiety medication and an upper like Adderall.
2/28/14 Ashton & Mila Engaged
Find me on Facebook: Jake Emily Poyet Webb
Friday, February 28, 2014
JADA PINKETT saw a recent picture of herself in which she could tell she'd gained 8 to 10 pounds, and she LIKED IT. She said, quote, "I like being a lil . . . fuller. Let's just hope it will fit in The Oscars dress. Here's to loving our bodies by our own standards."
ROBIN THICKE isn't keeping his feelings inside. The paparazzi asked him if he and PAULA PATTON are going to work things out, and he said he's, quote, "just trying to get her back, man." The cameraman asked Robin if his "VMA" performance with MILEY CYRUS caused the split. At first he didn't answer, but when asked a second time he said, "No." Meanwhile . . . one website says that Paula's "2 Guns" co-star DENZEL WASHINGTON has been her shoulder to cry on . . . and maybe even MORE than that.
DAVID ARQUETTE'S girlfriend Christina McLarty might be slightly more on-the-ball than he is. Because she's already put her foot down concerning the name of the baby boy they're expecting this spring.
David says he wanted to name the kid ASTRO, because he thought "Astro Arquette" was, quote, "an amazing name." But Christina wouldn't have it. David already has a daughter with ex-wife COURTENEY COX. The poor girl is named COCO.
KATY PERRY hasn't commented on her rumored split from JOHN MAYER . . . but she has announced that she helped deliver her sister's baby. She Tweeted, quote, "Finally you can add 'helps delivers babies in living rooms' to my resume! It's been a miracle of a day . . . Auntie Katy."
Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher are getting married! Mila was spotted shopping in L.A. Thursday wearing a diamond sparkler, and a source confirms to E! Online that the two have indeed gotten engaged.


text:
TomTom and Vodafone UK To Introduce the World's Most Advanced Travel Time Information System for Superior Navigation in the UK
Jun 26 2007
TomTom and Vodafone UK To Introduce the World's Most Advanced Travel Time Information System for Superior Navigation in the UK
Accurate Travel Time for All Roads
London, UK, 26 June 2007 - TomTom, the world's largest navigation solutions provider, and Vodafone UK today announce that they will jointly develop a new traffic information system that will deliver superior travel time information.
This exclusive agreement will see TomTom's in-house patented technology use information from the Vodafone UK network to provide accurate, real-time information on the speed and direction of cars travelling on all major roads across the UK. As a result customers will have a better understanding of the exact traffic situation and be able to plan and change their route instantly to avoid traffic congestion.
"This important development is a major breakthrough in mobility management and route guidance and will significantly benefit our customers. This will clearly improve the daily travel experience of our UK users." Harold Goddijn, TomTom's chief executive officer comments. "By working with Vodafone to bring the granularity of information from their mobile network to solve everyday navigation needs, we will redefine traffic mobility in the UK. It is TomTom's ambition to cover 50% of our installed European base by 2008 and this is another step towards making this revolutionary solution available to more drivers."
"We are extremely pleased to be working with TomTom to bring this innovative service to the UK. This exciting new initiative is a further demonstration of our commitment to develop new opportunities in the mobile market," said Tim Stone, Director of New Business Development and Wholesale for Vodafone UK. "Thanks to the quality of our data, UK drivers will soon be able to access up-to-the-minute traffic updates that will let them plan and navigate the fastest route for all their journeys."
Details of the service will be made available at launch which is expected to be in the first half of 2008. All current and future TomTom users will be able to benefit from the service, once it is available. The solution will also be available for road authorities and businesses, who may use it for dynamic traffic control measures and improved fleet management.
About TomTom
TomTom NV is the world's largest navigation solutions provider. TomTom's products are developed with an emphasis on innovation, quality, ease of use and value. TomTom's products include all-in-one navigation devices which enable customers to navigate right out of the box; these are the award-winning TomTom GO family, the TomTom ONE range and the TomTom RIDER. TomTom PLUS, is the location-based content and services offering for TomTom's navigation products easily available through TomTom HOME. TomTom also provides navigation software products which integrate with third party devices; the TomTom NAVIGATOR software for PDA's and smartphones. TomTom WORK combines industry leading communication and smart navigation technology with leading edge tracking and tracing expertise. TomTom's products are sold through a network of leading retailers in 25 countries and online. TomTom was founded in 1991 in Amsterdam and has offices in Europe, North America and Asia Pacific. TomTom is listed at Euronext, Amsterdam Stock Exchange in The Netherlands. For more information, go to http://www.tomtom.com.
Detailed information about the technology is available at www.mobility.tomtom.com
About Vodafone UK
Vodafone UK has 17.4 million customers and is part of the world's leading international mobile telecommunications Group, offering a wide range of voice and data communications. The company is committed to providing mobile solutions that allow both consumer and business customers to make the most of now. In addition, Vodafone connects customers across the globe with roaming agreements worldwide. It provides 3G roaming in 29 countries and offers great roaming value with Vodafone Passport. On June 6 2007 Vodafone UK launched Vodafone Mobile Internet. For more information, please visit www.vodafone.co.uk.


text:
My Account
My Bag
Karrimor footwear available from Karrimor.com, walking boots and more online now!
Rucksacks, backpacks and suitcases on Karrimor.com. Check out the Karrimor range today.
Karrimor camping available from Karrimor.com. Check out our camping gear today!
Explore a fantastic selection of Tents and Camping Equipment to get you set up for the great outdoors!


text: ArticleRelated DiseasesImages & Quizzes smallermediumlarger 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Iliotibial Band Syndrome(IT Band Syndrome) Least Effective Exercises Slideshow Dehydration Slideshow First Aid Care and Pain Relief for Minor Injuries Medical Author: Benjamin Wedro, MD, FACEP, FAAEM Benjamin Wedro, MD, FACEP, FAAEM Dr. Ben Wedro practices emergency medicine at Gundersen Clinic, a regional trauma center in La Crosse, Wisconsin. His background includes undergraduate and medical studies at the University of Alberta, a Family Practice internship at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario and residency training in Emergency Medicine at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center. View Full Profile Medical Editor: William C. Shiel Jr., MD, FACP, FACR William C. Shiel Jr., MD, FACP, FACR Dr. Shiel received a Bachelor of Science degree with honors from the University of Notre Dame. There he was involved in research in radiation biology and received the Huisking Scholarship. After graduating from St. Louis University School of Medicine, he completed his Internal Medicine residency and Rheumatology fellowship at the University of California, Irvine. He is board-certified in Internal Medicine and Rheumatology. View Full Profile Iliotibial band syndrome facts What is iliotibial band syndrome? What causes iliotibial band syndrome? What are iliotibial band syndrome symptoms and signs? How is iliotibial band syndrome diagnosed? What is the treatment for iliotibial band syndrome? What stretches and exercises are beneficial for iliotibial band syndrome? What exercises should be avoided with iliotibial band syndrome? What is the prognosis for iliotibial band syndrome? Can iliotibial band syndrome be prevented? Where can people find more information about iliotibial band syndrome? Patient Comments: Iliotibial Band Syndrome - SymptomsFind a local Doctor in your town Iliotibial band syndrome facts Iliotibial band syndrome is an overuse injury of tissues of the outer thigh and knee. The iliotibial band runs along the lateral or outside aspect of the thigh and is an important structure that stabilizes the outside of the knee as it flexes and extends. Inflammation of the IT band can occur as it crosses back and forth across the bony prominence of the femoral epicondyle as the knee flexes and extends. Iliotibial band syndrome is an overuse injury causing pain on the outside part of the knee especially during running when the heel strikes the ground. RICE and anti-inflammatory medications are first-line treatments. Physical therapy may be helpful and, rarely, surgery is an option for those who fail to respond to first-line treatment options. Prevention is a key component and includes maintaining flexibility of the low back and leg muscles. What is iliotibial band syndrome? Iliotibial band syndrome (ITBS or IT band syndrome) is an overuse injury of the tissues located on the outer part of thigh and knee. It causes pain and tenderness in those areas, especially just above the knee joint. Iliotibial band syndrome is more common in runners and bicyclists. The iliotibial band is a thick band of tissue that begins at the iliac crest in the pelvis, runs down the outer part of the thigh, and crosses the knee to attach into the top part of the tibia or shinbone. The iliotibial (IT) band helps stabilize the outside part of the knee through its range of motion. Picture of the iliotibial (IT) band When the knee is flexed, the IT band is located behind the femoral epicondyle, a bony outcropping of the femur or thighbone at the knee. The IT band moves forward across the condyle when the knee is extended. There is a sac or bursa that allows the band to glide across the condyle, but should inflammation occur in this area, the increased friction from repeatedly rubbing the iliotibial band across the bony condyle can cause pain, especially along the outer (lateral) aspect of the knee joint. If the symptoms are ignored, the inflammation can continue and scarring can occur in the bursa, decreasing knee range of motion and causing increasing pain with decreasing activity. Medically Reviewed by a Doctor on 12/4/2014Next: What causes iliotibial band syndrome?1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Iliotibial Band Syndrome Index Find a Local Doctor Patient Comments Viewers share their comments Iliotibial Band Syndrome - Symptoms Question: What were your symptoms associated with iliotibial band syndrome? View 1 Comment • Submit » Iliotibial Band Syndrome - Diagnosis Question: How was your IT band syndrome diagnosed? • Submit » Iliotibial Band Syndrome - Treatment Question: What was the treatment for your IT band syndrome? • Submit » Iliotibial Band Syndrome - Exercises Question: What exercises and/or stretches did your doctor or physical therapist recommend? • Submit » Share this Article: Facebook Twitter Email Print Article Suggested Reading on Iliotibial Band Syndrome by Our Doctors Related Diseases & Conditions 1 articles Knee Pain Acute injuries, medical conditions, and chronic use conditions are causes of knee pain. Symptoms and signs that accompany knee pain include redness, swelling, Medications 3 articles Procedures & Tests 3 articles Pictures, Images & Quizzes 2 articles Doctor's & Expert's Views 0 articles Health News 0 articles Health Features 0 articles STAY INFORMED Get the latest health and medical information delivered direct to your inbox!


text:
Search Results
In this activity, students review applications of nanotechnology and discuss issues involved in cutting edge technology. The purpose of thie activity is to get students to think about how different advances in...
How Products Are Made explains and details the manufacturing process of a wide variety of products, from daily household items to complicated electronic equipment and heavy machinery. The searchable site provides step...
These lesson plans were developed by Thirteen Ed Online master teachers. Starting with tried-and-true lessons that work in the classroom, web-savvy teachers have built web-based activities that use the rich resources of...
This module is one of the results of a project that was initially providing workshops in the areas of materials/manufacturing and information technologies to secondary school technology teachers through a program that...
In this brief activity, students are introduced to the nanometer and become familiar with just how small the nanoscale is. The lesson plan employs useful analogies to help illustrate the topics. MERC Online Reviewer...
Manage your resources
Save, organize, and share resources that you find.
Subscribe to bulletins
Automatically be notified about new resources that match your interests.
It's easy, fast, and FREE!
Have a favorite applied math or science site you want others to know about?
SUGGEST a
to add to AMSER


text:
236 Pounds of Class Vice President: A Memoir of Teenage Insecurity, Obesity, and Virginity
236 Pounds of Class Vice President: A Memoir of Teenage Insecurity, Obesity, and Virginity (Paperback)
Related Editions
Jason Mulgrew, popular blogger and author of Everything Is Wrong with Me, continues his depreciating yet hilarious self-reflection with 236 Pounds of Class Vice President.
Set in Mulgrew's high school years, this genuine and honest memoir revisits his teenage antics and escapades as he, while navigating the indignity of puberty, attempts to run for vice president of the student body, displays a penchant for long fur capes, and (naturally) wonders about sex.
Mulgrew's blog, Everything Is Wrong with me, has received more than 200 million hits since its inception in 2004. Complete with awkward, "what was he thinking?" photos—unmitigated proof of Mulgrew's ungainly adolescence—236 Pounds of Class Vice President is an no-holds-barred yet tender look at the years some of us would rather forget.
About the Author
Jason Mulgrew is a self-proclaimed "Internet Quasi-Celebrity" whose blog, Everything Is Wrong with Me: 30, Bipolar and Hungry, has received more than 200 million hits since its inception. Originally from Philadelphia, he now lives in New York City, where he works for a white-shoe law firm that tolerates his blue-collar ways.
Praise for 236 Pounds of Class Vice President: A Memoir of Teenage Insecurity, Obesity, and Virginity…
"I want to thank Jason Mulgrew for letting me know that, while I'm not an awkward teen anymore, I wasn't entirely alone back then after all--it turns out there was another weird kid making poor decisions and masturbating furiously whenever time permitted….Thank you, Jason--the healing begins now."
-Dave Hill, author of Tasteful Nudes
"A funny confessional from the American ethnic hinterlands. Jason Mulgrew is the John Hughes of South Philadelphia."
-Neal Pollack, author of Alternadad and Stretch
"I love 236 Pounds of Class Vice President. Should I call Jason Mulgrew brave? Hilarious? Honest? Gifted? Stunning? Tender? Let's just put it this way: he may be the best man on the planet."
-Rachel Shukert, author of Everything Is Going to Be Great
- Home
- Browse Our Shelves
- Events
- Chapbook Cafe
- Publishing Services
- Services
- About


text:
California Proposition 39, Income Tax Increase for Multistate Businesses (2012)
|Proposition 39
|Click here for the latest news on U.S. ballot measures
|Quick stats
|State statute
|Referred by:
|Petition signatures
|Taxes, Environment
- 1 Election results
- 2 Text of measure
- 3 Background of Proposition 39
- 4 Support
- 5 Opposition
- 6 Editorial opinion
- 7 Polling information
- 8 Path to the ballot
- 9 External links
- 10 References
Proposition 39:
- Requires out-of-state businesses to calculate their California income tax liability based on the percentage of their sales in California.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]
- Repeals an existing law that gives out-of-state businesses an option to choose a tax liability formula that provides favorable tax treatment for businesses with property and payroll outside California.
- Dedicates $550 million annually for five years from the initiative's anticipated increase in revenue in order to fund projects that "create energy efficiency and clean energy jobs" in California.[10][3][4][11] Initially, this extra revenue will go to fund "green" energy projects.[7][5]
Prior to the approval of Proposition 39, businesses located outside of California that, however, transacted some business within the state, had the ability to reduce their California income taxes by not locating facilities or employees within the state.[12]
Supporters of Proposition 39 argued that it will close a tax "loophole" that rewarded out-of-state companies for taking jobs out of California.[8][13][4][14][15] Opponents argue that Proposition 39 is a tax increase. [8][16]
Similar laws have been passed in New Jersey, Illinois, and Texas.[11][17] New Jersey Republican Governor Chris Christie said, "moving to a single sales factor removes a barrier to firms seeking to locate and grow their business and jobs in New Jersey, while also helping retain companies with headquarters in the state."[17]
The primary financial backer of Proposition 39 is Thomas Steyer,[18] who played a lead role in designing the initiative.[19]
Election results
- See also: 2012 ballot measure election results
|California Proposition 39
- These results are from the California Secretary of State as of November 7, 2012 at 2:03 a.m. PST with 79.6% (19,494 of 24,491) precincts partially reporting. This results section will be updated daily until the final results have been certified in about three weeks. The vote total will grow substantially as each precinct counts its absentee, mail-in and provisional ballots.
Text of measure
Fiscal impact
(This is a summary of the initiative's estimated "fiscal impact on state and local government" prepared by the California Legislative Analyst's Office and the Director of Finance.)
Background of Proposition 39
In 2009, the California State Legislature approved a budget that included an option for how out-of-state companies calculated their tax bill.[10][20] Companies could choose the "three-factor" method or the "single-sales factor" method.[7] The single-sales factor uses in-state sales alone to determine a company's tax obligation. [4] With the three-factor method, companies use a combination of sales, employees, and property to calculate their taxes. [4] For out-of-state companies with no physical presence in the state, the three-factor method offers a large savings. Thus, out-of-state businesses overwhelmingly choose the three-factor method.[21]
The measure now known as Proposition 39 qualified for the November ballot on June 20, 2012.[22] San Francisco-based philanthropist, businessman, and signer of the Giving Pledge, Tom Steyer conceived the measure.[22] He is also the main financial backer. [3][13][7] Steyer is co-chair of the Californians for Clean Energy & Jobs group, which has launched a campaign in favor of Proposition 39.[23]
State legislator John Pérez introduced Assembly Bill 1500 during the most recent session.[3] The bill had the same intent as Proposition 39, but it failed to gain traction among Senate Republicans.[13][3]
Thomas Steyer, the founder and co-senior managing partner of Farallon Capital Management, supported Proposition 39. He said, "We have a loophole. It is worth over $1 billion a year. We should close the loophole, and that is what we are doing."[18]
Several California-based companies voiced support for changes to corporate tax law, including Disney, Cisco, Qualcomm, and Amgen.[24] They argued that the law changed by Proposition 39 gave out-of-state companies an unfair advantage.[24][8]
The California Teachers Association also supported the measure.[13] Atlas Project Support, a green energy firm, said that the measure would greatly increase its business. [13] Genentech, a California-based biotech firm, expressed support for Proposition 39. [7] Executive Andrea Jackson said that the company recently built a $450 million facility in Oregon to take advantage of the three-factor method. [7] She said that the company would rather keep all of its assets in-state. [7]
The San Francisco Chamber of Commerce,[25] former U.S. Secretary of State to Ronald Reagan, George Schultz,[26] The Sacramento Bee,[15] the San Jose Mercury News[27], California State Assembly Speaker John Perez,[28] the California Labor Federation,[29] and California State Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg,[30] had endorsed the initiative.
On September 26, 2012, the California Democratic Party Chairman, John Burton, announced his endorsement of Proposition 39. Other endorsements of the initiative included: "the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, California Nurses Association, American Lung Association - California, CA NOW, California Alliance for Retired Americans, California Church IMPACT, Latin Business Association, California Labor Federation, CleanTECH San Diego, Los Angeles/Orange Counties Building & Construction Trades Council, Sacramento Bee, San Jose Mercury News, Los Angeles Business Council, California Community College Trustees, and the California League of Conservation Voters."[31]
As of October 1st, 2012, General Motors, International Paper, Kimberly Clark, Chrysler and Proctor & Gamble will not oppose Proposition 39 any further.[7]
The arguments in favor of Proposition 39 in the state's official voter guide were submitted by:
- Jane Warner. Warner is the president of the American Lung Association in California.
- Thomas Steyer.
- Mary Leslie. Leslie is the president of the Los Angeles Business Council.
- Alan Joseph Bankman. Bankman is a professor of tax law at Stanford Law School.
- Ruben Guerra. Guerra is the CEO of the Latin Business Association.
- Jane Skeeter. Skeeter is a small business owner in California.
Arguments in favor
The arguments presented in favor of Proposition 39 in the state's official voter guide included:
- "At the end of the 2009 budget negotiations in Sacramento, in the middle of the night, legislators and lobbyists for out-of-state corporations made a deal—with no public hearings and no debate. They put a loophole into state law that allows out-of-state corporations to manipulate our tax system every single year, and avoid paying their fair share to California. The cost of this loophole: $1 billion per year in lost revenues for California."
- "Prop. 39 simply closes this loophole. It ends this manipulation of our tax system—and requires that all corporations doing business in California pay taxes determined by their sales here, no matter where they are based."
- "Prop. 39 levels the playing field, ensuring that out-of-state companies play by the same rules as California employers."
- "The current tax loophole lets corporations pay less tax to California if they have fewer employees here—giving companies a reason to send jobs out of state. In fact, the state's nonpartisan, independent Legislative Analyst has cited studies showing that the tax policy in Prop. 39 will bring California as many as 40,000 jobs. That's why the independent Legislative Analyst has called for eliminating the present loophole."
- "Multistate corporations that provide few jobs here are using the loophole to avoid paying their fair share to California, costing the state $1 billion per year in lost revenues. Prop. 39 will clovitally-needed revenues for public services. Because almost half of all new revenue is legally required to go to education, hundreds of millions of dollars per year will be dedicated to schools. Additionally, Prop. 39 will create savings for taxpayers. 39 will use a portion of the revenues from closing the loophole to fund energy efficiency projects at schools and other public buildings. Using proven energy efficiency measures like improving insulation, replacing leaky windows and roofs and adding small-scale solar panel installations will reduce state energy costs—freeing up dollars for essential services like education, police, and fire."
- "Prop. 39 contains tough financial accountability provisions —including independent annual audits, ongoing review and evaluation by a Citizens Oversight Board, a complete accounting of all funds and expenditures, and full public disclosure."
| Total campaign cash
as of November 3, 2012
Thomas Steyer is the primary financial backer of Proposition 39.[32]
The donors listed in the chart below are the $25,000 and over donors to the "Yes on 39" campaign as of Saturday, November 3, 2012. Note that some of these donors gave their money to a committee that was simultaneously supporting or opposing more than one of the ballot propositions on the November 6, 2012, ballot. When that is the case, it is not generally possible to break down how much of that donor's money specifically was spent on the campaign for a particular proposition. Those contributions are listed below with shading; readers should not assume that all or even most of a donation to a multi-purpose committee was used for expenditures related to this particular proposition.
|Thomas Steyer
|Californians for Clean Energy and Jobs
|California State Council of Service Employees (SEIU)
|National Education Association
|Asian-Pacific Environmental Network
|California Teachers Association
|United Food and Commercial Workers
|Taxpayers to Preserve Community Jobs
|Natural Resources Defense Council
|Green Tech Action Fund
|League of Conservation Voters
Opponents of the measure argued that California already has an unfriendly business climate. According to the Tax Foundation, California's business tax climate ranks 48th in the nation.
Several major corporations benefited from the law that was changed by Proposition 39, including General Motors, International Paper, Kimberley-Clark, and Chrysler. [3] From 2006-2012, these companies earned $42.4 million in state contracts. [3] These four companies vocally opposed Assembly Bill 1500, and they equally opposed Proposition 39. [3] In September 2012, Proctor & Gamble and Chrysler both announced they wouldn't oppose Proposition 39.[33][34]
The group "California Employers against Higher Taxes" also opposed Proposition 39.[3] Opponents said that Proposition 39 would add more bureaucracy to California government and discourage businesses from contributing to the economy through job creation. [8] They also said that the three-factor method had been on the books since 1966 with no ill effects. [16] The Carpinteria Valley Chamber of Commerce, The Simi Valley Chamber of Commerce, the Oxnard Chamber of Commerce, and the United Chambers of Commerce all oppose Proposition 39.[26]
The arguments against Proposition 39 in the state's official voter guide were submitted by:
- Jack Stewart. Stewart is the president of the California Manufacturers & Technology Association.
- Lew Uhler. Uhler is the president of the National Tax Limitation Committee.
- Pat Kong Kushida. Kushida is the president of the California Asian Pacific Chamber of Commerce.
- Mike Spence. Spence is the president of the California Taxpayer Protection Committee.
- Robert Ming. Ming is the chairman of Friends for Saving California Jobs.
- Jack Stewart. Stewart is the president of California Manufacturers & Technology Association.
Other opponents included:
- Peter DeMarco, a spokesperson for a coalition of businesses that oppose the initiative, said that if approved, Proposition 39 is "going to drive workers and jobs out of California."[35]
The "Yes on 39" campaign ran a full-page ad in the Sacramento Bee the last week of July 2012 asking four companies who had indicated their opposition to Proposition 39 to back off and pledge not to oppose Proposition 39. The four companies identified in the advertisement were Chrysler, General Motors, Kimberly-Clark and International Paper.[37]
Arguments against
The arguments in opposition to Proposition 39 presented in the state's official voter guide included:
- "Proposition 39 is a massive $1 billion tax increase on California job creators that will result in the loss of thousands of middle class jobs. California's unemployment rate is already third worst in the country at nearly 11%. Prop. 39 makes our problems worse."
- "Proposition 39 is a recipe for waste and corruption. It spends up to $22 million on a new bureaucracy and special interest commission. It gives Sacramento politicians a blank check to spend billions without real accountability or taxpayer protections against conflicts of interest."
- "Here are the facts: a billionaire who CNN called 'California's Hedge Fund King' is bankrolling 39, spending $20 million to influence your vote and buy the election. His political consultants use terms like 'closing a loophole' but don't believe them. Prop. 39 is politics at its worst. California needs reform, not more taxes and wasteful spending."
- "$2.5 billion that could go to schools, health and welfare, environmental protection or public safety is instead diverted to a new government commission with fat salaries and little accountability. Our state budget deficit today is nearly $16 billion and Prop. 39 makes things worse by wasting money on a new unnecessary bureaucracy. California needs teachers and police officers, not more bureaucrats!"
- "Manufacturing jobs that provide for families are vanishing. Almost two million hard-working Californians are struggling to find any kind of work. The $1 billion Prop. 39 tax increase changes tax laws that have been in effect for more than 40 years and will cost more union and non-union workers their jobs."
- "You've heard it before. Sacramento has a plan to create jobs. We give them money to create a commission of political appointees with an appealing name like Citizens Oversight Board. They get a blank check to spend (or waste) tax dollars. Under Prop. 39, money is spent to give contracts to so-called 'Green Energy' programs. Who is likely to get those contracts? Big campaign contributors, that's who."
- "California needs reform, not tax increases that eliminate middle class jobs. Prop. 39 raises taxes by $1 billion on California job creators to help fund more government bureaucracy and more bloated pensions. It doesn't protect against ongoing state budget deficits, high nemployment and continued economic recession. Remember, a billionaire with an agenda is bankrolling 39. It's up to voters to protect California taxpayers. By voting NO on Prop. 39, you will stop a job-killing $1 billion tax increase on California job creators. You will support middle class California jobs that provide for families and sustain our economy. And you'll tell Sacramento politicians no more blank checks for more special interest spending on bloated government and pensions."
| Total campaign cash
as of November 3, 2012
These are the $5,000 and over donors to the "no" campaign as of November 3, 2012:
|General Motors
|Kimberly-Clark Corporation
|International Paper
Opposition campaign
- A Stop 39 website was registered with GoDaddy on July 18, 2012. The identity of the organization or individual who registered the URL is unavailable, since they used "Domains by Proxy" to shield their identity.
- As of October 14, 2012, visitors to the Stop 39 website see no content, other than the phrase, "This site is under construction."
Editorial opinion
"Yes on 39"
- The Bakersfield Californian: "It's time to fix a bad tax policy, created three years ago by the California Legislature, once and for all."[38]
- The Contra Costa Times: "State lawmakers have refused to correct the mistake they made in 2009 when, in a late-night budget session, they created a tax incentive for companies to locate outside California. Voters need to fix it for them on Nov. 6 by voting for Proposition 39."[39]
- The Daily Democrat (Woodland, California): "Vote yes on this initiative to end a system that lets out-of-state corporations choose their methods of taxation."[40]
- The Fresno Bee endorsed Proposition 39 on October 1st, 2012. They wrote, "If it's approved, the initiative would generate $1 billion a year."[41]
- The Los Angeles Times: "Proposition 39, would raise an estimated $1 billion a year, about half of which would be dedicated temporarily to making public buildings more energy efficient."[19]
- The Marin Independent Journal: "This measure needs to be on the ballot because the state Legislature has refused to close a business tax loophole it approved in a late-night budget decision in 2009."[42]
- The Merced Sun-Star: "The initiative on the Nov. 6 ballot would close a $1 billion corporate tax loophole, one that legislators are incapable of shutting because they are beholden to outside influences."[43]
- The Modesto Bee: "Proposition 39 shows how direct democracy should work."[44]
- The Oakland Tribune: "Prop. 39 will help keep businesses here."[45]
- The Press-Enterprise: "California has no need for a tax break that puts the state at an economic disadvantage."[46]
- The Redding Record Searchlight: "[Proposition 39] ends a billion-dollar giveaway to out-of-state corporations."[47]
- The Sacramento Bee: "Essentially, out-of-state corporations such as cigarette maker Altria gained the privilege to determine which of two methods of taxation allowed them to pay the least in state taxes, and they are allowed to toggle back and forth each year so as to gain the greatest benefit,... Proposition 39 shows how direct democracy should work."[14]
- The San Diego Free Press: "Proposition 39 would eliminate the ability of companies to choose between two methods to calculate their taxable income in California and require them to use sales only for the calculation."[48]
- The San Francisco Bay Guardian: "It's more fair, it creates the right incentives to keep jobs and equipment in the state, and it cuts a hole in the deficit."[49]
- The San Jose Mercury News endorsed Proposition 39, writing, "State lawmakers have so far refused to correct the mistake they made in 2009 when, in a late-night budget session, they created a tax incentive for companies to locate outside California. Voters will be able to fix it for them Nov. 6 by voting yes on Proposition 39."[50]
- The Santa Cruz Sentinel: "Ballot-budgeting? Yes. But as it stands, Steyer's Prop. 39 revenue would help create jobs while also cutting down on energy use and greenhouse gas emissions at public buildings -- and the revenue directed toward these causes is limited to five years. More importantly, the tax loophole is egregious and only encourages multistate companies doing business in California to create jobs outside the state."[51]
- The Vallejo Times-Herald: "We'd prefer to see all the money go to the general fund, but it almost doesn't matter. The important thing is to change a tax policy that now encourages firms to leave California or to expand in other states. Proposition 39 does that."[52]
"No on 39"
- The editorial board of the Appeal-Democrat opposed Proposition 39, writing, "Steyer said the initiative would create green jobs. But taxes kill jobs by sucking money out of the private sector. Similar green-jobs claims were made about Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. But A.B. 32 didn't prevent state unemployment from soaring well above the national rate. California's real employment problem is not a lack of green jobs, but the state's severe anti-jobs climate, to which A.B. 32 and the specter of Steyer's initiative contribute."[53]
- The Bay Area Reporter: "We agree that this is a loophole in the state tax code that should be eliminated. However, this proposition then mandates that the increased revenue, estimated at up to $1 billion annually, be earmarked for specific energy and education programs. This is ballot box budgeting, and we oppose it. It is the role of the legislature to determine the most effective use of revenues, particularly in these hard times of competing priorities. This is a loophole that needs to be closed, but this proposition brings too much other baggage."[54]
- The Long Beach Press-Telegram: "Proposition 39 is a mixed bag - like so many of the initiatives that appear on California's ballots - that should be rejected. At its core is a sound idea: changing the way multistate corporations are taxed in order to remove a perverse incentive against locating operations in California. But the measure has two big problems: One, it's yet another example of ballot-box budgeting, directing half the revenue that would be generated into niche projects instead of into the general fund; and two, it goes back on a budget deal that the Legislature made three years ago."[55]
- The Los Angeles Daily News: "...the measure has two big problems: One, it's yet another example of ballot-box budgeting, directing half the revenue that would be generated into niche projects instead of into the general fund; and two, it goes back on a budget deal that the Legislature made three years ago."[56]
- The Orange County Register: "Prop. 39 ultimately would punish companies with higher taxes and consequently their customers with higher prices, while discouraging hiring in California. We suspect a substantial motive behind the initiative, which largely was funded by a private equity fund partner with clean energy investments, is to extract more taxes, and to use much of the additional money to reward favored projects."[57]
- The Pasadena Star-News opposed Proposition 39, writing that, "PROPOSITION 39 is a mixed bag - like so many of the initiatives that appear on California's ballots - that should be rejected."[58]
- The San Bernadino Sun opposed the initiative, writing, "Of the $1 billion or so in additional tax revenue that change would produce, Proposition 39 directs half into energy efficiency and alternative energy projects for four years."[59]
- The San Diego Union-Tribune opposed Proposition 39, writing, "Proposition 39 targets this same loophole. But instead of using the extra revenue to help small business and spur the struggling economy, the measure would devote half the new revenue, up to $550 million, to alternative energy and energy efficiency projects. These areas are already getting billions of dollars in federal funding, sometimes with horrible track records. We much prefer Fletcher's approach – or the simplest idea of all: just putting all the money back in the general fund, not half of it."[60]
- The San Francisco Chronicle opposed the initiative in a September editorial, stating that, "Proposition 39, which would direct about half of the extra $1 billion in annual revenue to energy-efficient projects, corrupts a very good idea (tax reform) with a very bad one (ballot-box budgeting)."[61]
- The San Gabriel Valley Tribune: "California can't stand any more ballot-box budgeting that squirrels away money for a single purpose favored by an initiative's proponents - in this case a hedge-fund billionaire. Proposition 39 creates the Clean Energy Job Creation Fund, another otherwise untouchable pot of money like the First 5 and mental health funds that past initiatives have given us. The purposes are good, but they should be weighed against other priorities like education and care for the indigent and elderly."[62]
- The Ventura County Star opposed Proposition 39, stating, "Supporters of Proposition 39 may have had good intentions, but this initiative on the Nov. 6 ballot doesn't measure up to reasonable expectations. The Star recommends a no vote."[63]
- The Victorville Daily Press: "Thomas Steyer, a San Francisco hedge-fund manager who's worth in excess of $1.3 billion, authored Prop 39 and has invested millions of dollars in the campaign to have it approved. This is far from selfless. Mr. Steyer's hedge funds invest in 'clean' energy — windmills, you know, and solar plants. So it's easy to understand why, in writing Prop 39, Mr. Steyer stipulated that for the first five years after it becomes law, some $5 billion of tax revenue it throws off will go into building 'green' projects. Remember, that $5 billion is going to come from you because of higher prices on the stuff you buy, just to keep Mr. Steyer's hedge funds spewing cash for his investors. Just what we need, another environmental activist mandate to soak Californians' family budgets — to no justifiable purpose. Like other tax increase measures on the Nov. 6 ballot (Prop 30, for instance) Prop. 39 is just another measure that would raise taxes at the expense of private-sector economic growth, to hand billions of dollars to Gov. Jerry Brown and Legislature to do with as they please."[64]
Polling information
- See also: Polls, 2012 ballot measures
A Field Poll taken in late June/early July showed that the "yes" side had a very slight lead over the "no" side, but with less than 50% support.[65]
A Field Poll conducted in mid-September showed similar levels of support and opposition.[66]
|Date of Poll
|In favor
|Number polled
|June 21-July 2, 2012
|Field Poll
|September 6-18, 2012
|Field Poll
|September 17-23, 2012
|USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times
|October 7-10, 2012
|California Business Roundtable
|October 21-28, 2012
|California Business Roundtable
A poll of 802 likely voters conducted by the California Business Roundtable and Pepperdine University's School of Public Policy showed 57 percent of voters in support of Proposition 39. [13] Twenty-nine percent opposed the measure. [13]
Path to the ballot
- See also: California signature requirements
- The letter requesting a title and summary was signed by Joseph Caves. Caves is also the proponent of a different initiative, the Pollution Producers To Pay for Pollution Mitigation Initiative.
- The 150-day circulation deadline for #11-0080 was June 11, 2012.
- 504,760 valid signatures were required for qualification purposes.
- Signatures to qualify the initiative for the November 6, 2012 ballot were submitted to county election officials throughout the state on May 4, 2012.[35]
- On June 20, the California Secretary of State announced that Proposition 39 had qualified for the November 6, 2012, ballot.[1]
External links
Basic information:
- Complete November 6, 2012 official voter guide
- Ballot title, summary and LAO analysis of Proposition 39
- Arguments for and against Proposition 39 in the official state voter guide
- Letter requesting a ballot title for Initiative 11-0080
- Living Voters Guide to Proposition 39
- Proposition 39, an overview prepared by the League of Women Voters of California
- Proposition 39 on Voter's Edge
- Proposition 39 Cheatsheet from KCET
- Proposition 39 on California Choices (sponsored by Next 10, IGS at UC Berkeley, the UC San Diego Political Science Department, the Bill Lane Center for the American West at Stanford, and the Center for CA Studies at Sac State)
- Proposition 39 at the California Voter Foundation
- "Yes on 39" website
- "Yes on 39" on Facebook
- Campaign finance reports for "Yes on 39; Californians to Close the Out-of-State Corporate Tax Loophole"
- Campaign finance reports for "Californians for Clean Energy and Jobs"
- Campaign finance reports for "South LA Power PAC"
- Stop 39
- Campaign finance reports for "California Manufacturers & Technology Association Issues Political Action Committee/No on 39"
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Sacramento Bee, "Jerry Brown's proposal and two other tax measures qualify for November ballot", June 21, 2012
- ↑ Monterey County Herald, "Other views: Vote for Prop. 39, return business", August 14, 2012
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 The Sacramento Bee, "Prop. 39 backers suggest California end contracts with tax foes", July 31, 2012
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Legislative Analyst's Office, "Tax Treatment for Multistate Businesses. Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Funding. Initiative Statue.", July 18, 2012
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 SmartVoter.org, "Proposition 39", 2012
- ↑ San Diego Free Press, "Proposition 39 – Why You Should Vote Yes on the Most Boring Proposition on the 2012 Ballot", September 6,2012
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 Silicon Valley Mercury News, "http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_21276138/mercury-news-editorial-californias-prop-39-will-help", August 9, 2012
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 CA.gov, "ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 39", 2012
- ↑ KCET, "Prop 39 Funding", September 26, 2012
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 CA.gov, "TAX TREATMENT FOR MULTISTATE BUSINESSES. CLEAN ENERGY AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY FUNDING. INITIATIVE STATUTE." 2012
- ↑ 11.0 11.1 Legislative Analyst's Office, "Reconsidering the Optional Single Sales Factor", May 26, 2012
- ↑ NBC Bay Area, "The Three Numbers You'll Hear This Fall: 38 - 39 - 40", June 30, 2012
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs named
- ↑ 14.0 14.1 The California Majority Report, Sacramento Bee Backs Prop 39", September 24, 2012
- ↑ 15.0 15.1 Sacramento Bee, "Endorsements: Proposition 39 is a tax code fix worthy of your 'yes' vote", September 23, 2012
- ↑ 16.0 16.1 CalWatchdog, "Prop 39 and AB 1500: A taxing alliance", August 20, 2012
- ↑ 17.0 17.1 State of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, "The New Jersey Comeback", June 14, 2012
- ↑ 18.0 18.1 Sacramento Bee, "Tax campaign targets Capitol's inside game", January 29, 2012
- ↑ 19.0 19.1 Los Angeles Times, "Yes on Proposition 39", September 27, 2012
- ↑ Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, "Corporate Income Tax Apportionment and the Single Sales Factor", August, 2012
- ↑ Oakland Tribune,"Oakland Tribune editorial: California's Prop. 39 will help keep businesses here", August 13, 2012.
- ↑ 22.0 22.1 Scaramento Bee, "Jerry Brown's proposal and two other tax measures qualify for November ballot", June 21, 2012
- ↑ Californians for Clean Energy & Jobs Network, "About Us", 2012
- ↑ 24.0 24.1 Sacramento Bee, "Dan Morain: Tax campaign targets Capitol's inside game", January 29, 2012
- ↑ San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, "San Francisco Chamber of Commerce Announces Ballot Positions for November Presidential Election" 2012
- ↑ 26.0 26.1 Chamber of Commerce Alliance, "2012 Ballot Measures", September 17, 2012
- ↑ Silicon Valley Mercury News, "Mercury News editorial: California's Prop. 39 will help keep businesses here", August 9, 2012
- ↑ San Francisco Chronicle, "Tax measure gets Speaker Pérez's support", September 14, 2012
- ↑ California Labor Federation, "Prop 39: Closing a Corporate Tax Loophole and Bringing Jobs Back to California", 2012
- ↑ YesOnProp39, "California State Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg Endorses Proposition 39", September 20, 2012
- ↑ San Diego Politico, "California Democratic Party Chairman, John Burton, Endorses Proposition 39", September 26, 2012
- ↑ Sacramento Bee, "Billionaire will give $20 million for corporate tax hike initiative", May 10, 2012
- ↑ Sacramento Bee, "Chrysler States it Will Not Oppose Proposition 39", September 19, 2012
- ↑ Los Angeles Times, "Procter & Gamble stands aside as corporate tax battle heats up", August 3, 2012
- ↑ 35.0 35.1 89.3 KPCC, "Initiative to close tax exemption for out-of-state businesses to join November ballot", May 4, 2012
- ↑ Walnut Creek Patch, "California Republicans Oppose Proposed Tax Measures", August 12, 2012
- ↑ Sacramento Bee, "AM Alert: Yes on Prop. 39 campaign throws down gauntlet", July 30, 2012
- ↑ The Bakersfield Californian, "Prop. 39 evens field for state's businesses", September 20, 2012
- ↑ Monterey Herald, "Contra Costa Times: Repeal Prop. 39, return business", August 14, 2012
- ↑ Daily Democrat, "Democrat endorsements: Propositions", October 14, 2012
- ↑ The Fresno Bee, "EDITORIAL: Proposition 39 would close tax loophole", October 1, 2012
- ↑ Marin Independent Journal, "Editorial: IJ endorsements for state Propositions 38-40", October 13, 2012
- ↑ Merced Sun-Star, "Our View: Proposition 39 shows how direct democracy should work", September 27, 2012
- ↑ The Modesto Bee, "Proposition 39 would fix big tax loopholes", September 27, 2012
- ↑ The Oakland Tribune, "Prop. 39 will help keep businesses here.", August 13, 2012
- ↑ Press-Enterprise, "Yes on 39", October 4, 2012
- ↑ The Redding Record Searchlight, "Editorial: Close senseless tax loophole — 'Yes' on Prop. 39", October 1, 2012
- ↑ San Diego Free Press, "Proposition 39 – Why You Should Vote Yes on the Most Boring Proposition on the 2012 Ballot", September 6, 2012
- ↑ San Francisco Bay Guardian, "Endorsements 2012: State ballot measures", October 3, 2012
- ↑ Mercury News, "California's Prop. 39 will help keep businesses here", August 9, 2012
- ↑ Santa Cruz Sentinel, "Editorial: Yes on 39; close tax loophole for multistate firms", October 3, 2012
- ↑ Vallejo Times-Herald, "'Yes' on Prop. 39: Keeping businesses right here", October 20, 2012
- ↑ Appeal-Democrat, "Our View: California businesses facing new tax hikes", May 10, 2012
- ↑ Bay Area Reporter, "Editorial: State ballot measures", September 20, 2012
- ↑ Long Beach Press Telegram, "Endorsement: No on Proposition 39 -- This ballot-box budgeting measure reneges on another budget deal from 2009", October 1, 2012
- ↑ Los Angeles Daily News, "Editorial: No on Proposition 39", October 1, 2012
- ↑ Orange County Register, "Editorial: No on Prop. 39 (business taxes)", October 1, 2012
- ↑ Pasadena Star-News, "Our View: No on Prop. 39's ballot-box budget", September 30, 2012
- ↑ San Bernadino Sun, "No more ballot-box budgeting; no on Prop. 39", September 30, 2012
- ↑ San Diego Union Tribune, "No on Prop. 39: Fix needed, but not this one", September 30, 2012
- ↑ The San Francisco Chronicle, "Editorial: No on Prop. 39", September 21, 2012
- ↑ San Gabriel Valley Tribune, "Our View: No on Prop. 39's ballot-box budget", September 30, 2012
- ↑ The Ventura County Star, "Editorial: No on Prop. 39, a $2.75 billion tax grab on Nov. 6", September 19, 2012
- ↑ Victorville Daily Press, "Prop. 39: Another raid on your wallet", October 22, 2012
- ↑ Field Poll released July 5, 2012
- ↑ Field Poll, "California's Tax Initiatives", September 20, 2012
State of California
Sacramento (capital)
|Ballot Measures
List of California ballot propositions | Local measures | School bond issues | Ballot measure laws | Initiative laws | History of I&R | Campaign Finance Requirements | Recall process |
|Ballot measures by year
1910 | 1911 | 1912 | 1914 | 1915 | 1916 | 1919 | 1920 | 1922 | 1924 | 1926 | 1928 | 1930 | 1932 | 1933 | 1934 | 1935 | 1936 | 1938 | 1939 | 1940 | 1942 | 1944 | 1946 | 1948 | 1949 | 1950 | 1952 | 1954 | 1956 | 1958 | 1960 | 1962 | 1964 | 1966 | 1968 | 1970 | 1972 | 1973 | 1974 | 1976 | 1978 | 1980 | 1982 | 1984 | 1986 | 1988 | 1990 | 1992 | 1993 | 1994 | 1996 | 1998 | 2000 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2006 (local) | 2008 | 2008 (local) | 2009 | 2009 (local) | 2010 | 2010 (local) | 2011 (local) | 2012 | 2012 (local) | 2014 | 2016 |
California State Constitution | State Assembly | State Senate | State legislative districts | Legislative Analyst's Office|
|State executive offices
Governor | Attorney General | Secretary of State | Controller | Treasurer | State Auditor | Superintendent of Public Instruction | Commissioner of Insurance | Secretary of Agriculture | Secretary for Natural Resources | Director of Industrial Relations | President of Public Utilities |
|School boards
California Department of Education | California school districts |
California Supreme Court | Courts of Appeal | Superior Courts | Judicial selection in California |
Recalls | Vote fraud | 2010 elections | 2012 elections | 2014 elections | Fair Political Practices Commission |
List of Counties | List of Cities | List of School Districts | Evaluation of county websites | Evaluation of city websites | Evaluation of school district websites |


text:
Results 1 to 5 of 22
Thread: Girl names from classic books
June 21st, 2013 10:17 AM #1
Girl names from classic books
My two biggest passions are names and reading. I especially enjoy classic book and besides wonderful telling, they got some pretty names. I collected my favorite literature names for both genders and ask you to post yours here - let's exchange ideas! I will post only the author if the names are from writer's different works and both author and title if name/s are from one book.
Baby girl names from books:
Sybilla (Oscar Wilde, "The Picture of Dorian Gray")
Dora and Estelle (Charles Dickens)
Polly and Emmeline(Mark Twen, "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn")
Charmian, Bianca, Hermione, Miranda and Cordelia(William Shakespeare; Charmian even has double connection - it's also the name of Jack London's wife)
Winifred (Natalie Babbet, "Tuck Everlasting")
Daisy, Myrtle, Sigourney, Vienna, Birdie, Ermine and Hildegarde (Francis Scott Fitzgerald)
Alice (Lewis Carroll, "Alice's Adventures In Wonderland")
Larisa/Lara, Antonina, Marfa (Boris Pasternak, "Doctor Zhivago")
Amy, Beth (Louisa May Alcott, "Little Women")
Scarlett, Melanie, India and Maybelle (Margaret Mitchell, "Gone With The Wind")
Feel free to add your favorite literature names, too. Obviously, this is not a full list
Last edited by handsallover; June 21st, 2013 at 03:08 PM.Olympia
Russian Lit student, bookworm, and arts geek.
• Frances Birdie Jane • Emmeline Twila Alice • Ramona Juniper Monet • Esme Helena Mazarine • Sibyl Jemima Iris
• Nathaniel Roscoe Wilde • Grover Elijah St John • Oscar Ignatius Cosmo • Robin Hector Barnaby • Axel Isidore Sage
Apollo Amy Atlas Celia Dashiell Constance Jarvis Eugenie Raphael Magnolia Magnus Marigold Seymour Rosario Wilbur
June 21st, 2013 10:37 AM #3♂ Ellis Christopher / Asher Estlin / Seth Joshua / Gordon Thomas / Russell Joseph ♂
♀ Marilyn Kay / Joanna Kathryn / Tessa Diane / Nola Elaine / Christine Ruby ♀
June 22nd, 2013 12:02 AM #5
Marjorie (Robert Hugh Benson - Come Rack! Come Rope!)
Marguerite (Emuska Orczy - The Scarlet Pimpernel)
I suppose Anne of Green Gables (Lucy Maud Montgomery) doesn't quite count, but here are a few:
Anne (of course)
Last edited by chrisco; June 22nd, 2013 at 12:05 AM.Becket Lawrence-Jude Maximilian-Alban Ignatius-Piers Benedict
Marguerite Josephine-Catharina Ophélie-Genevieve Antonia-Elisabet Valentine
June 22nd, 2013 12:28 AM #7Senior Member
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
- Posts
- 646
LOVE this thread!
Eowyn (The Lord of the Rings) *my favorite female name from my favorite book, but alas, I will never be brave enough to use it*
Pearl (the Scarlet Letter)
Jean Louise "Scout" (To Kill a Mockingbird)
Fern (Charlotte's Web) a children's book, but I love the name, and Charlotte as well, actually
Penelope (the Odyssey)
Josephine "Jo" (Little Women)
Eilonwy (Chronicles of Prydain) another fav I'll never use...*sigh*
Jane (Jane Eyre)
Eppie (Silas Marner)
Rosalind (Shakespeare-As You Like It)
Juliet (Romeo and Juliet)
Anne (Anne of Green Gables) with an "e" please!
Elaine (The Once and Future King)
Guenever (The Once and Future King)Lucy Magdalene ~ Felix Augustine
Catherine Lark ~ William Ignatius
Margaret Fiona "Maisy" ~ Calvin Gabriel
Edith Primrose ~ Thomas Percival
Jane ??? ~ Owen Benedict
Eleanor Valentine ~ Timothy Lewis
Elizabeth Agnes ~ Harrison Peter
Anthea Valentine ~ Sebastian Luke ~ Elanor Astrid
June 22nd, 2013 01:45 AM #9Member
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
- Posts
- 63


text:
The following page details the Subversion (svn) installation at Codehaus. In addition, it also provides a set of "how-to" documents for both users and administrators of Subversion repositories tailored for the haus installation. If you are not interested in the details of the Codehaus installation, skip ahead to the How To documents at the end of this document.
Codehaus is running the latest and greatest version of Subversion on
beaver.codehaus.org. We're happy to say that we've been using Subversion at the house ever since v0.25 was released. At the time of this writing, the most recent version of Subversion is v1.0.1. When the Subversion team releases a new version, one can expect it to be installed at Codehaus within a few days. The previous installation of Subversion on
hogshead.codehaus.org will be retired after all projects have been migrated to the new server.
The most recent version of Subversion can be found in
/usr/local/subversion directory. In reality, this is a symbolic link to a directory in the form of
/usr/local/subversion-version where
version is the current version of the Subversion release. This enables the maintainer to switch back and forth between new and past installations with relative ease without impacting users. All binaries are located in
/usr/local/subversion/bin, which is automatically inserted into your
PATH upon login (via
/etc/profile.d/subversion.sh). The two most frequently used commands are
svn and
svnadmin. Their use is illustrated in the How To documents at the end of this document.
The current installation is maintained by Pete Kazmier.
Repository Access
Subversion features several methods to access Subversion repositories. Each access method is described in the following subsections. Please note that not all of these methods are supported by the Codehaus installation at this time. Additionally,
svn.codehaus.org is now registered to facilitate our userbase.
Local Filesystem
Local filesystem access is of limited use in the Codehaus environment because users should not be working on the Codehaus machine directly. However, there may be times when accessing a local repository is necessary. All Subversion repositories are located in the
/home/projects/FOO/scm directory (where
FOO is the name of the project). Thus, to check out a repository on the local machine, one would type:
svn co file:///home/projects/FOO/scm
Obviously, in order to use this repository access mechanism, you must have a shell account on the Codehaus server. Note: you must specify the full pathname to the repository when using this access method.
Anonymous svnserve
Similar to CVS, Subversion includes a mechanism to provide remote anonymous/read-only access to repositories. The
svnserve daemon provides this functionality. This access method enables users that do not have accounts on the Codehaus server to check out the repositories and track changes in their own local working copies. In order to check out a repository using this access method, one would type:
svn co svn://svn.FOO.codehaus.org/FOO/scm
FOO is the name of the project. Note: in this case, the anonymous user does not include the actual filesystem path
/home/projects on the command line. The
svnserve daemon executes as the
apache user for security reasons. Thus, it is important that all Subversion repositories permit read access for the
apache user. By default, all projects are automatically created in this manner.
Anonymous ViewCVS
The ViewCVS installation on Codehaus has been upgraded to a more recent version which supports browsing of Subversion repositories in a manner that is familiar to most CVS users. To access the repository, go to the following URL:
FOO is the name of the project. Again, the only requirement is that all repositoies must be permit read-write access for the
apache user (under which the ViewCVS program is executed). By default, all projects are automatically created in this manner.
Authenticated svnserve via SSH
Secure and authenticated access to the Codehaus Subversion repositories is provided via SSH (similar to the standard CVS access method used at Codehaus). By using SSH, a secure communication channel can be established to Codehaus over which passwords can be sent safely. This method enables all users with accounts on the Codehaus machine to check out repositories in a read-write manner. In order to check out a repository using this access method, one would type:
svn co svn+ssh://svn.FOO.codehaus.org/home/projects/FOO/scm
Note: in this case, you must specify the full path to the repository which includes the actual filesystem path
/home/projects. If your username on the client machine differs from your Codehaus username, you'll need to tell Subversion to invoke SSH differently; see http://svnbook.red-bean.com/html-chunk/ch05s04.html#svn-ch-5-sect-4.2.2 for details.
WebDAV access enables users to access repositories remotely via DAV which is an extension to the HTTP protocol. The Codehaus installation does not support this remote access method for a variety of reasons. This does not indicate Codehaus will never support this access method; however, for the first release of the Subversion at Codehaus, it was decided to eliminate this access method for the following reasons:
Software Requirements
The Codehaus web server is currently running 1.x version of Apache. WebDAV and SVN DAV modules are only available for the 2.x version of the Apache web server. At this time, Pete Kazmier did not want to undertake the migration to Apache 2.x. Furthermore, the web server process owner must have read-write access to the Subversion repositories in addition to users accessing the repository with authenticated svnserve.
User Authentication
One of the benefits of using Apache and WebDAV to access remote repositories is that users can be authenticated with any of the typical Apache user-authentication mechanisms. However, this is problematic because the basic authentication mechanism of Apache sends passwords in cleartext (I need to verify if Digest authentication is supported by the svn client). Thus, it now becomes necessary to secure the transport of the HTTP session which leads to the next point.
In order to provide a secure transport channel for WebDAV access to the repositories, the Codehaus Apache server must implement SSL/TLS. To properly configure the Codehaus web server, a valid certificate would have to be purchased (self-signed certificates are not an option as they provide no real security).
Repositoy Backup Strategy
Every night, a hot-backup of each Subversion repository located in
/svnroot (this is a directory of symlinks to each project's
/home/projects/FOO/scm directory) is produced by
/etc/cron.daily/local-svn-backup.rb (a simple wrapper to the
hot-backup.py script provided with Subversion). Theses hot-backups are stored locally on the server in
/home/services/backup/svn/FOO where
FOO is the name of the Subversion repository.
Within this directory, ten days-worth of fully-functional hot-backups reside. The naming convention used in this backup directory is
FOO-rev[-count] where
rev is the global revision number of the repository. If a repository has not changed since the previous day (i.e. the revision number has not changed), then the name of the backup is appended with a dash followed by a simple incrementing counter. For example, in the following example, the repository has changed only twice in the previous ten days (revisions 12 and 13):
drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 4096 Aug 24 04:02 testproject-13-3 drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 4096 Aug 23 04:02 testproject-13-2 drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 4096 Aug 22 04:02 testproject-13-1 drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 4096 Aug 21 04:02 testproject-13 drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 4096 Aug 20 04:02 testproject-12-12 drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 4096 Aug 19 04:03 testproject-12-11 drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 4096 Aug 18 04:02 testproject-12-10 drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 4096 Aug 17 04:02 testproject-12-9 drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 4096 Aug 16 04:02 testproject-12-8 drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 4096 Aug 15 04:03 testproject-12-7
Finally, remote backups are performed in the event of a local server catastrophe. These backups are part of the system-wide backup that occurs every night via an rsync process. To maximize the efficiency of rsync, a file with a constant name is required so that only differences between the local and remote versions are sent across the network. With the help of a small patch to the standard
hot-backup.py script included with Subversion, a symbolic link to the most recent backup is created in the
/home/services/backup/svn/FOO directory which is named
/home/services/backup/svn/FOO/FOO-CURRENT. This enables the rsync process to efficiently send only the differences over the wire.
Subversion How-To Guides
The following are a series of "how-to" guides for a variety of Subversion-related tasks. The tasks are organized by role of the user.
Codehaus Administrator
The Codehaus adminstrator is a user that has root access to the Codehaus servers. This user can create and remove repositories, as well as convert existing CVS repositories to Subversion repositories.
- How to Create a New Subversion Repository
- How to Send Subversion Commit Logs to Email
- How to Setup ViewCVS Access to a Subversion Repository
- How to Convert a CVS Repository to a Subversion Repository
- How to Recover a Subversion Repository
Project Committer
The project committer is a user who has read-write access to a project's source repository. This user can check out code as well as check in capability. The following How-To documents have been organized sequentially for a new Subversion user.
- How to Organize a Subversion Repository
- How to Import Files Into a Subversion Repository
- How to Check Out a Subversion Repository
- How to Tag and Branch a Subversion Repository
- How to Browse a Subversion Repository via ViewCVS
- How to Recover a Subversion Repository
Anonymous User
The anonymous user is a user who does not have read-write access to a project or access to the Codehaus servers. This user can only check out read-only versions of a repository.


text:
Your location: Home
Mountain Partnership Secretariat
The Mountain Partnership is a United Nations voluntary alliance of partners dedicated to improving the lives of mountain people and protecting mountain environments around the world.Currently, 50 countries, 16 intergovernmental organizations and 127 Major Groups (e.g. civil society, NGOs and the private sector) are members. The Mountain Partnership is supported by a Secretariat which acts as a networking and liaison point for members, connecting institutions and activities in mountain development to ensure greater participation, coherence and impact. It does this by delivering key services: advocacy, capacity building and knowledge management.In particular, the Mountain Partnership Secretariat plays a facilitating role in helping members build and develop joint activities.
Organizations, institutions and private sector companies at all levels and in a wide range of sectors can become engaged with the NWP by becoming a partner and making Action Pledges. Information about how organizations can become engaged with work on adaptation under the NWP can be found here.
© 2014 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change