skiltrip
Sep 22, 08:17 AM
I went to a few BB and FINALLY found a normal color. It's dark purple. :rolleyes:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4146/4991683186_4dbdce9fe8_z.jpg
2G/3G vs. 4G Belkin Grip Vue
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4105/4991684382_44ce8e0ef1_z.jpg
The microphone is clearly visible, compared to the silicone case.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4145/4991078861_edc77bc1e1_z.jpg
Other Belkin 4G case (taken with the iPod Touch):
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4149/4991706626_3484f20967_z.jpg
I just ordered this Night Sky Grip Vue from the Best buy website for local pickup. Looks pretty nice. I liked the look of the case, but hated the two colors my local BB has... the baby blue, and pink.
Up till now I've been using the 99 cent Hong Kong cases, and they work pretty well, but are lint magnets, and fall off sometimes when you stick them in or pull them out of your jean pockets.
Thanks for posting those pictures. It helped me make up my mind.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4146/4991683186_4dbdce9fe8_z.jpg
2G/3G vs. 4G Belkin Grip Vue
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4105/4991684382_44ce8e0ef1_z.jpg
The microphone is clearly visible, compared to the silicone case.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4145/4991078861_edc77bc1e1_z.jpg
Other Belkin 4G case (taken with the iPod Touch):
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4149/4991706626_3484f20967_z.jpg
I just ordered this Night Sky Grip Vue from the Best buy website for local pickup. Looks pretty nice. I liked the look of the case, but hated the two colors my local BB has... the baby blue, and pink.
Up till now I've been using the 99 cent Hong Kong cases, and they work pretty well, but are lint magnets, and fall off sometimes when you stick them in or pull them out of your jean pockets.
Thanks for posting those pictures. It helped me make up my mind.
CalBoy
Apr 26, 03:17 PM
I doubt any legal battle between titans is a simple case, even if it appears so to us laypersons.
Certainly there are going to be minutiae that most of us won't ever learn about (and even fewer will understand), but in this case the trademark dispute is going to invariably depend on whether or not "app" is specific enough to trademark or whether it is generic to the point that trademarking it would deprive consumers and companies of a simple ands valuable labeling device.
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
Generic in a legal sense means that the term describes the product or service. For example, "computer" broadly describes any device with a chip, some storage, and an ability to perform calculations or other functions for the user. A person could not trademark "Computer Store" because it would leave other competitors with no way of describing the service they offer.
Amazon is an online retailer; hence "online retailer" cannot be trademarked but "Amazon" can be.
In much the same way "app store" describes what is being sold and how, and any competitor would want to make use of the same basic naming structure in order to clearly inform consumers about what they could expect to find.
The general population never heard the term "App" until Apple released the iPhone.
Nor did the general population ever shop for Apps online until Apple built the App Store.
The abbreviation "App" used in conjunction with "store" to denote an online marketplace in which to buy applications is a unique combination that is not known in generic parlance.
Apple will win this.
This is just not true. App has long been in use since before the 1990s.
Apple is also not the only company to sell software online; many companies had been doing direct downloads for years before iOS came out.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Apple does not actually hold the trademark yet. That is still being decided. They filed their case against Amazon prematurely, hoping to either make Amazon change names or get a leg-up in the trademark hearings (or both).
Certainly there are going to be minutiae that most of us won't ever learn about (and even fewer will understand), but in this case the trademark dispute is going to invariably depend on whether or not "app" is specific enough to trademark or whether it is generic to the point that trademarking it would deprive consumers and companies of a simple ands valuable labeling device.
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
Generic in a legal sense means that the term describes the product or service. For example, "computer" broadly describes any device with a chip, some storage, and an ability to perform calculations or other functions for the user. A person could not trademark "Computer Store" because it would leave other competitors with no way of describing the service they offer.
Amazon is an online retailer; hence "online retailer" cannot be trademarked but "Amazon" can be.
In much the same way "app store" describes what is being sold and how, and any competitor would want to make use of the same basic naming structure in order to clearly inform consumers about what they could expect to find.
The general population never heard the term "App" until Apple released the iPhone.
Nor did the general population ever shop for Apps online until Apple built the App Store.
The abbreviation "App" used in conjunction with "store" to denote an online marketplace in which to buy applications is a unique combination that is not known in generic parlance.
Apple will win this.
This is just not true. App has long been in use since before the 1990s.
Apple is also not the only company to sell software online; many companies had been doing direct downloads for years before iOS came out.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Apple does not actually hold the trademark yet. That is still being decided. They filed their case against Amazon prematurely, hoping to either make Amazon change names or get a leg-up in the trademark hearings (or both).
MagnusVonMagnum
Oct 20, 03:33 PM
Consumer Reports has always been corrupt and in it to tear down companies.
What a crock of nonsense. :rolleyes:
Apparently, your idea of "corrupt" is to tell the truth about products instead of letting unsafe, Chinese garbage get pushed on the world with millions in advertising, but not a useful word in the bunch. Do you think Apple is going to advertise their antenna problem or Suzuki is going to brag that their vehicle is more likely to roll over than most other vehicles on the road? Heck no. Most magazines take money directly from the manufacturers that advertise in their magazines and thus have a total conflict of interests. Here's a magazine that doesn't take a dime from advertisers and thus has no reason to pick on anyone or lie about anything. But YOU call that "corruption." That's like Republicans saying they will create jobs (and leave out the "in China" part).
What a crock of nonsense. :rolleyes:
Apparently, your idea of "corrupt" is to tell the truth about products instead of letting unsafe, Chinese garbage get pushed on the world with millions in advertising, but not a useful word in the bunch. Do you think Apple is going to advertise their antenna problem or Suzuki is going to brag that their vehicle is more likely to roll over than most other vehicles on the road? Heck no. Most magazines take money directly from the manufacturers that advertise in their magazines and thus have a total conflict of interests. Here's a magazine that doesn't take a dime from advertisers and thus has no reason to pick on anyone or lie about anything. But YOU call that "corruption." That's like Republicans saying they will create jobs (and leave out the "in China" part).
nagromme
Aug 6, 11:26 PM
Whatever is or is not shown about Leopard/Macs, be sure to enjoy the spectacular howling from those who assume that nothing ELSE will ever emerge about Leopard/Macs. From those who assume that if it's not mentioned on THIS particular date, Apple is doomed and it's too late :D You heard it here first: any Macs that don't appear tomorrow will NEVER appear, and Leopard will have NOTHING except what is shown tomorrow ;) It's life or death... if any rumors turn out to be only rumors, the platform is dead :)
kungming2
Jan 12, 10:57 AM
I think 'air' would have been capitalised on the banner if it was a reference to a product name.
It might not be capitalized: Check it out, iPod touch, nano, and classic. All lowercase.
It might not be capitalized: Check it out, iPod touch, nano, and classic. All lowercase.
HecubusPro
Aug 29, 05:42 PM
Amen to that. I give this about as much credibility as an apple rumor scrawled in sharpie on a gas station toilet stall.
Huh? What happened there? Didn't Think Secret used to be the place to go for the most accurate rumors? I definitely trust macrumors and appleinsider a lot more than think secret now though.
Huh? What happened there? Didn't Think Secret used to be the place to go for the most accurate rumors? I definitely trust macrumors and appleinsider a lot more than think secret now though.
Sarah Hastings
Oct 19, 01:39 AM
I think I am going to check out eBay�I saw few there a couple of months back.
Manic Mouse
Aug 26, 05:57 AM
Oh I can be sure that a Conroe placed in an iMac will run into the volume constraints and effective heat dissipation of the heat sink when compared to a full blown BTX tower.
The original G5 and the Rev. B (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/IMacG5guts.png) stuck with the wonderful heat channel. The 17" models ran a lot hotter then the 20" due to the internal design and volume.
The Rev. C (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/imac_isight_internals/imac_g5_isight_inside.html) and Intel use similar internal layouts with the CPU and power supply toward the top of the machine.
Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/88928219/) is a good comparison.
Watch the WWDC keynote and note that the xserves now use Woodcrest which has a higher TDP than Conroe (95W compared to 65W). Also note what they say about Woodcrest having a better thermal environment that the G5's they were using before which were the same G5's (non-dual core) that the iMac used I believe. Conroe has better thermal characteristics than G5's, the Mac Pro and xserve prove that.
iMac will get Conroe. 2.4Ghz and 2.66Ghz. Conroe is the best value for performance processor that Intel are offering, so they need to use it SOMEWHERE in their lineup.
The original G5 and the Rev. B (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/IMacG5guts.png) stuck with the wonderful heat channel. The 17" models ran a lot hotter then the 20" due to the internal design and volume.
The Rev. C (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/imac_isight_internals/imac_g5_isight_inside.html) and Intel use similar internal layouts with the CPU and power supply toward the top of the machine.
Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/88928219/) is a good comparison.
Watch the WWDC keynote and note that the xserves now use Woodcrest which has a higher TDP than Conroe (95W compared to 65W). Also note what they say about Woodcrest having a better thermal environment that the G5's they were using before which were the same G5's (non-dual core) that the iMac used I believe. Conroe has better thermal characteristics than G5's, the Mac Pro and xserve prove that.
iMac will get Conroe. 2.4Ghz and 2.66Ghz. Conroe is the best value for performance processor that Intel are offering, so they need to use it SOMEWHERE in their lineup.
lordonuthin
Nov 18, 07:57 PM
^yeah almost seems unfair to ppl that want to compete but dont have access to high end hardware. i guess if you look at it from an aggregate standpoint then low point crunchers make a bit of a diff.
the amount of power sucked from the wall per unit would be WAY less i would imagine. from an environmental standpoint it wouldnt make sense
That's why I dropped the G5 after I saw how little it was doing against the Mac Pro and even the low end amd's, it just wasn't worth it in terms of the electric bill.
And speaking of electric bills... I'm just kind of guessing here but I think folding is costing me about $50 a month :eek:
the amount of power sucked from the wall per unit would be WAY less i would imagine. from an environmental standpoint it wouldnt make sense
That's why I dropped the G5 after I saw how little it was doing against the Mac Pro and even the low end amd's, it just wasn't worth it in terms of the electric bill.
And speaking of electric bills... I'm just kind of guessing here but I think folding is costing me about $50 a month :eek:
Chef Medeski
Jul 14, 11:31 AM
I just saw this and though it was pretty interesting:
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Yeah, but wasn't that also when Apple had something like 50% of the consumer market share. I mean... I think its a very different situation even if its the same names.
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Yeah, but wasn't that also when Apple had something like 50% of the consumer market share. I mean... I think its a very different situation even if its the same names.
jgonzo
Jan 21, 02:58 PM
with GTO in garage
cwerdna
Dec 6, 12:39 PM
It was also to get MS to continue making Office for the Mac. The deal also included that Apple put IE on every Mac they sold (I could be wrong on that, correct me if I am.).
You can rewatch the announcement of that at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY.
You can rewatch the announcement of that at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY.
takepillsdie
Jan 13, 09:21 PM
Can't wait for the macbook icare! gonna be so sweet!!:cool:
GeekLawyer
Apr 12, 08:19 PM
That was pretty funny. It looked on Twitter like maybe 9to5mac had sorta tricked AppleInsider into announcing FCP7. (2 years after the fact.) Apparently there's a lot of "borrowing" of stories between the two sites.
noservice2001
Oct 23, 07:15 AM
o please red!!!
trekkie604
Feb 19, 08:01 PM
Hasn't changed too much this time around:
http://link.trekcubed.com/trekmb_Feb2011_s.jpg (http://link.trekcubed.com/trekmb_Feb2011.jpg)
http://link.trekcubed.com/trekmb_Feb2011_s.jpg (http://link.trekcubed.com/trekmb_Feb2011.jpg)
Manic Mouse
Aug 20, 06:44 AM
But you know what I mean and you cannot possible say that they are easy inpurt methods for even moderately extended use. Or are you?
I'm getting a little confused, are you trying to say keyboards are not easy input methods? QWERTY keyboards are FULL keyboards like the ones you and I are using to type in these forums. I completely agree with you that phone/PSP-esque multi-press solutions are not good for extended use, which is why I think the MYLO is such a good example of what can be done with a "portable WiFi" device because it has a full keyboard.
The iPod would continue to sell "pure" (and I know I'm being contradictory as my original 1Gen iPod is a much different machine than my vid iPod but we're talking of the iPod as a basic walkman-type device) as there will always be demand for a music/media player at a fairly reasonably price. Either through attrition, improvements to current features (bigger screens, easier input methods, color screens, longer battery life, new battery types, etc) there will ALWAYS be demand for the iPod.
As you point out, the current iPod isn't a "pure" machine either. Apple have realised that they have to continually offer new things and more functionality to continue to sell and tempt existing customers to upgrade. As a music player my 4G iPod is more than sufficient: It has a nice enough size, decent enough battery life, 40Gb of space and music will not sound any better no matter how bigger the screen is. If the iPod is only to be a "pure" walkman then there is no reason for me to ever buy a new iPod unless it breaks, which is bad for Apple. Apple realise this, and validate my point by adding extra features to the iPod like photo and video support. Things like a web browser, IM etc are also just natural evolutions of the device.
Using your reasoning, why not add all these features and more to every TV on the market cuz, "Hey, pure machines are going to be extinct soon. Everybody has a TV so we're not going to be selling any more pretty soon... Let's add keyboards and webcams to the remotes. make 'em with wireless net access, hell, throw in Vista and a dock for the refrigerator to show you how much beer is left so you don't have to get up!!!" That's not what happens. Improvements come and are incorporated and even stick around if people like them or are weeded out in the next model. But those improvements are all related to the TV viewing experience. Remember webTV? and that was only offered as a separate add-on if memory serves.
Actually that's exactly what's happening. TV's now are having HDD's built in, PC's are having media centre's built in. Here in the UK, with the BBC, the difference between TV and computer are being blurred. A few minutes ago I watched a TV show on this computer steamed from the BBC.
You can innovate wothout mucking about with a winner by adding a battery draining
Well all the things I'm proposing are software, not hardware, features. So they should have minimal effect on battery life. The new iPod will have a large screen and WiFi regardless of whether it can surf the net/IM/email, and those are the battery draining features.
If apple feels there is a market for what some members of this forum are calling for and said market is large enough the smart move seems to me to be a new device along with that device's new profit stream, limit it's ability to cannibalize your other products in any large way. You get the idea. You don't need to make the iPod the be-all end-all device. In fact, I think if you did, you'd lose market share to other devices without the bloat.
But that is exactly what Apple are doing: When the ipod launched it was nothing more than an MP3 player yet the current iPods are evolving into the "be-all-and-end-all" device I'm suggesting: They play games, they have a calander, they show notes, they play videos, they display photos. Has Apple lost market share by offering these things? Or would they have lost market share if they had not offered them?
And precisely what other Apple product sales would a MYLO iPod cannibalise? What competing product does Apple offer?
And the argument that no one wants a "utility belt" with a million devices each dedicated to one function just doesn't hold water with me. I carry a lot of gear. A laptop, a comm device of some sort and my iPod would do anything I need to do as a civilian back in the world. Obviously I carry much more here as I have the desire to make it back to the real world but that's not what the real market is.
Like I said in my previous post, the mobile phone market (and what Apple have done with added functionality to the iPod) shows the exact opposite trend. I'd much rather have a MYLO iPod than cart a laptop and an iPod around with me EVERYWHERE I go.
But maybe I'm the oddd man out in this argument. I hope not but I have ben wrong once or twice. My wife says so.
Women are always right. Or so my mother tells me... :p
I don't believe that the next iPod will be a MYLO-esque device, but eventually it will offer all that functionality.
I'm getting a little confused, are you trying to say keyboards are not easy input methods? QWERTY keyboards are FULL keyboards like the ones you and I are using to type in these forums. I completely agree with you that phone/PSP-esque multi-press solutions are not good for extended use, which is why I think the MYLO is such a good example of what can be done with a "portable WiFi" device because it has a full keyboard.
The iPod would continue to sell "pure" (and I know I'm being contradictory as my original 1Gen iPod is a much different machine than my vid iPod but we're talking of the iPod as a basic walkman-type device) as there will always be demand for a music/media player at a fairly reasonably price. Either through attrition, improvements to current features (bigger screens, easier input methods, color screens, longer battery life, new battery types, etc) there will ALWAYS be demand for the iPod.
As you point out, the current iPod isn't a "pure" machine either. Apple have realised that they have to continually offer new things and more functionality to continue to sell and tempt existing customers to upgrade. As a music player my 4G iPod is more than sufficient: It has a nice enough size, decent enough battery life, 40Gb of space and music will not sound any better no matter how bigger the screen is. If the iPod is only to be a "pure" walkman then there is no reason for me to ever buy a new iPod unless it breaks, which is bad for Apple. Apple realise this, and validate my point by adding extra features to the iPod like photo and video support. Things like a web browser, IM etc are also just natural evolutions of the device.
Using your reasoning, why not add all these features and more to every TV on the market cuz, "Hey, pure machines are going to be extinct soon. Everybody has a TV so we're not going to be selling any more pretty soon... Let's add keyboards and webcams to the remotes. make 'em with wireless net access, hell, throw in Vista and a dock for the refrigerator to show you how much beer is left so you don't have to get up!!!" That's not what happens. Improvements come and are incorporated and even stick around if people like them or are weeded out in the next model. But those improvements are all related to the TV viewing experience. Remember webTV? and that was only offered as a separate add-on if memory serves.
Actually that's exactly what's happening. TV's now are having HDD's built in, PC's are having media centre's built in. Here in the UK, with the BBC, the difference between TV and computer are being blurred. A few minutes ago I watched a TV show on this computer steamed from the BBC.
You can innovate wothout mucking about with a winner by adding a battery draining
Well all the things I'm proposing are software, not hardware, features. So they should have minimal effect on battery life. The new iPod will have a large screen and WiFi regardless of whether it can surf the net/IM/email, and those are the battery draining features.
If apple feels there is a market for what some members of this forum are calling for and said market is large enough the smart move seems to me to be a new device along with that device's new profit stream, limit it's ability to cannibalize your other products in any large way. You get the idea. You don't need to make the iPod the be-all end-all device. In fact, I think if you did, you'd lose market share to other devices without the bloat.
But that is exactly what Apple are doing: When the ipod launched it was nothing more than an MP3 player yet the current iPods are evolving into the "be-all-and-end-all" device I'm suggesting: They play games, they have a calander, they show notes, they play videos, they display photos. Has Apple lost market share by offering these things? Or would they have lost market share if they had not offered them?
And precisely what other Apple product sales would a MYLO iPod cannibalise? What competing product does Apple offer?
And the argument that no one wants a "utility belt" with a million devices each dedicated to one function just doesn't hold water with me. I carry a lot of gear. A laptop, a comm device of some sort and my iPod would do anything I need to do as a civilian back in the world. Obviously I carry much more here as I have the desire to make it back to the real world but that's not what the real market is.
Like I said in my previous post, the mobile phone market (and what Apple have done with added functionality to the iPod) shows the exact opposite trend. I'd much rather have a MYLO iPod than cart a laptop and an iPod around with me EVERYWHERE I go.
But maybe I'm the oddd man out in this argument. I hope not but I have ben wrong once or twice. My wife says so.
Women are always right. Or so my mother tells me... :p
I don't believe that the next iPod will be a MYLO-esque device, but eventually it will offer all that functionality.
Twizz91
Mar 22, 05:12 PM
exactly. ios4 base, but made look the same UI.
Come to think about it, longer lasting battery stamina, better screen, internal additions. All without really changing the physical appearance of the classic.
It can therefore still be 'classic' with up-to-date tweaks.
No iOS for the Classic.
The Classic will remain classic, that means it won't have too many functions.
Therefore it won't need an operating system(OS)
Just my 2 cents
Come to think about it, longer lasting battery stamina, better screen, internal additions. All without really changing the physical appearance of the classic.
It can therefore still be 'classic' with up-to-date tweaks.
No iOS for the Classic.
The Classic will remain classic, that means it won't have too many functions.
Therefore it won't need an operating system(OS)
Just my 2 cents
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 07:50 AM
PSP interface is so cumbersome, though. Just have a laptop.
Rodimus Prime
Mar 19, 11:56 AM
Must we get involved in this? Can't France do something for once by themselves, or any other european nations for that matter? When was the last time they even fired a weapon? You know, the taliban were once known as freedom fighters too. I'm so sick of these countries, let them self destruct, maybe some day they will choose to civilize themselves. Please, no more US to the rescue, and then they all wonder why many Americans have a feeling of exceptionalism. :rolleyes:
Umm kind of hard to do this with out the US and its military power. My understanding is the US it mostly going to provide support for it but not as much of the combat forces. The support being things like aerial refueling as we have the most of those flying gas tanks. They will circle over the Mediterranean Sea refueling planes going to and from missions. Kind of key to extend the range of the fighters and Fighter bombers.
Other thing the US I believe will provide is cruise missals as that they can launch from the Mediterranean Sea. This mostly to take out the Air Defenses. They might provide a few bombers to help take out artillery
US is not taking the lead. But is providing support. US is going to have the other countries really provide most of the planes needed for this.
Umm kind of hard to do this with out the US and its military power. My understanding is the US it mostly going to provide support for it but not as much of the combat forces. The support being things like aerial refueling as we have the most of those flying gas tanks. They will circle over the Mediterranean Sea refueling planes going to and from missions. Kind of key to extend the range of the fighters and Fighter bombers.
Other thing the US I believe will provide is cruise missals as that they can launch from the Mediterranean Sea. This mostly to take out the Air Defenses. They might provide a few bombers to help take out artillery
US is not taking the lead. But is providing support. US is going to have the other countries really provide most of the planes needed for this.
Peace
Jul 19, 04:57 PM
Apple pretty much confirmed an iPhone in this call..
He said that cell phones dont play music very well.iPods do and they were doing something about that.
He said that cell phones dont play music very well.iPods do and they were doing something about that.
Chaos123x
Apr 12, 10:02 PM
$299 are you out of your mind?
dalvin200
Oct 23, 06:51 AM
i'd like to see what's inside the new MBP's, though i already bought my MBP a couple weeks ago with no regrets.. i'd still like to see what those who are waiting will get for their hard earned patience
a 1 second increase in boot time? ;)
oops.. i blinked and I missed it :P
JUST KIDDING YOU SERIOUS GUYS OUT THERE
a 1 second increase in boot time? ;)
oops.. i blinked and I missed it :P
JUST KIDDING YOU SERIOUS GUYS OUT THERE
tann
Mar 25, 03:54 PM
Wow! This looks insane!! I didn't realise that the iPad was so powerful!
Makes me want one more now :(!
Makes me want one more now :(!