calderone
Apr 3, 06:59 PM
^ I don't about you, guys, but is there a way to make the address bar auto-hide when in FS mode? Logically, you don't wanna see anything but page content when in FS mode, no?
How is this logical? Just because I am in FS doesn't mean I don't want the ability to easily change what I am looking at.
How is this logical? Just because I am in FS doesn't mean I don't want the ability to easily change what I am looking at.
vansouza
Sep 1, 12:09 PM
Just how I feel about just what I have been waiting for... let it be...
Lord Blackadder
Mar 6, 12:08 PM
regarding cars as very international affairs: the history is plastered with failed attempts at "world cars" .. even more so when a car makers call one of their cars a 'world car' in their PR before the release
That's true, though there have been a few successes, like the Ford Focus.
For the record, I walk to work unless the temperatures is around 10F or below. I intentionally located myself near my job, and made some sacrifices in order to do so.
That's true, though there have been a few successes, like the Ford Focus.
For the record, I walk to work unless the temperatures is around 10F or below. I intentionally located myself near my job, and made some sacrifices in order to do so.
nagromme
Apr 2, 07:05 PM
This ad will never work. People want ads that make them feel like teenage boys. I know this from Android ads. Steel and lasers, Apple. Steel and lasers!
jholzner
Aug 24, 06:51 PM
As a previous poster pointed out, I don't think that conroe is compatible with the current Yonah procs. Only Merom is. Conroe requires a MB redesign.
SactoGuy18
Jan 2, 04:41 PM
I personally think we'll see this:
1) 2G iPod nano available in 16 GB edition. Apple drops the 2 GB edition and lowers the price of the 4 GB to $175 and 8 GB to $225.
2) 30 GB 5.5G iPod dropped, replaced by new 40 GB model. 80 GB model has no changes.
3) "True" video iPod (about the size of the Samsung Q1 handheld computer) arrives with 16:9 aspect ratio screen with full touchscreen functions. Will offer either 80 GB or 120 GB hard disk drive capacities.
1) 2G iPod nano available in 16 GB edition. Apple drops the 2 GB edition and lowers the price of the 4 GB to $175 and 8 GB to $225.
2) 30 GB 5.5G iPod dropped, replaced by new 40 GB model. 80 GB model has no changes.
3) "True" video iPod (about the size of the Samsung Q1 handheld computer) arrives with 16:9 aspect ratio screen with full touchscreen functions. Will offer either 80 GB or 120 GB hard disk drive capacities.
MisterK
Apr 3, 11:25 AM
I loved this ad. The voiceover reminds me of old Hal Riney commercials, where there is a reverence for the product � a person with quiet confidence telling you a "truth". When the message is a simple one, it's easier to tell a compelling story. Here's the message: when you don't notice the tech the experience feels magical.
There's nothing wrong with this. Magic is what tech is at its finest. Engineers and developers become mired in the details of how to make it work and think that's the important part, and then we get awful commercials boasting specs. When we lift abstractions and technological explanations, the things we do become more fantastic. We don't visit websites, but can see all the knowledge of the world. We don't Skype; we talk face-to-face with distant loved ones. We don't use Photoshop brushes; we create images with our fingers. Why are the details of how that happens the important part?
TBWA are the marketing geniuses that have always done Apple's stuff and I'm glad they saw this nugget of truth in Apple's iPad message. This is what we have to do in the advertising business (yes, I'm in it). I've been lucky enough to work with TBWA and can say that they are the real deal. They are true MadMen who honestly look for the most beautiful truth in the products they are asked to sell and then speak that truth more eloquently than everyone else.
People who identify this as "simply advertising" are missing the point. You're not the smartest kid in the playground when you tell everyone that Santa doesn't exist. The smart ones are the kids enjoying Christmas.
There's nothing wrong with this. Magic is what tech is at its finest. Engineers and developers become mired in the details of how to make it work and think that's the important part, and then we get awful commercials boasting specs. When we lift abstractions and technological explanations, the things we do become more fantastic. We don't visit websites, but can see all the knowledge of the world. We don't Skype; we talk face-to-face with distant loved ones. We don't use Photoshop brushes; we create images with our fingers. Why are the details of how that happens the important part?
TBWA are the marketing geniuses that have always done Apple's stuff and I'm glad they saw this nugget of truth in Apple's iPad message. This is what we have to do in the advertising business (yes, I'm in it). I've been lucky enough to work with TBWA and can say that they are the real deal. They are true MadMen who honestly look for the most beautiful truth in the products they are asked to sell and then speak that truth more eloquently than everyone else.
People who identify this as "simply advertising" are missing the point. You're not the smartest kid in the playground when you tell everyone that Santa doesn't exist. The smart ones are the kids enjoying Christmas.
Tones2
Mar 22, 03:44 PM
The chance that the iPod Classic is updated to 220GB is zero. Apple has no plans to ever update a hard drive based non-touch portable device (they would not waste their time), and they've shown even less interest in increasing the capacity of any device beyond even 64GB flash.
Tony
Tony
Lord Blackadder
Mar 4, 02:27 PM
In many ways, it's shameful today that we think that 60 or even 70mpg is somehow remarkable for a family car. :(
It certainly could be significantly higher. Public taste, laziness on the part of manufacturers and other things have all conspired to keep the bar set low on fuel economy.
In the US, there's one key reason why small cars don't sell (above and beyond the reasons I already listed), and that is that popular wisdom holds that you will die in a small car when someone in a large SUV or truck hits you. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy as people buy big cars because they don't feel safe in small ones, with the result that they become part of the "problem". Ultimately it's down to selfishness. Apparently people would rather kill someone else in an accident than risk being killed themselves.
It's idiotic, but this "wisdom" will only be unlearned slowly. Smaller cars are much safer now then they once were - safer than trucks and SUVs.
By way of a postscript, it's worth pointing out that today's safety and environmental regulations make it more difficult to make a car frugal, small and light than it was when Alec Issigonis designed the Mini. Also, aluminum construction (in smaller production cars such as the A2) remains nearly as rare and expensive as it was in the 50s.
But not the brand image... that could perhaps be the biggest stumbling block of all, it certainly is in Europe anyway.
True, and that's a shame, because brand image often matters than a car's actual merits. If the new Jetta is a turd, people will still buy it because the VW badge has cachet here that GM does not, at least in the realm of small cars.
I'm not going to stand up too much for GM, I've never held a high opinion of most of their products, but I have reasonably read good reviews of the Cruze and I hope they bring the diesel here.
Have to say my preference is for saloons... occasionally an estate (particularly A4 & A6 allroads, also 159 Sportwagons, that sort of thing), hatches (the bigger ones anyway) & estates can/tend to be a little boomy in my experience. Saloons also often have better body rigidity too.
The sedan body is the default in the US. Hatches and wagons are much rarer and therefore more interesting. In Europe it's really the other way around. When you're talking about mid-size or larger cars, sedans do generally have better proportions in my opinion (with a few exceptions - I like 5-Series wagon, and the 1990s Subaru Legacy wagon). Hatches look good on small cars though. The Focus, for example, looked stupid as a sedan but great as a hatch.
I do agree with you about the noise though - my Forester's rear suspension is sometimes very audible in the cabin, especially with the seats down. A few years before I bought my Forester, I used to mock it as the ugliest thing on the road, but I've gotten used to it and while it's never going to be attractive it does have a certain pleasing purposefulness in its proportions. Even though a lesbian couple I know call it my lesbian wagon. :rolleyes::D
It certainly could be significantly higher. Public taste, laziness on the part of manufacturers and other things have all conspired to keep the bar set low on fuel economy.
In the US, there's one key reason why small cars don't sell (above and beyond the reasons I already listed), and that is that popular wisdom holds that you will die in a small car when someone in a large SUV or truck hits you. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy as people buy big cars because they don't feel safe in small ones, with the result that they become part of the "problem". Ultimately it's down to selfishness. Apparently people would rather kill someone else in an accident than risk being killed themselves.
It's idiotic, but this "wisdom" will only be unlearned slowly. Smaller cars are much safer now then they once were - safer than trucks and SUVs.
By way of a postscript, it's worth pointing out that today's safety and environmental regulations make it more difficult to make a car frugal, small and light than it was when Alec Issigonis designed the Mini. Also, aluminum construction (in smaller production cars such as the A2) remains nearly as rare and expensive as it was in the 50s.
But not the brand image... that could perhaps be the biggest stumbling block of all, it certainly is in Europe anyway.
True, and that's a shame, because brand image often matters than a car's actual merits. If the new Jetta is a turd, people will still buy it because the VW badge has cachet here that GM does not, at least in the realm of small cars.
I'm not going to stand up too much for GM, I've never held a high opinion of most of their products, but I have reasonably read good reviews of the Cruze and I hope they bring the diesel here.
Have to say my preference is for saloons... occasionally an estate (particularly A4 & A6 allroads, also 159 Sportwagons, that sort of thing), hatches (the bigger ones anyway) & estates can/tend to be a little boomy in my experience. Saloons also often have better body rigidity too.
The sedan body is the default in the US. Hatches and wagons are much rarer and therefore more interesting. In Europe it's really the other way around. When you're talking about mid-size or larger cars, sedans do generally have better proportions in my opinion (with a few exceptions - I like 5-Series wagon, and the 1990s Subaru Legacy wagon). Hatches look good on small cars though. The Focus, for example, looked stupid as a sedan but great as a hatch.
I do agree with you about the noise though - my Forester's rear suspension is sometimes very audible in the cabin, especially with the seats down. A few years before I bought my Forester, I used to mock it as the ugliest thing on the road, but I've gotten used to it and while it's never going to be attractive it does have a certain pleasing purposefulness in its proportions. Even though a lesbian couple I know call it my lesbian wagon. :rolleyes::D
Built
Apr 2, 10:08 PM
Apparently "virtually every" doesn't mean what you think it means.
Those who don't see the light bleed are simply in denial. It is a known problem affecting this version of the iPad. If you took a few minutes to read the iPad forum, you'd know that.
Those who don't see the light bleed are simply in denial. It is a known problem affecting this version of the iPad. If you took a few minutes to read the iPad forum, you'd know that.
macmunch
Jul 19, 06:45 PM
Thats very cool !
I see high chance to even better Results ...
1. Look for People which wait for the Mac Pro (its me and at least 3-4 of my friends, 2 of them Switchers)
2. iPod no major new features (New model will boost Sales)
3. More Stores ---> more People who learn about Macs and try them out (50% new to mac in stores) ----> Here is much Space in Europe ecspecially in Germany !!! Every 11 or 12 PC user knows Mac or OS X, some know Apple cause of the iPod ....
4. The Good old guys which wait for Revision 2 of a Mac :D
bye
I see high chance to even better Results ...
1. Look for People which wait for the Mac Pro (its me and at least 3-4 of my friends, 2 of them Switchers)
2. iPod no major new features (New model will boost Sales)
3. More Stores ---> more People who learn about Macs and try them out (50% new to mac in stores) ----> Here is much Space in Europe ecspecially in Germany !!! Every 11 or 12 PC user knows Mac or OS X, some know Apple cause of the iPod ....
4. The Good old guys which wait for Revision 2 of a Mac :D
bye
Earendil
Nov 27, 09:49 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
twoodcc
Sep 6, 06:37 PM
i just hope the quality is good
ipedro
Apr 12, 10:20 PM
Who thinks that they'll eliminate Final Cut Express and lower the price of Final Cut Pro? iMovie seems to serve the "express crowd" while FCP would be within reach of the semi-pro demographic if the price were around $300.
Well, looks like I was right on the mouche. :D
Well, looks like I was right on the mouche. :D
vand0576
Sep 1, 01:23 PM
iMac is already wildly popular. they have no reason for aggressive pricing.
You must have missed my post on doing the price comparison a la the Mac Pro. I feel they should have to prove the "more expensive" myth wrong CLEAR across the board.
You must have missed my post on doing the price comparison a la the Mac Pro. I feel they should have to prove the "more expensive" myth wrong CLEAR across the board.
GW3
Aug 4, 09:11 PM
If Im not mistaken every KeyNote from Steve Jobs, whether at WWDC, MacWorld or any other event from Apple has been on tuesdays. Why is this one DIFFERENT. Could we see a Movie Store on Tuesday ???????
puma1552
Feb 5, 08:48 PM
For something creeping up on 15 years old, that thing is in fantastic shape. Mustangs are an odd car for me. I never seem to like them each time a new one is released, but then the older they get, the more I start to like them. A buddy of mine has a '93 Cobra with just a couple thousand miles on it, and I absolutely love it.
I read a story a while back about people and their music tastes. Many people never really get out of their 20's with their favorite bands. The stuff you like around that age is what sticks with you forever as your favorite. I think it might be something similar with cars. I see cars from back in the early-mid 90s, when I was in high school and then into college, and I get all nostalgic and stuff. Fox body 5L Mustangs, FC RX7s, C4 Corvettes, Syclone/Typhoon, etc. The older I get, and the older those cars get, the more I love them. New cars are nice, but some things just stick with you. And those cars are permanently stuck with me.
Treat that Stang nice Puma, because it is certainly a keeper.
Well said.
Yeah it's definitely been taken care of, both owners kept it for quite a few years each, both only putting about 6,500 miles a year on it. You can tell it's been garaged likely its whole life because the headlights and tail lights aren't hazy from sun exposure.
I remember when these cars were just 1-2 years old, basically factory fresh, and I would go to the dealer and drool over them under the lights at night--ones just like this, with these 17" wheels and leather. I've always loved them, and probably always will. I'm also a fan of the 5L cars, and the thirdgen F-bodies of the day (I own a thirdgen Camaro too).
I really can't wait to get it.:)
I read a story a while back about people and their music tastes. Many people never really get out of their 20's with their favorite bands. The stuff you like around that age is what sticks with you forever as your favorite. I think it might be something similar with cars. I see cars from back in the early-mid 90s, when I was in high school and then into college, and I get all nostalgic and stuff. Fox body 5L Mustangs, FC RX7s, C4 Corvettes, Syclone/Typhoon, etc. The older I get, and the older those cars get, the more I love them. New cars are nice, but some things just stick with you. And those cars are permanently stuck with me.
Treat that Stang nice Puma, because it is certainly a keeper.
Well said.
Yeah it's definitely been taken care of, both owners kept it for quite a few years each, both only putting about 6,500 miles a year on it. You can tell it's been garaged likely its whole life because the headlights and tail lights aren't hazy from sun exposure.
I remember when these cars were just 1-2 years old, basically factory fresh, and I would go to the dealer and drool over them under the lights at night--ones just like this, with these 17" wheels and leather. I've always loved them, and probably always will. I'm also a fan of the 5L cars, and the thirdgen F-bodies of the day (I own a thirdgen Camaro too).
I really can't wait to get it.:)
gr8whtd0pe
Jan 21, 09:08 PM
traded our CR-V in on Sunday, bought a 2011 Honda Odyssey EX-L
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5250/5376350835_210e8839b7_z.jpg
You are officially a parent now. Your cool factor is gone. LOL jk. TURBO IT!
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5250/5376350835_210e8839b7_z.jpg
You are officially a parent now. Your cool factor is gone. LOL jk. TURBO IT!
bobsentell
May 2, 06:00 PM
I doubt that the Mac is getting the type of multi tasking that you see with the iPhone, more likely it's getting the option to suspend something in the background, but for everything else, life goes on as normal (eg I can batch stuff in an application whilst I continue surfing, reading mail, watching porn etc).
As for the crippled multi tasking on an iPhone - it's a phone for heavens sake. The BIGGEST problem that all smartphones are suffering from is battery - batteries are not able to cope with the demands of the modern phone.
If you let people multi task properly, the phone would eat its battery alive. And we've all seen bad programming (cough...flash) which given half a chance will kill your battery in 15 seconds stone dead just to show you some crappy ad.
So a phone does need a sensible trade off when it comes to multi tasking, and both Apple and Google (with Android) made a very sensible choice to put battery before true background multitasking.
I wasn't saying there's not justification for single task oparation on a phone. I just think it would be a bad move to bring that type of thinking to an admittedly more powerful machine.
As for the crippled multi tasking on an iPhone - it's a phone for heavens sake. The BIGGEST problem that all smartphones are suffering from is battery - batteries are not able to cope with the demands of the modern phone.
If you let people multi task properly, the phone would eat its battery alive. And we've all seen bad programming (cough...flash) which given half a chance will kill your battery in 15 seconds stone dead just to show you some crappy ad.
So a phone does need a sensible trade off when it comes to multi tasking, and both Apple and Google (with Android) made a very sensible choice to put battery before true background multitasking.
I wasn't saying there's not justification for single task oparation on a phone. I just think it would be a bad move to bring that type of thinking to an admittedly more powerful machine.
Sean7512
Aug 24, 05:50 PM
Core 2 Duo processors are drop-in replacements for existing Core Duo processors which power the Mac Mini, MacBook, iMac and MacBook Pro.
This article refers to the Mac Mini, not the iMac...
Just taking a guess that it also includes the iMac, well praying :o
This article refers to the Mac Mini, not the iMac...
Just taking a guess that it also includes the iMac, well praying :o
RawBert
Apr 2, 07:29 PM
Very classy with the black theme and piano music. Loved it.
FubsyGamr
Sep 20, 01:46 PM
Ok guys, I'm torn between two cases. First of all, I just got a case from Amazon, the MiniSuit, and I hate it! )= This was my first case for my first iPod Touch, and I was very disappointed. It is silicone/rubbery, but it is like a magnet for lint, hair, dust, and anything else I don't want to go on it. I put it in my pocket (my pockets are relatively clean, nothing too out of the ordinary) and when I pulled it out, it was just covered in lint. I tried to brush it off, but it won't 'brush off' because the rubber is too sticky. Also, the case is not snug at all, and the sides are always slipping off. Not happy. I am returning the case.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0041PIGMY/ref=oss_product
So now, after scouring these forums, I have seen two cases that I think I will like a lot, but I am not sure which I should get. I am hoping some of you will have some personal experience and can help me out!
The first is the dermaSHOT (http://www.myincipio.com/product/IPOD_TOUCH_IP-900/iPod-touch-4G-dermaSHOT-Silicone-Case---Black.html). I am worried, however, that I will have the same problem with lint-magnet, because it is also made of silicone. Any ideas there?
The other is one of the Melkco Leather Cases (http://www.carrymobile.com/scripts/main/viewitem-A1ITO4LCFT1BK-ITO4.html). Back when I had my first iPod (it was the iPod 3g or 4g, the first to play videos) I had a case very similar and I loved it! Does anyone have any reviews/tips on this case?
Anywho, any help would be very much appreciated! Thanks!
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0041PIGMY/ref=oss_product
So now, after scouring these forums, I have seen two cases that I think I will like a lot, but I am not sure which I should get. I am hoping some of you will have some personal experience and can help me out!
The first is the dermaSHOT (http://www.myincipio.com/product/IPOD_TOUCH_IP-900/iPod-touch-4G-dermaSHOT-Silicone-Case---Black.html). I am worried, however, that I will have the same problem with lint-magnet, because it is also made of silicone. Any ideas there?
The other is one of the Melkco Leather Cases (http://www.carrymobile.com/scripts/main/viewitem-A1ITO4LCFT1BK-ITO4.html). Back when I had my first iPod (it was the iPod 3g or 4g, the first to play videos) I had a case very similar and I loved it! Does anyone have any reviews/tips on this case?
Anywho, any help would be very much appreciated! Thanks!
Chupa Chupa
Sep 1, 01:19 PM
Is there really a big market for a 23" iMac @ 2000? I hope this rumor is bogus. I'd much rather see Apple come out with a headless Gaming mid-tower with a Core 2 Duo Extreme and X1600 card. Dual HD bays and one optical bay. AP/BT built in. 3 PCIe slots (one used by X1600). I think that would would fill a gap Apple has in their consumer line-up right now.
flyfish29
Mar 26, 04:13 PM
its my understanding that apple made this browser BEFORE MSIE was pulled from the mac. M$ pulled IE because they believed Safari was better and faster and could better serve the mac. it was also part of a marketing plan by M$ to remove IE as a stand alone browser from Win and Mac. Think before you post and do your homework. The rest of use don't want to read something that's not true or thot out.
Yes, Apple made this browser before M$ IE was pulled, but it was obvious that M$ would be pulling it long before they announced it. With the integratioin of IE into windows it was only a matter of time and if Apple had waited until the announcement they would have been so far behind that the mainstream would have suffered. Safari is just now getting up to speed on its accessability to most web pages- and I even still have major accessability problems with some financial pages and registering at some other types of pages. Most people don't know about the alternative browsers out there such as Mozilla, etc. so it would have proved devestating to Apple had they not been on the ball with Safari. They just know netscape, IE and now safari. I think iMac-Japan's comment on this particular issue is partly true as is your Calebj14.
Yes, Apple made this browser before M$ IE was pulled, but it was obvious that M$ would be pulling it long before they announced it. With the integratioin of IE into windows it was only a matter of time and if Apple had waited until the announcement they would have been so far behind that the mainstream would have suffered. Safari is just now getting up to speed on its accessability to most web pages- and I even still have major accessability problems with some financial pages and registering at some other types of pages. Most people don't know about the alternative browsers out there such as Mozilla, etc. so it would have proved devestating to Apple had they not been on the ball with Safari. They just know netscape, IE and now safari. I think iMac-Japan's comment on this particular issue is partly true as is your Calebj14.