scottsjack
Apr 25, 02:35 PM
Strange but using the downloaded software my 3Gs running the latest iOS doesn't show very many of the places I've been. I drove 400 miles this weekend using the 3Gs for navigation and a photo. Even that trip doesn't show. All I can see is a bunch of evenly-spaced dots in my area.
Nuks
Aug 26, 06:31 PM
Can someone briefly explain the huge benefits of Santa Rosa (in layman's terms) or post a link to a thread/description of it?
Much thanks.
Much thanks.
noire anqa
Mar 26, 07:25 AM
Oracle's acquisition of Sun was just... bad. I have nothing good to say about that.
I loved ReiserFS (v3 anyway). I was using it in beta on Slackware about as early as I could.
And for my unnecessary griping about HFS+, I've never had a problem with it the whole time I've used Macs (so, about 6 years now). ZFS would be cool though.
I'm not sure about that .. my hfs+ partitions always seem to get corrupted more often than any linux box i've ever owned. I hate to say it, but probably even more than any windows box i've owned.
I loved ReiserFS (v3 anyway). I was using it in beta on Slackware about as early as I could.
And for my unnecessary griping about HFS+, I've never had a problem with it the whole time I've used Macs (so, about 6 years now). ZFS would be cool though.
I'm not sure about that .. my hfs+ partitions always seem to get corrupted more often than any linux box i've ever owned. I hate to say it, but probably even more than any windows box i've owned.
Multimedia
Jul 28, 04:57 PM
I am a new Mac owner. I just bought my new 20 " iMac and I am learing aout the upcomming conference and possible new product releases. I
Would appreciate any thoughts on my question.
I am considering returning the new 20" I just bought in the 14 day period and taking the 10% hit and waitning to see if the iMac gets updated and I will repurchase. What is the likelyhood that the version I have will be updated. I would be bummed if I just bought it and I am at the end of a cycle. The $160 fee would actuallly be worth it to me to get thte latest. I would have to return it prior to the conference to stay within the 14 days but i may not want to loose out on lthe chance to get the latest.
Any thoughts on this 20 " model be increased with a new processor??
Thanks,
New Mac owner.....merk850
dont take it back.
I dont think that the difference will be that much, with the new systems.
If your happy with its performance then keep it.
A mild CPU boost isnt all that, and I doubt that the video cards will be upped that much.
I wouldnt take the hit in money lost, cause you can always sell it later down the line and get the lastest and greatest thats really a must buy.I respectfully disagree. I say take it back and be ready for a much faster iMac Core 2 Duo. You want the latest, take it back. It won't be the latest for many more weeks. Core 2 Duo will be the latest for two more years.
Would appreciate any thoughts on my question.
I am considering returning the new 20" I just bought in the 14 day period and taking the 10% hit and waitning to see if the iMac gets updated and I will repurchase. What is the likelyhood that the version I have will be updated. I would be bummed if I just bought it and I am at the end of a cycle. The $160 fee would actuallly be worth it to me to get thte latest. I would have to return it prior to the conference to stay within the 14 days but i may not want to loose out on lthe chance to get the latest.
Any thoughts on this 20 " model be increased with a new processor??
Thanks,
New Mac owner.....merk850
dont take it back.
I dont think that the difference will be that much, with the new systems.
If your happy with its performance then keep it.
A mild CPU boost isnt all that, and I doubt that the video cards will be upped that much.
I wouldnt take the hit in money lost, cause you can always sell it later down the line and get the lastest and greatest thats really a must buy.I respectfully disagree. I say take it back and be ready for a much faster iMac Core 2 Duo. You want the latest, take it back. It won't be the latest for many more weeks. Core 2 Duo will be the latest for two more years.
zooniverse
Aug 8, 06:48 AM
love the new features so far. Hopefully a UI refresh will be one of the top secret features to finally get rid of the dated brushed-metal finder etc...
Eidorian
Jul 14, 05:21 PM
Given that this is easily available for the PC world, there's no reason why it can't also be made available for the Mac (aside from someone deciding to write the device driver, of course.)Ok, here's ANOTHER can of worms. Since we're on EFI now and can boot in Windows. It means our video cards, etc. don't have Open Firmware BIOS. Does that mean ANY "Windows" video card will work as long as OS X has drivers for it? Does OS X even have generic VGA drivers?
Timepass
Jul 15, 10:57 AM
I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.
Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).
I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.
Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).
I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.
TerrorOFdeath
Apr 6, 11:07 AM
Forget i7.. Hellhammer seriously? Didnt expect that from you. (or where you just speaking what tehnical could be possible)
Marketingwise this would just make no sense at all. It would actually be a Conflict of interest for the MBP.
i5 seems logic. And then just mhz bump bto.
IMHO i would love to see an 11.6 MBA with an i3. So that there could still be enough power for backlit.
And please, do make the screen better for the 11.6
GMA3000 is ok for an Air. Even if it is just DX10.
Tod
PS: @Scottsdale: Did you buy this Generation MBA. Or did you wait, because the backlit thing? (just wondering, because to an i5 you cant say no can you ;-) Oh yes, to replay to your text. The bus is higher, and so is the turboboost option up to 2.X GhZ. It IS better than actuall CD2. The power you use if you need it (if not, much more battery life). But on the GPU part im with you. It is still freaking me out, crp Intel Graphics. But i can swallow it on a MBA.
Marketingwise this would just make no sense at all. It would actually be a Conflict of interest for the MBP.
i5 seems logic. And then just mhz bump bto.
IMHO i would love to see an 11.6 MBA with an i3. So that there could still be enough power for backlit.
And please, do make the screen better for the 11.6
GMA3000 is ok for an Air. Even if it is just DX10.
Tod
PS: @Scottsdale: Did you buy this Generation MBA. Or did you wait, because the backlit thing? (just wondering, because to an i5 you cant say no can you ;-) Oh yes, to replay to your text. The bus is higher, and so is the turboboost option up to 2.X GhZ. It IS better than actuall CD2. The power you use if you need it (if not, much more battery life). But on the GPU part im with you. It is still freaking me out, crp Intel Graphics. But i can swallow it on a MBA.
matticus008
Nov 29, 06:30 AM
It goes to court and the 'Pirate' successfully argues that he/she has already compensated UMG by buying the iPod/Zune. The judge agrees and piracy of Universal music becomes legal so long as it's for the 'UMG taxed' iPod or Zune.
Only if all the lawyers and judges in the room are asleep at the wheel, and even then only if that mass narcolepsy extends to all appellate and supreme courts above that one for the several months it would take to shut down any of the major labels.
It would be an interesting case, and yes, it is possible.
So is teleporation, but I'm not camping out in any lines.
Only if all the lawyers and judges in the room are asleep at the wheel, and even then only if that mass narcolepsy extends to all appellate and supreme courts above that one for the several months it would take to shut down any of the major labels.
It would be an interesting case, and yes, it is possible.
So is teleporation, but I'm not camping out in any lines.
rjohnstone
Apr 25, 03:06 PM
You obviously missed the point that they do not track anything. It's just a log file on your iphone, it stays with your iphone. I GOT even more news!! I FOUND a file on the iphone that stores text messages. YES PEOPLE text messages. I can read your text messages from this file if I have your phone!! Oh ya, I know you can launch the SMS app, but WHY WOULD APPLE NEED TO STORE TEXT MESSAGES ON MY DEVICE?!?! I'm suing!!
Just like web caching, storing text messages is part of the function of the messaging app. It serves a purpose of giving YOU a history.
And guess what... you can clear it. ;)
Just like web caching, storing text messages is part of the function of the messaging app. It serves a purpose of giving YOU a history.
And guess what... you can clear it. ;)
tripjammer
Apr 11, 01:05 PM
Not sure I believe the rumors, but as long as my 3G still works, I'll wait. $200 every 3 years is better than $200 every 2 years.
That is why you sell your iphone every year and it does not cost you to upgrade. ATT basically allows you to upgrade at the lowest price every year.
Its all about timing.
That is why you sell your iphone every year and it does not cost you to upgrade. ATT basically allows you to upgrade at the lowest price every year.
Its all about timing.
DJMastaWes
Aug 26, 08:29 PM
Updated Wesbite Is Usually by 9 Eastern. Occasionally later. But usually then. :)
Eastern? That's 6:00AM Pacific? You think?
9:00AM Pacific sounds good.
Eastern? That's 6:00AM Pacific? You think?
9:00AM Pacific sounds good.
wpotere
Apr 27, 10:17 AM
Trump is a hero. :rolleyes:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/trump-takes-credit-for-release-of-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate/
I listened to the report and I can't understand a word he is saying. He babbles about nothing.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/trump-takes-credit-for-release-of-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate/
I listened to the report and I can't understand a word he is saying. He babbles about nothing.
JS77
Mar 26, 08:23 AM
I'm really not looking forward to Lion at all. It just seems like a huge step backwards for those of us that use our computers as real computers and not toys. I have an ipad, an iphone and several macs, but they each have specific uses. I don't want my desktop machine to be anything like my ipad, one is for doing real work and doing my daily stuff on, the iOS gadgets are for fun games and browsing mostly.
I LOATH the whole idea of merging OSX and iOS, they shouldn't even be related. I hate how they are ruining expose, I really don't want my stuff groups by app, I want to see every window like it is now. I have no use for "full screen" apps, why would I waste all my screen real estate only showing one thing at a time? I hate the idea of getting programs through the app store on the Mac, I refuse to do that. I hate all the gesture crap going on, sure it's fine for laptop users, but it's of no use to me on my mac pro.
I think all this is just a dumbing down of what is an amazing OS. I don't use my mac with dual displays anything like I'd use an iPad, so why put that crap in there? I just don't like the direction they are taking OSX in general, and I doubt I will upgrade from snow leopard. To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
110% with you buddy.
I LOATH the whole idea of merging OSX and iOS, they shouldn't even be related. I hate how they are ruining expose, I really don't want my stuff groups by app, I want to see every window like it is now. I have no use for "full screen" apps, why would I waste all my screen real estate only showing one thing at a time? I hate the idea of getting programs through the app store on the Mac, I refuse to do that. I hate all the gesture crap going on, sure it's fine for laptop users, but it's of no use to me on my mac pro.
I think all this is just a dumbing down of what is an amazing OS. I don't use my mac with dual displays anything like I'd use an iPad, so why put that crap in there? I just don't like the direction they are taking OSX in general, and I doubt I will upgrade from snow leopard. To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
110% with you buddy.
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
birch25
Mar 26, 07:10 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
They added a $500 product that the vast majority of users will never use and don't even know is there. For some people, this will be a steal, but most users will get zero value out of the feature.
They added a $500 product that the vast majority of users will never use and don't even know is there. For some people, this will be a steal, but most users will get zero value out of the feature.
MacRumors
Aug 25, 02:37 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Over the past month or so, there appears to have been an uptick in user dissatisfaction with Apple's handling of support incidents. While overall satisfaction is extremely hard to gauge due to the fact that typically only disgruntled users notify sites of issues and the uptick could also simply represent Apple's increased marketshare, it does come amongst reports of Apple firing its online forum moderator staff (http://www.macobserver.com/article/2006/07/28.10.shtml) and an Indian support center (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060604190322.shtml) that was shut down as quickly as it was opened. Similarly, many people felt that Apple was ill-prepared for yesterday's 1.8 million battery recall (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060824134647.shtml), as Apple's support site was quickly overloaded with requests and there was a lot of confusion as to what batteries were affected.
This all could, of course be coincidental. Of note, Apple has consistently been a market leader in surveys on customer support (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2006497,00.asp).
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Apple_Having_Support_Problems)
Over the past month or so, there appears to have been an uptick in user dissatisfaction with Apple's handling of support incidents. While overall satisfaction is extremely hard to gauge due to the fact that typically only disgruntled users notify sites of issues and the uptick could also simply represent Apple's increased marketshare, it does come amongst reports of Apple firing its online forum moderator staff (http://www.macobserver.com/article/2006/07/28.10.shtml) and an Indian support center (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060604190322.shtml) that was shut down as quickly as it was opened. Similarly, many people felt that Apple was ill-prepared for yesterday's 1.8 million battery recall (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060824134647.shtml), as Apple's support site was quickly overloaded with requests and there was a lot of confusion as to what batteries were affected.
This all could, of course be coincidental. Of note, Apple has consistently been a market leader in surveys on customer support (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2006497,00.asp).
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Apple_Having_Support_Problems)
BlizzardBomb
Jul 27, 02:00 PM
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more thanthree years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
What difference does it make if virtually no consumer software is effected by 64-bit processors, even now?
What difference does it make if virtually no consumer software is effected by 64-bit processors, even now?
jordo
Nov 28, 08:46 PM
I think we all saw this coming with Microsoft setting Apple up for this with their feeble Zune; I'm not surprised. I mean it is not like Microsoft is actually going to pay up, as they would have to actually sell a unit before they did that, ha!
Universal has it coming if they think that the leading digital media player manufacturer is going to dish out money to them for a product whose production/ingenuity they have nothing to do with. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that Sony ever paid $10 to each music company for each CD player they sold. This is like forcing Apple to pay a fee to the manufacturer of my desk because my iBook sits on it. Jobs has no reason to give in. Apple holds 75% of the cards in the US market alone, and if other people want in on the action, they should consider themselves lucky if they are chosen. I smell a boycott...
Universal has it coming if they think that the leading digital media player manufacturer is going to dish out money to them for a product whose production/ingenuity they have nothing to do with. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that Sony ever paid $10 to each music company for each CD player they sold. This is like forcing Apple to pay a fee to the manufacturer of my desk because my iBook sits on it. Jobs has no reason to give in. Apple holds 75% of the cards in the US market alone, and if other people want in on the action, they should consider themselves lucky if they are chosen. I smell a boycott...
Ugg
Apr 27, 11:41 AM
It's good that he released it. I'm sure it was for political purposes but that's fine.
Cobrien
Aug 5, 03:26 PM
I heard a rumour somewhere of an all metallic ipod nano, can anyone else tell me if they have heard anything similar.
Zadillo
Aug 7, 09:35 PM
This preview of Leopard seemed really like a glaze over of some "fun" little advancements, it did not look polished at all...to all those dissapointed in what leopard has to offer, not to be punny, but steve has barely let the cat out of the bag
tonne more to come
I don't know, I thought Spaces and Time Machine looked very polished, personally. Spaces in particular is one of those things that I actually think will be genuinely useful (like Expose before it), and I like that it seems to be an even more useful implementation of the virtual desktops concept than what I've seen in Linux.
tonne more to come
I don't know, I thought Spaces and Time Machine looked very polished, personally. Spaces in particular is one of those things that I actually think will be genuinely useful (like Expose before it), and I like that it seems to be an even more useful implementation of the virtual desktops concept than what I've seen in Linux.
yg17
Feb 28, 12:54 PM
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Why do you care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home?
Why do you care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home?
Flowbee
Aug 5, 04:06 PM
My longshot dream is the Mac Pro Cube.
No comments:
Post a Comment