shawnce
Jul 27, 11:02 AM
"...Core 2 Duo chips need less electricity, drawing just 65 watts compared to the Pentium 4’s 95 watts and Pentium D’s 130 watts"
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
1) The watts numbers listed are TDP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_Design_Power). They are not the amount of power the processor consumes ("drawing").
2) PPC 970fx falls in the realm of Conroe in terms of heat generation but of course the Conroe has better performance.
I should note that the PPC 970FX is a single core chip while the PPC 970MP is the dual core one... don't have good numbers for the later but I would guess it would be about 1.75 times (or more) the PPC 970FX in terms of thermal generation and power consumption.
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
1) The watts numbers listed are TDP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_Design_Power). They are not the amount of power the processor consumes ("drawing").
2) PPC 970fx falls in the realm of Conroe in terms of heat generation but of course the Conroe has better performance.
I should note that the PPC 970FX is a single core chip while the PPC 970MP is the dual core one... don't have good numbers for the later but I would guess it would be about 1.75 times (or more) the PPC 970FX in terms of thermal generation and power consumption.
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:46 AM
Pot, meet kettle.
There's a difference in what I wrote and what the OP did. I said I THINK. Big difference between a declaritive statement and offering my opinion.
There's a difference in what I wrote and what the OP did. I said I THINK. Big difference between a declaritive statement and offering my opinion.
shawnce
Sep 13, 11:48 AM
Yes, that's true.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
Lets not forget things like Spotlight that can now run more rigorously without affecting CPU resource much. You will get more intelligent software that can prepare for what you want to do so that when you go to do it it will be much more responsive. In other words just because some tasks cannot be easily broken up to leverage multiple cores doesn't mean that tasks such as those cannot be speculative run by software on idle cores in preparation for you doing the task.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
Lets not forget things like Spotlight that can now run more rigorously without affecting CPU resource much. You will get more intelligent software that can prepare for what you want to do so that when you go to do it it will be much more responsive. In other words just because some tasks cannot be easily broken up to leverage multiple cores doesn't mean that tasks such as those cannot be speculative run by software on idle cores in preparation for you doing the task.
deej999
Apr 6, 02:32 AM
Mercury actually doesn't need CUDA but having a 1gig graphics card (not gonna happen on a portable laptop) will enable CUDA and supposed turbo charged results and rendering
The new MBPs have the option of a 1GB Graphics card. Am using one now!
http://www.apple.com/uk/macbookpro/performance.html
The new MBPs have the option of a 1GB Graphics card. Am using one now!
http://www.apple.com/uk/macbookpro/performance.html
SuperCachetes
Mar 22, 06:53 PM
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:
Here's a little fun little nugget for those who say "Obama's just Bush all over again."
UN Resolution 1441 (2002) was drafted by the US and UK, and presented at the UN by Bush.
UN Resolution 1973 (2011) was drafted by France, Lebanon, and the UK, and not presented by the US.
Like you, I would rather us not be involved at all - but we hardly have quite the same hand in this latest business as we did when we went WMD-hunting...
Here's a little fun little nugget for those who say "Obama's just Bush all over again."
UN Resolution 1441 (2002) was drafted by the US and UK, and presented at the UN by Bush.
UN Resolution 1973 (2011) was drafted by France, Lebanon, and the UK, and not presented by the US.
Like you, I would rather us not be involved at all - but we hardly have quite the same hand in this latest business as we did when we went WMD-hunting...
Malligator
Mar 31, 03:56 PM
Ironically, most of the people on this forum said iPhone on Verizon would be game over for Android.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
Or a lot like the "iPad Killer" monicker given to every piece of Android vaporware announced since 2007.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
Or a lot like the "iPad Killer" monicker given to every piece of Android vaporware announced since 2007.
yg17
Apr 27, 08:49 AM
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2711155/posts?q=1&;page=101
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
obeygiant
Apr 27, 01:43 PM
Hey! The birth issue is closed! End of story! I am yelling this!
boo-hoo my all-caps was undid. :(
boo-hoo my all-caps was undid. :(
Cinch
Aug 11, 11:39 AM
This is probably the rumored Apple product I look forward to the most. Could really use a new phone, :p.
I agree at least since the iPod. As an investor, I hope Apple executes their plan well. The mobile phone business is getting crowded all of a sudden e.g. Best Buy, Disney, ESPN etc. I think it will come down to design e.g. Razr.
Cinch
I agree at least since the iPod. As an investor, I hope Apple executes their plan well. The mobile phone business is getting crowded all of a sudden e.g. Best Buy, Disney, ESPN etc. I think it will come down to design e.g. Razr.
Cinch
RedTomato
Aug 12, 03:58 AM
Ah but Finland is a tiny social democrat country that's home to some of the world's largest mobile companies. They like to give a bit back to their home communities.
For example, deaf people in Finland get free / very cheap video-capable mobile phones and very cheap video calling rates so that they can sign to each other on the phone. (or access sign/ spoken language translation services - very important for work)
The rest of us deaf people around the world are screaming for the same thing, but do we get it bollocks? Videophoning on a mobile remains majorly expensive for anything more than a few minutes per month.
For example, deaf people in Finland get free / very cheap video-capable mobile phones and very cheap video calling rates so that they can sign to each other on the phone. (or access sign/ spoken language translation services - very important for work)
The rest of us deaf people around the world are screaming for the same thing, but do we get it bollocks? Videophoning on a mobile remains majorly expensive for anything more than a few minutes per month.
janstett
Sep 15, 07:48 AM
The Today show is an embarrassment. The US major tv networks do not have any real morning news programs. How to trim your dog's ears and an inside look into American Idol contestants is NOT NEWS. It is an entertainment talk show.
The network morning "news" shows have always been fluff. What's worse is that the so-called "hard news" shows are just as bad, and not just in the morning -- CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News all run mindless fluff instead of news. And don't get me started with MSNBC airing Eye-Puss in the Morning.
The network morning "news" shows have always been fluff. What's worse is that the so-called "hard news" shows are just as bad, and not just in the morning -- CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News all run mindless fluff instead of news. And don't get me started with MSNBC airing Eye-Puss in the Morning.
twoodcc
Apr 10, 08:55 PM
can't wait to see what it's all gonna be about! hope it ships soon!
SevenInchScrew
Dec 10, 01:06 AM
For all my whining and complaining about the game part of GT5, I still stand, firmly, behind my previous statement about how amazing "Photo Mode" is. It is the most amazing thing I've seen on a console this generation. The lighting engine in this game is beyond words. The vehicular "Uncanny Valley" is upon us....
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/ydtza.jpg
http://imgur.com/OdFGf.jpg
http://imgur.com/9rznQ.jpg
http://imgur.com/YtIud.jpg
http://imgur.com/OjHVn.jpg
http://imgur.com/wz6q6.jpg
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/ydtza.jpg
http://imgur.com/OdFGf.jpg
http://imgur.com/9rznQ.jpg
http://imgur.com/YtIud.jpg
http://imgur.com/OjHVn.jpg
http://imgur.com/wz6q6.jpg
milo
Nov 29, 11:05 AM
"I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way"
Well, I can't see why Universal wouldn't do that...getting paid money for doing nothing? Sure, I'll have some too.
But I can definitely see why Apple wouldn't do that. Universal could threaten to yank all their content from iTunes if Apple refuses but at this point that might hurt Universal more than Apple.
Well, I can't see why Universal wouldn't do that...getting paid money for doing nothing? Sure, I'll have some too.
But I can definitely see why Apple wouldn't do that. Universal could threaten to yank all their content from iTunes if Apple refuses but at this point that might hurt Universal more than Apple.
maclaptop
Apr 19, 08:02 PM
You're missing the point. It's more fun to come to an Apple rumors site and irrationally bait the residents into irrationally baiting you into irrationally...well, you get the point. :rolleyes:
This post is the best I've read in ages. Well Done.
Simply Exemplary :)
This post is the best I've read in ages. Well Done.
Simply Exemplary :)
Kwill
Mar 22, 12:49 PM
Meanwhile, Apple is drowning in orders and battling light leaks (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/22/buyers.complain.of.multiple.faulty.replacements/) in displays. If the quality cannot be improved expeditiously, would-be customers may investigate the competition. :(
lgutie20
Mar 22, 02:04 PM
The trick with Apple is to innovate in aspects that no one else is considering. Example: "we need smart covers because protecting your tablet is a must and should be easy." Thus far this is an APPLE ONLY thing and it works like a charm.
There are other things they could do.
If Apple really wants to completely stand out (even with the crippled aspect that they don't support Flash) they really need to push for Thunderbolt on iOS devices.
It would sync data faster.
It would charge devices faster.
I know there is a lot of groundwork to be done first. All Apple computers should have the Thunderbolt I/O in order for the iOS devices to even consider Thunderbolt.
Time is not a luxury Apple has right now. They need to move faster than ever.
There are other things they could do.
If Apple really wants to completely stand out (even with the crippled aspect that they don't support Flash) they really need to push for Thunderbolt on iOS devices.
It would sync data faster.
It would charge devices faster.
I know there is a lot of groundwork to be done first. All Apple computers should have the Thunderbolt I/O in order for the iOS devices to even consider Thunderbolt.
Time is not a luxury Apple has right now. They need to move faster than ever.
skunk
Mar 22, 07:39 PM
I don't think Obama was "dragged" into this at all, the US has gotten willingly involved - but to what extent do you think it was stage-managed?As far as necessary to make it appear that he was the "last piece of the jigsaw" rather than its inventor.
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:54 AM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704123204576283580249161342.html
Ah, I see. I wasn't checking the WSJ, only Macrumors.
Ah, I see. I wasn't checking the WSJ, only Macrumors.
clockworksaulo
Jun 8, 07:40 PM
That's me!
Nearest Apple Store is 90 minutes away. Nearest Authorized AT&T store that would carry the iPhone is like 60. Radio shack is just 10 minutes.
I'm wondering though, what would be the advantages/disadvantages to buying it at Radio Shack vs AT&T vs The Apple Store? Once I have the item purchased, will I notice any sort of difference what-so-ever?
Cheers.
I used to work at radioshack too and the resources there suck. Activation will take longer than usual and they can mess up your account/credit. I hated activating phones cause it was a hassle since we were not connected directly with carriers.
I bought my 3Gs from ATT store and my girlfriends at Apple Store. Mine began freezing within the first 15 days. Went to ATT and they gave me so much trouble when trying to exchange it. They ended up not wanting to exchange it for me and said they don't take returns on iPhones, when it says the customer has a 30 day (BY LAW) return policy. SO then i went to apple store, even though i bought it from ATT, they quickly opened up a new one and gave me a brand new one, no questions asked (just their standard serial number checks). Went to get 3 more iphones for family plan at Apple, fast easy and great service. Point is ATT = no good and Apple = better.
Now for Radioshack. Brother-in-Law goes and his credit gets run twice by child who works at Radioshack and signs him up to expensive plan. So they have to call their 3rd party service provider and the manager there and employee make a big mess of his ATT account and turns out the phone they had was from a customer return, not even brand new. He ends up just getting bad credit after 4 hrs in the stuffy dusty shack. We go to apple next week, now he has to put deposit cause his credit was messed up but guess what? thats right apple waived it as they saw the mistake and he gets a brand new phone. :) Radioshack = worse place to get any phone Apple = smart well trained employees
I just talked about these cases closest to me but I'll tell you those Radioshack employees are the worst to buy any cellphone from. you take a risk with your credit, used phone possibly, long activations, and bad locale. Radioshack is closest to me, then ATT, then Apple, then Best Buy and Walmart. I would take the long trip to apple before i try the first two stores. And if your other options are real far away i would recommend just ordering it on apple's website direct. Shipping is free and you know what plan youre adding. I've heard good stuff about BestBuy and dont have a clue how Walmart goes, just know RADIOSHACK IS THE WORSE, unless of course they get it right and phone works without a flaw the first 30days.
Nearest Apple Store is 90 minutes away. Nearest Authorized AT&T store that would carry the iPhone is like 60. Radio shack is just 10 minutes.
I'm wondering though, what would be the advantages/disadvantages to buying it at Radio Shack vs AT&T vs The Apple Store? Once I have the item purchased, will I notice any sort of difference what-so-ever?
Cheers.
I used to work at radioshack too and the resources there suck. Activation will take longer than usual and they can mess up your account/credit. I hated activating phones cause it was a hassle since we were not connected directly with carriers.
I bought my 3Gs from ATT store and my girlfriends at Apple Store. Mine began freezing within the first 15 days. Went to ATT and they gave me so much trouble when trying to exchange it. They ended up not wanting to exchange it for me and said they don't take returns on iPhones, when it says the customer has a 30 day (BY LAW) return policy. SO then i went to apple store, even though i bought it from ATT, they quickly opened up a new one and gave me a brand new one, no questions asked (just their standard serial number checks). Went to get 3 more iphones for family plan at Apple, fast easy and great service. Point is ATT = no good and Apple = better.
Now for Radioshack. Brother-in-Law goes and his credit gets run twice by child who works at Radioshack and signs him up to expensive plan. So they have to call their 3rd party service provider and the manager there and employee make a big mess of his ATT account and turns out the phone they had was from a customer return, not even brand new. He ends up just getting bad credit after 4 hrs in the stuffy dusty shack. We go to apple next week, now he has to put deposit cause his credit was messed up but guess what? thats right apple waived it as they saw the mistake and he gets a brand new phone. :) Radioshack = worse place to get any phone Apple = smart well trained employees
I just talked about these cases closest to me but I'll tell you those Radioshack employees are the worst to buy any cellphone from. you take a risk with your credit, used phone possibly, long activations, and bad locale. Radioshack is closest to me, then ATT, then Apple, then Best Buy and Walmart. I would take the long trip to apple before i try the first two stores. And if your other options are real far away i would recommend just ordering it on apple's website direct. Shipping is free and you know what plan youre adding. I've heard good stuff about BestBuy and dont have a clue how Walmart goes, just know RADIOSHACK IS THE WORSE, unless of course they get it right and phone works without a flaw the first 30days.
NJRonbo
Jun 23, 05:32 PM
Good luck with that one as that is not going to happen. They did not advertise Pre-Orders. They said reserves only. They told no money from you nor did they hold credit card information on file like Apple does.
No...
...but what they did do was waste people's time.
How can you ask customers to stand in line last
week -- in my case (and certainly others) arriving
to the store early to be first in line and then wait
an additional 90 minutes for the store to attempt
to generate a PIN --- and be told that none of
what you just did will guarantee you a phone?
Imagine only 9,000 pins available and every Radio
Shack Store online at the same time trying to get
one for their customers on line. It's like a
Beatles Reunion concert going on sale nationwide
through Ticketmaster and everyone is trying to get
their ticket at the same time.
All the inconvenience and wasted time that RS
put their customers through last week all in the
name of asking for a phone that is not officially
being called a "preorder."
Now, all those people that stood in line and
had to go through the hassle of wasting their
afternoon to not officially preorder an iPhone
aren't seemingly going to get one at all.
Radio Shack really screwed this one up.
At least people who lined up at AT&T to
preorder a phone weren't told that they
were doing so just to gauge a number of
requests and none of them would be
guaranteed a phone.
It's really sad that all of us that spent
an hour, two or three in the stores last
week did it all for naught.
No...
...but what they did do was waste people's time.
How can you ask customers to stand in line last
week -- in my case (and certainly others) arriving
to the store early to be first in line and then wait
an additional 90 minutes for the store to attempt
to generate a PIN --- and be told that none of
what you just did will guarantee you a phone?
Imagine only 9,000 pins available and every Radio
Shack Store online at the same time trying to get
one for their customers on line. It's like a
Beatles Reunion concert going on sale nationwide
through Ticketmaster and everyone is trying to get
their ticket at the same time.
All the inconvenience and wasted time that RS
put their customers through last week all in the
name of asking for a phone that is not officially
being called a "preorder."
Now, all those people that stood in line and
had to go through the hassle of wasting their
afternoon to not officially preorder an iPhone
aren't seemingly going to get one at all.
Radio Shack really screwed this one up.
At least people who lined up at AT&T to
preorder a phone weren't told that they
were doing so just to gauge a number of
requests and none of them would be
guaranteed a phone.
It's really sad that all of us that spent
an hour, two or three in the stores last
week did it all for naught.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:05 AM
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
moochermaulucci
Apr 6, 05:05 PM
Or...
It could be considered being close minded and afraid of new things.
Just saying, you know?
Yes, it could...
...and then again, maybe not. Brilliant deduction. Great, now we're no further along than we were three posts ago.
It could be considered being close minded and afraid of new things.
Just saying, you know?
Yes, it could...
...and then again, maybe not. Brilliant deduction. Great, now we're no further along than we were three posts ago.
ugp
Jun 15, 07:48 PM
This has to be the worst a pre-order has ever gone in history. Better preparation needs to be made in the future to avoid these problems.
I was able to get Apples site to get to the final stage and "Place Order" but I opted not to. I am first on the list at my local Radio Shack and I will take my chances there. I am not going to be able to be home when the iPhone would deliver. If I have to wait I will wait. My friend is the Manager and he would process my ticket for me if he had to and drop it off to me if it doesn't come launch day. Otherwise I will be there the 24th in the morning at opening.
I was able to get Apples site to get to the final stage and "Place Order" but I opted not to. I am first on the list at my local Radio Shack and I will take my chances there. I am not going to be able to be home when the iPhone would deliver. If I have to wait I will wait. My friend is the Manager and he would process my ticket for me if he had to and drop it off to me if it doesn't come launch day. Otherwise I will be there the 24th in the morning at opening.
No comments:
Post a Comment