sehix
Sep 27, 01:36 PM
They Can Aways Resort To 10.4.9.1, 10.4.9.2 Etc.
Nah, if they need to go past 10.7.9, they can go for 10.7.10, 10.7.11 .. 10.7.93 or whatever.
The numbering scheme just looks like it's base 10. It ain't.
Nah, if they need to go past 10.7.9, they can go for 10.7.10, 10.7.11 .. 10.7.93 or whatever.
The numbering scheme just looks like it's base 10. It ain't.
xIGmanIx
Apr 5, 10:24 AM
All this post does is make him sound like you can barely handle the iPad. if that is the case, don't get a Xoom, way to advanced for you, you know things like widgets and usb
I have used a Moto Xoom. Honeycomb requires you learn a new user interface. Instead of a nice seamless experience where you can get right in to using apps, you have to learn about the literally 3 or 4 different ways to trigger, dismiss, and access apps. If they're utilities, they're accessed one way. If they're apps, you've got an app menu and a desktop-style metaphor to try-- either works. It's confusing as hell. I mean, you can LEARN anything, but why would you want to.
Bottom line-- a Xoom is $800, it's far less functional, and it's far more confusing to use.
I have used a Moto Xoom. Honeycomb requires you learn a new user interface. Instead of a nice seamless experience where you can get right in to using apps, you have to learn about the literally 3 or 4 different ways to trigger, dismiss, and access apps. If they're utilities, they're accessed one way. If they're apps, you've got an app menu and a desktop-style metaphor to try-- either works. It's confusing as hell. I mean, you can LEARN anything, but why would you want to.
Bottom line-- a Xoom is $800, it's far less functional, and it's far more confusing to use.
bclark82
Jun 13, 06:16 PM
I have read numerous threads concerning this issue but seems like they are related to jailbreaking? I have not done this. Ihad purchased a number of apps and had not yet backed up on my itunes- therefore do not want to have to restore.
Any help would be appreciated. I have tried everything
Any help would be appreciated. I have tried everything
LarryC
Apr 26, 09:00 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
If you have a blank Mac because of a problem or HD upgrade, a network install image being sold outside the Mac App Store makes a lot more sense than Mac App Store distribution. OSes shouldn't be distributed in a store that requires an OS installation to even work.
That is what the USB stick is for! No need to download from anywhere. Don't cherry pick what you want to see and leave out the other options.
That's the point. You say it yourself, your machines still have DVD drives. What's the point of going to the more expensive USB drive option ? Again : CDs were cheaper than floppies to produce and were much quicker to mass produce. Going from optical to Flash memory is the opposite move, it makes the media both more expensive and much more complicated/long to duplicate in mass.
Saying we need DVD Drives just because all the machines out there (still) have DVD drives is a poor argument - following that we still would have floppies. I don't want a DVD drive in my next machine. I would need it only for reinstalling the OS (which on MacOS I actually never had to do, but worst case it might be needed). Actually I won't have a DVD in my next machine since it will be the MBA. The future is here.
And if you see the whole picture (distribution, shipping, storage, ...) I doubt that a read-only chip on a USB stick is much more expensive - and you save on all new machines the cost for the DVD drive and can use the space for better things. If it is so much more expensive, why does the cheapest Apple laptop come with a USB stick instead of DVD? Yes it might be a tiny bit more expensive.
As an Air user with such a thumb drive let me tell you this : their design is pure crap and it is not quite as convenient as a real thumb drive. It also tends to get all scratched up when inserting it and removing it because it lacks the proper guides for the USB port.
How often to you reinstall your OS that you keep inserting and removing it and scratching it all up? It should be a cheap stick (not good for anything else) that just sits 99.99999% of its time in the shelf. It's not that this is meant as a 'free Apple branded USB Stick' that you use all the time.
I keep seeing where people are saying that the MacBook Air is apple's cheapest laptop. Isn't the MacBook cheaper? And no, the 11" 64GB Air does not count. That is not a real computer. That is an iPad with a keyboard.
If you have a blank Mac because of a problem or HD upgrade, a network install image being sold outside the Mac App Store makes a lot more sense than Mac App Store distribution. OSes shouldn't be distributed in a store that requires an OS installation to even work.
That is what the USB stick is for! No need to download from anywhere. Don't cherry pick what you want to see and leave out the other options.
That's the point. You say it yourself, your machines still have DVD drives. What's the point of going to the more expensive USB drive option ? Again : CDs were cheaper than floppies to produce and were much quicker to mass produce. Going from optical to Flash memory is the opposite move, it makes the media both more expensive and much more complicated/long to duplicate in mass.
Saying we need DVD Drives just because all the machines out there (still) have DVD drives is a poor argument - following that we still would have floppies. I don't want a DVD drive in my next machine. I would need it only for reinstalling the OS (which on MacOS I actually never had to do, but worst case it might be needed). Actually I won't have a DVD in my next machine since it will be the MBA. The future is here.
And if you see the whole picture (distribution, shipping, storage, ...) I doubt that a read-only chip on a USB stick is much more expensive - and you save on all new machines the cost for the DVD drive and can use the space for better things. If it is so much more expensive, why does the cheapest Apple laptop come with a USB stick instead of DVD? Yes it might be a tiny bit more expensive.
As an Air user with such a thumb drive let me tell you this : their design is pure crap and it is not quite as convenient as a real thumb drive. It also tends to get all scratched up when inserting it and removing it because it lacks the proper guides for the USB port.
How often to you reinstall your OS that you keep inserting and removing it and scratching it all up? It should be a cheap stick (not good for anything else) that just sits 99.99999% of its time in the shelf. It's not that this is meant as a 'free Apple branded USB Stick' that you use all the time.
I keep seeing where people are saying that the MacBook Air is apple's cheapest laptop. Isn't the MacBook cheaper? And no, the 11" 64GB Air does not count. That is not a real computer. That is an iPad with a keyboard.
more...
D*I*S_Frontman
Nov 21, 07:53 PM
Nothing new. I remember playing around with this as a science experiment in the early 80's. Dissimilar metals sandwiched together--put one end in ice, the other in hot coffee--walaah! Current sufficient to make a fan turn. Hook up the same device to a battery, and one side gets slightly colder while the other gets slightly warmer.
The obvious problem is that the system requires isolated extremes of temperature to do aything. After an hour of use, my MBP's lower case is uniformly warm. Once a thermoelectric device is at a uniform temperature, it ceases to work, if you are using it as a way to convert heat into electricity. If you power the device with electricity in order to cool a laptop CPU, then the other half of the device will be throwing out MORE heat--which the singed hairs on your upper thighs will attest to when you are using your system as a "laptop".
The only time it would work with any effectiveness would be if you took your room-temp cold MBP and, immediately after start-up, tasked a huge Photoshop render file that pounded on the CPUs. At least for a while, the temp differential would give you some electricity back.
The obvious problem is that the system requires isolated extremes of temperature to do aything. After an hour of use, my MBP's lower case is uniformly warm. Once a thermoelectric device is at a uniform temperature, it ceases to work, if you are using it as a way to convert heat into electricity. If you power the device with electricity in order to cool a laptop CPU, then the other half of the device will be throwing out MORE heat--which the singed hairs on your upper thighs will attest to when you are using your system as a "laptop".
The only time it would work with any effectiveness would be if you took your room-temp cold MBP and, immediately after start-up, tasked a huge Photoshop render file that pounded on the CPUs. At least for a while, the temp differential would give you some electricity back.
nuckinfutz
Sep 14, 03:39 AM
This nextgen Processor is codenamed "Prescott"
Yes it looks like a 1MB L2 Cache is likely. Xeons are already at 512k so this is the next logical step.
The doubling of the L2 of course raises the transistor count so don't be shocked that the P4 is going from roughly 40million to 100 million. The larger cache is adding many. Prescott is going to be fabbed on 90 nanometer tech so these transistors will be physically smaller.
http://www.chip-architect.com/news/2002_04_16_Prescott_Prospects.html for "over your head info" good stuff
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1677 Nice also.
The FSB of Prescott will probably be 667mhz but this is NOT Double Pumpled 333mhz. This is still a Quad Pumped bus which now starts out at 166mhz.(166.66 x 4 I believe).
Remember Apple's Top Line G4 supports 166 mhz but it doesn't Double or Quad pump the bus.
How does Apple compete? Well here's my guess.
Perhaps at Macworld San Fran or soon after Apple announces the next G4 based machines. These Computers will be based on 130 nano G4+ chips(the current G4+ are 180 nano chips) . This will allow the G4's to clock to as high as 1.6Ghz.
This allows Apple to prepare for what I think everyone knows is coming. The IBM GPUL Power4 based Proc which should hit late 2003. This Proc would start at 1.8ghz and depending on yields Apple could always offer a Dual Configuration. We'll know how quickly IBM will drop from 130 to 90 nano tech on these procs as soon as Oct 15. So there you have it.
Intel will be shipping 4Ghz P4's
AMD will have 3.4Ghz Rated chips
And shortly after Apple will be at 2Ghz with a 64bit proc.
Will we be faster. Who knows. The IBM Proc is 8way Superscalar with 5 dispatch, It supports 6.4Gbps throughput which puts it on par with where Intel and AMD will be as far as Bandwidth. Apple is clearly not freaking out about this. They're calm and cool so you know something good is coming.
I am mad at apple, their processors suck right now... not to mention their price. Im not gunna spend 3,000 for a computer that I could get with -yes - a worse os, for 1,000. Macs just arent worth it right now. Until they have something that can compete speed wise, my next comp is a PC.
Can you please explain why Apple's using G4's suck? And please since you have it ALL figured out. Tell me what Apple needs to do to fix this. I'm sure we're all ears. ;)
Yes it looks like a 1MB L2 Cache is likely. Xeons are already at 512k so this is the next logical step.
The doubling of the L2 of course raises the transistor count so don't be shocked that the P4 is going from roughly 40million to 100 million. The larger cache is adding many. Prescott is going to be fabbed on 90 nanometer tech so these transistors will be physically smaller.
http://www.chip-architect.com/news/2002_04_16_Prescott_Prospects.html for "over your head info" good stuff
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1677 Nice also.
The FSB of Prescott will probably be 667mhz but this is NOT Double Pumpled 333mhz. This is still a Quad Pumped bus which now starts out at 166mhz.(166.66 x 4 I believe).
Remember Apple's Top Line G4 supports 166 mhz but it doesn't Double or Quad pump the bus.
How does Apple compete? Well here's my guess.
Perhaps at Macworld San Fran or soon after Apple announces the next G4 based machines. These Computers will be based on 130 nano G4+ chips(the current G4+ are 180 nano chips) . This will allow the G4's to clock to as high as 1.6Ghz.
This allows Apple to prepare for what I think everyone knows is coming. The IBM GPUL Power4 based Proc which should hit late 2003. This Proc would start at 1.8ghz and depending on yields Apple could always offer a Dual Configuration. We'll know how quickly IBM will drop from 130 to 90 nano tech on these procs as soon as Oct 15. So there you have it.
Intel will be shipping 4Ghz P4's
AMD will have 3.4Ghz Rated chips
And shortly after Apple will be at 2Ghz with a 64bit proc.
Will we be faster. Who knows. The IBM Proc is 8way Superscalar with 5 dispatch, It supports 6.4Gbps throughput which puts it on par with where Intel and AMD will be as far as Bandwidth. Apple is clearly not freaking out about this. They're calm and cool so you know something good is coming.
I am mad at apple, their processors suck right now... not to mention their price. Im not gunna spend 3,000 for a computer that I could get with -yes - a worse os, for 1,000. Macs just arent worth it right now. Until they have something that can compete speed wise, my next comp is a PC.
Can you please explain why Apple's using G4's suck? And please since you have it ALL figured out. Tell me what Apple needs to do to fix this. I'm sure we're all ears. ;)
more...
wsteineker
May 26, 01:48 AM
Originally posted by Ryan1524
i'm just curious about all the people that stated how PCs are troublesome when we're adding hardwares. after i installed XP, i did not even installed any driver and everything was recognized as soon as i plugged them in and working in no time, from keyboards, mouses, to routers, scanners, graphics cards, printers, digital cameras. i had the drivers ready, expecting the onslaught of hardware setup wizard typical of 98, but instead, there's the little pop up box near the system tray that stated that these hardwares have been recognized, drivers installed, and ready for use. and sure enough, they are. as for the hardware incompatibilities, remember that PC hardwares and softwares are made by two different companies, while any apple computers ae assembled and prepared by on company who manufactured both. therefore, they KNOW what their software needs in order for them to work perfectly.
Ok, here's a nightmare for you just to illustrate the kind of headaches we're talking about. First, let me start by saying that I upgraded my Cube from OS 9.2.2 to OS X 10.1 all the way through 10.2.4 with no problems, and that I recently installed a Pioneer A05 DVD-R/RW in my Quicksilver tower without so much as a hiccup. So on to my Windows XP hell...
Here's the deal. I was running a Dell with Windows 98 SE, all updates and service packs installed. The system specs were as follows: 1.2 GHz P4, 1 GB RDRAM, 80 GB HD, DVD ROM (all stock) and a Geforce 3 Ti and Sony CDRW (upgrades). Everything was hunky dory, but I was wondering what this new Microsoft OS was about. A buddy of mine is an IT admin and was just RAVING about the thing, so I figured I'd give it a try. His company bought XP on a corporate license (without the hardware registration and activation, and with one token serial for the entire company) so he gave me a copy just to try out. I appreciatively installed it on my machine which well outpaced the recommended minimum config, and got to work. The install crashed twice, but I managed to get past that.
Once I had successfully installed, I realized that everything was running well. I went to the prefs pane to take care of that Fisher-Price My First Interface (TM), and everything was fantastic. It really was more stable, though not so much so that I never crashed at all. In fact, I still crashed once a day, but that was so much of an improvement over 98 that I didn't complain. The only real problem I had for the better part of a month was that every time something went south the machine asked me if I wished to send an error report to Microsoft. Ugh.
So things are great for around 3 weeks when all of the sudden my CDR just stops working. Seriously, just like that. I wake up, boot, and BOOM! It's gone. It's not in My Computer, and I can't use it at all. It's visible in the BIOS, and it's obviously drawing power, but XP just decided that it wasn't welcome anymore. I got in touch with Sony after I was unable to find an XP driver on their site, and they told me that XP didn't actually need drivers. They recommended trying the 2000 Pro driver. That didn't work either, so I called Microsoft. They recommended a reformat. To this day they have no idea what went wrong. No service pack has been able to fix this, and it cost me countless hours (on top of those already detailed) to remove the HD, install it as a slave on a 2000 machine (because it was NTFS formatted) and recover my data to 65 individual CDs. What a nightmare.
My experience may be atypical, but from talking to friends and reading the horror stories here I've come to doubt it. Simply put, XP really is the best OS Microsoft has ever produced (except for 2000 Pro, but we're quibbling). That being said, being a higher grade piece of ***** doesn't count for much. It's still a piece of ***** after all, and it's still got more buggy code than it does functional code. Since I switched to the Mac my life has been simpler. Period. End of story. Even when using OS 9 I never experienced horrors like this. OS X has been a breeze since 10.1 on 3 year old hardware. When was the last time someone could say that about ANY Microsoft OS? Seriously, the only hardware problems I've had at all on my Mac were directly related to bad memory, and that's not the fault of the OS. That's why we bitch and moan about Windows, my friend. That's why. :)
i'm just curious about all the people that stated how PCs are troublesome when we're adding hardwares. after i installed XP, i did not even installed any driver and everything was recognized as soon as i plugged them in and working in no time, from keyboards, mouses, to routers, scanners, graphics cards, printers, digital cameras. i had the drivers ready, expecting the onslaught of hardware setup wizard typical of 98, but instead, there's the little pop up box near the system tray that stated that these hardwares have been recognized, drivers installed, and ready for use. and sure enough, they are. as for the hardware incompatibilities, remember that PC hardwares and softwares are made by two different companies, while any apple computers ae assembled and prepared by on company who manufactured both. therefore, they KNOW what their software needs in order for them to work perfectly.
Ok, here's a nightmare for you just to illustrate the kind of headaches we're talking about. First, let me start by saying that I upgraded my Cube from OS 9.2.2 to OS X 10.1 all the way through 10.2.4 with no problems, and that I recently installed a Pioneer A05 DVD-R/RW in my Quicksilver tower without so much as a hiccup. So on to my Windows XP hell...
Here's the deal. I was running a Dell with Windows 98 SE, all updates and service packs installed. The system specs were as follows: 1.2 GHz P4, 1 GB RDRAM, 80 GB HD, DVD ROM (all stock) and a Geforce 3 Ti and Sony CDRW (upgrades). Everything was hunky dory, but I was wondering what this new Microsoft OS was about. A buddy of mine is an IT admin and was just RAVING about the thing, so I figured I'd give it a try. His company bought XP on a corporate license (without the hardware registration and activation, and with one token serial for the entire company) so he gave me a copy just to try out. I appreciatively installed it on my machine which well outpaced the recommended minimum config, and got to work. The install crashed twice, but I managed to get past that.
Once I had successfully installed, I realized that everything was running well. I went to the prefs pane to take care of that Fisher-Price My First Interface (TM), and everything was fantastic. It really was more stable, though not so much so that I never crashed at all. In fact, I still crashed once a day, but that was so much of an improvement over 98 that I didn't complain. The only real problem I had for the better part of a month was that every time something went south the machine asked me if I wished to send an error report to Microsoft. Ugh.
So things are great for around 3 weeks when all of the sudden my CDR just stops working. Seriously, just like that. I wake up, boot, and BOOM! It's gone. It's not in My Computer, and I can't use it at all. It's visible in the BIOS, and it's obviously drawing power, but XP just decided that it wasn't welcome anymore. I got in touch with Sony after I was unable to find an XP driver on their site, and they told me that XP didn't actually need drivers. They recommended trying the 2000 Pro driver. That didn't work either, so I called Microsoft. They recommended a reformat. To this day they have no idea what went wrong. No service pack has been able to fix this, and it cost me countless hours (on top of those already detailed) to remove the HD, install it as a slave on a 2000 machine (because it was NTFS formatted) and recover my data to 65 individual CDs. What a nightmare.
My experience may be atypical, but from talking to friends and reading the horror stories here I've come to doubt it. Simply put, XP really is the best OS Microsoft has ever produced (except for 2000 Pro, but we're quibbling). That being said, being a higher grade piece of ***** doesn't count for much. It's still a piece of ***** after all, and it's still got more buggy code than it does functional code. Since I switched to the Mac my life has been simpler. Period. End of story. Even when using OS 9 I never experienced horrors like this. OS X has been a breeze since 10.1 on 3 year old hardware. When was the last time someone could say that about ANY Microsoft OS? Seriously, the only hardware problems I've had at all on my Mac were directly related to bad memory, and that's not the fault of the OS. That's why we bitch and moan about Windows, my friend. That's why. :)
sebastianlewis
May 31, 04:32 AM
A solution is a solution no matter whether it's the Command Line or a GUI, besides that, a lot of apps also have a CLI equivalent, Property List Editor and defaults, Disk Utility and diskutil, Automator and automator, etc. So clearly articles involving Disk Utility would also need to include diskutil, and Automator would need to include it's CLI equivalent... not quite the same for the Plist editor and defaults I guess.
Then there is something like Quicksilver, which is kind of a mix between the GUI and the Terminal, well actually I'd go so far as to say it's an interface paradigm in itself. Then there are preference pane apps which aren't full GUI apps, codecs like Perian and WMV Components which also happen to have preference panes by the way, small utilities like Jumpcut which can function in either the GUI or the CLI via the same keyboard shortcut and just extend the clipboard, so it's really hard to create an artificial distinction between them, and then there are X11 apps, and what about online apps like Google Docs? No, they're not Mac specific apps, but neither is something like OpenOffice.org, they just happen to be hosted online and work in a browser, but a solution is still a solution whether or not it's locally hosted or remote, has a GUI or uses the CLI, or has its own unique interface, uses Aqua, or uses the X Window System, or uses your browsers rendering engine.
On the other hand, if we were to use subcategories as filters, then that would just have the effect of narrowing the list instead of forcing the user to click through to another category to find what they might be looking for so we wouldn't have to create a distinction between different types of Software in the main category.
So in reality, Mac OS X is a hybrid breed and so you have to look at where the real distinction is, the Operating System provides the software for a functioning computer, Apple provides their Cocoa and Carbon developers with the HIG, and also provides a full UNIX environment that anyone can take advantage of, and also provides a powerful Rendering Engine in the OS that provides an environment for both Widgets and Web-based Apps to run in. Some people are scared of the Terminal, but the Guides are here and they can be a powerful tool for getting people more used to the idea of using the Terminal and getting the most out of their computer, or if they chose too, they can completely ignore it.
Sebastian
Clearly there are both cases where there is too much categorisation and where there is not enough. I'm in favour of general guidelines based on the number of articles, ie new subcategories should have at least x articles, and categories with more than y articles may want to be broken up - of course, there will be exceptions, so they should be only very general guidelines.
I'm open to a big change in the category organisation of the Guides, as it is clearly badly structured in some places. However, any new structure needs to be carefully designed and agreed upon, as it is a lot of work to change and very difficult to undo.
Overly-general guidelines based on the number of articles is poor structure, if it gets vastly overcrowded then new subcategories should be used very sparingly, but without subsubcategories, a user won't have to click through more than 3 times to get to the article they want from the Guides page, Top Category>Subcategory>Article, and potentially most of the time, two, Top Category>Article, or they'll just search it out which is the most likely, but that doesn't mean a decent hierarchy should be given up since it allows the user to just browse articles of interest.
Sebastian
Then there is something like Quicksilver, which is kind of a mix between the GUI and the Terminal, well actually I'd go so far as to say it's an interface paradigm in itself. Then there are preference pane apps which aren't full GUI apps, codecs like Perian and WMV Components which also happen to have preference panes by the way, small utilities like Jumpcut which can function in either the GUI or the CLI via the same keyboard shortcut and just extend the clipboard, so it's really hard to create an artificial distinction between them, and then there are X11 apps, and what about online apps like Google Docs? No, they're not Mac specific apps, but neither is something like OpenOffice.org, they just happen to be hosted online and work in a browser, but a solution is still a solution whether or not it's locally hosted or remote, has a GUI or uses the CLI, or has its own unique interface, uses Aqua, or uses the X Window System, or uses your browsers rendering engine.
On the other hand, if we were to use subcategories as filters, then that would just have the effect of narrowing the list instead of forcing the user to click through to another category to find what they might be looking for so we wouldn't have to create a distinction between different types of Software in the main category.
So in reality, Mac OS X is a hybrid breed and so you have to look at where the real distinction is, the Operating System provides the software for a functioning computer, Apple provides their Cocoa and Carbon developers with the HIG, and also provides a full UNIX environment that anyone can take advantage of, and also provides a powerful Rendering Engine in the OS that provides an environment for both Widgets and Web-based Apps to run in. Some people are scared of the Terminal, but the Guides are here and they can be a powerful tool for getting people more used to the idea of using the Terminal and getting the most out of their computer, or if they chose too, they can completely ignore it.
Sebastian
Clearly there are both cases where there is too much categorisation and where there is not enough. I'm in favour of general guidelines based on the number of articles, ie new subcategories should have at least x articles, and categories with more than y articles may want to be broken up - of course, there will be exceptions, so they should be only very general guidelines.
I'm open to a big change in the category organisation of the Guides, as it is clearly badly structured in some places. However, any new structure needs to be carefully designed and agreed upon, as it is a lot of work to change and very difficult to undo.
Overly-general guidelines based on the number of articles is poor structure, if it gets vastly overcrowded then new subcategories should be used very sparingly, but without subsubcategories, a user won't have to click through more than 3 times to get to the article they want from the Guides page, Top Category>Subcategory>Article, and potentially most of the time, two, Top Category>Article, or they'll just search it out which is the most likely, but that doesn't mean a decent hierarchy should be given up since it allows the user to just browse articles of interest.
Sebastian
more...
jamieg
Jan 8, 02:19 PM
3.1.1 is updating some of my contacts who aren't on Facebook and haven't got an email address assigned. It matches them to a seemingly random person's profile who I am not even friends with on Facebook!!
Anyone else getting this issue??
Push updates seem intermittent today, they were working well yesterday!!
Anyone else getting this issue??
Push updates seem intermittent today, they were working well yesterday!!
wdlove
Aug 25, 05:00 PM
Thank you for your hard work on the folding widget redeye_be. I'm sure that it's a labor of love. Improvements are always welcome. Will be something to look forward to when I upgrade to Tiger.
more...
UTclassof89
Mar 13, 03:15 PM
Get rid of DST. Not needed anymore. Problem solved.
Steve?
Is that you ??
Thought you were on medical leave.
Steve?
Is that you ??
Thought you were on medical leave.
cerote
Mar 26, 06:21 PM
http://www.9to5mac.com/files/Screen%20shot%202010-03-26%20at%205.26.29%20PM.png
It's one of those containers holding the bill. It's too black to be an iPad.
Steve: "5. 5 dollar foot long."
It's one of those containers holding the bill. It's too black to be an iPad.
Steve: "5. 5 dollar foot long."
more...
spazzcat
Jan 4, 12:30 PM
Whoever advised them to not put the maps onboard and download as needed, needs to be fired- poor decision.
Went from Cleveland to Flordia with a download based GPS on my iPhone, had no issues.
Went from Cleveland to Flordia with a download based GPS on my iPhone, had no issues.
bizzle
Apr 8, 09:47 PM
If that's your ideology, you're selling yourself short by focusing just on Planned Parenthood. Don't forget about medicaid, social security, public education, and disability. In the name of not wanting to pay for other peoples' social services, might as well kill those too
I am all for getting rid of those too. This topic was about PP, so I expressed my feelings for that colossal waste of money. I didn't want to stray too far off topic.
I am all for getting rid of those too. This topic was about PP, so I expressed my feelings for that colossal waste of money. I didn't want to stray too far off topic.
more...
ArchaicRevival
Apr 21, 02:04 PM
Regardless, some people are still gonna complain of some unimportant missing feature.
fehhkk
May 5, 02:54 PM
lol @ comparing the MBP 15" to the Dell XPS 15 ... haaaahahahaha :D
more...
CubusX
Mar 13, 09:50 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8F190)
New iOS update, same old story. With all the time it takes Apple to release these updates, will they ever get it right,
New iOS update, same old story. With all the time it takes Apple to release these updates, will they ever get it right,
adroit
May 2, 10:58 PM
Ba-bye Canada :'(
doctor-don
Jun 14, 10:02 AM
depends on who you are. my bill with 500 more minutes and rollover, 1500 text and unlimited data is only $7 more than yours. of course I have had my voice plan for almost 8 years
and tmobile is simply awful
Only your [minority] opinion. I have been a customer of T-Mo for more than a decade, and I have no complaints except coverage in remote areas (which might be alleviated only with a satellite phone). My 1,000 family minutes and 4 phones and 2 datas cost $177/month, btw.
and tmobile is simply awful
Only your [minority] opinion. I have been a customer of T-Mo for more than a decade, and I have no complaints except coverage in remote areas (which might be alleviated only with a satellite phone). My 1,000 family minutes and 4 phones and 2 datas cost $177/month, btw.
McGiord
Apr 5, 06:35 PM
This is great, now :apple: seem to be back on track to continuously release improved hardware technology.
It was sad when they took away the Firewire out of the iPod.
Something like the European requirement, in the US the cable TV providers have to provide firewire equipped cable boxes, so the users can get Firewire video out them. Normally you have to ask for it, and they have to give it to you.
Thunderbolt will kick ass.
It was sad when they took away the Firewire out of the iPod.
Something like the European requirement, in the US the cable TV providers have to provide firewire equipped cable boxes, so the users can get Firewire video out them. Normally you have to ask for it, and they have to give it to you.
Thunderbolt will kick ass.
Artofilm
Mar 28, 09:00 AM
Why did you buy a 3DS if you're not going to use the 3D?
Buhbuhb
Oct 26, 04:33 PM
Given that universal versions of Adobe's software are not universal yet (Or at least most) does anyone know exactly how much slower any particular Adobe program (photoshop, illustrator, etc.) runs on an Intel Mac compared to a PPC Mac? I've heard it runs slower, but HOW much slower?
steeleclipse
Sep 17, 09:02 AM
tell them you apple-care about them alot :D
hayesk
Mar 28, 09:37 AM
From that price, you can better buy a Mac and watch it in QuikTime... :)
I could also buy groceries for three months, but I don't see what that has to do with this being a Developer conference. Seriously people, this is a developer conference, not a consumer product showcase.
I could also buy groceries for three months, but I don't see what that has to do with this being a Developer conference. Seriously people, this is a developer conference, not a consumer product showcase.
0 comments:
Post a Comment