chrmjenkins
May 4, 04:45 PM
And goodness, Beatrice makes me feel like I'm 100 years old.
It's closer to 700.
It's closer to 700.
jvmxtra
Mar 29, 12:22 PM
Going further on infancy stage of cloud as far as main stream consumers are concerned -- Only way they can drive people to it right now would be if it was all free.
Nobody in right mind would pay money to store their own files somewhere else which they already have on their computer.
Cloud storage can work for things that people do not own: software that they rent, movies and such.
Storing music on cloud is just simply stupid idea as it doesn't take up lot of space on your device and music is something you want to listen over and over again if it's your favorite(do you really want to having to connect to internet to get your fav music?)
Nobody in right mind would pay money to store their own files somewhere else which they already have on their computer.
Cloud storage can work for things that people do not own: software that they rent, movies and such.
Storing music on cloud is just simply stupid idea as it doesn't take up lot of space on your device and music is something you want to listen over and over again if it's your favorite(do you really want to having to connect to internet to get your fav music?)
maclaptop
May 4, 04:52 PM
The number of lazy, complacent, disorganized, people that "don't want a disc lying around, or "don't want to keep track of one, is just hilarious.
Or sad, depending on how you look at it.
I'm not surprised that Apple plans to distribute it this way, since it gives them one more reason to trumpet their "fantastic Mac App store". Yeah right.
Apple is dumbing down every step of the process.
How long before it will be "too much work" to sit in front of the computer?
Or sad, depending on how you look at it.
I'm not surprised that Apple plans to distribute it this way, since it gives them one more reason to trumpet their "fantastic Mac App store". Yeah right.
Apple is dumbing down every step of the process.
How long before it will be "too much work" to sit in front of the computer?
Hastings101
Apr 26, 02:12 PM
Who cares? I thought this was macrumors not android news...
I also thought it was Macrumors and not iPhonerumors :)
Macrumors is just the name of the site, whatever "rumors" get posted just have to somehow relate to Apple I guess.
I also thought it was Macrumors and not iPhonerumors :)
Macrumors is just the name of the site, whatever "rumors" get posted just have to somehow relate to Apple I guess.
milo
Sep 11, 04:17 PM
At a compression value I would accecpt, files will still be to big for the internet of today / average power of a computer today / the HD's of today.
People keep saying things like this. But look at online movie piracy. It's probably as big now as napster was a few years ago. The pirates have proven that people are interested in getting movies online, and that the technological barriers can be overcome.
Unless you have a progressive scan TV, which propbably means an HDTV, DVD is only 480i, which can be argued to be equivalent to 240p. That way Apple can easily claim their movies to be DVD quality at 320x240.
But would that look as good as DVD on NTSC television? Sure doesn't seem like it with the current downloads.
People keep saying things like this. But look at online movie piracy. It's probably as big now as napster was a few years ago. The pirates have proven that people are interested in getting movies online, and that the technological barriers can be overcome.
Unless you have a progressive scan TV, which propbably means an HDTV, DVD is only 480i, which can be argued to be equivalent to 240p. That way Apple can easily claim their movies to be DVD quality at 320x240.
But would that look as good as DVD on NTSC television? Sure doesn't seem like it with the current downloads.
shawnce
Aug 4, 04:07 PM
You know, considering that Sony has been able to cram a DL drive in something as tiny as the TX series (not to mention the SZ series), I'm not sure why Apple couldn't do something similar with the 15" MBP.
Why not compare the sizes?
If you look both MBP are 1" tall with the lid closed while the Sony TX series is 1.12" tall and the SZ is 1.5" tall (at the thickest... which is up near the drive area).
Why not compare the sizes?
If you look both MBP are 1" tall with the lid closed while the Sony TX series is 1.12" tall and the SZ is 1.5" tall (at the thickest... which is up near the drive area).
jglavin
Mar 28, 10:25 AM
My 2-year contract finishes next month and my 3G is almost inoperative. No way I want to buy into the antenna problems with a 4. Glad you're happy though.Antennagate! Nice blast from the past ;)
Seriously though, I understand your hesitation. I did buy the thing and haven't had issues but plenty have, so its a toss-up. I'd just go for an Android unless you are really heavily invested in iOS apps. Last time I looked I was a few hundred $$ in on the appstore, since xmas 08. That's not so much that it would hurt to jump ship, but not so little that I'd make the decision lightly, either.
Seriously though, I understand your hesitation. I did buy the thing and haven't had issues but plenty have, so its a toss-up. I'd just go for an Android unless you are really heavily invested in iOS apps. Last time I looked I was a few hundred $$ in on the appstore, since xmas 08. That's not so much that it would hurt to jump ship, but not so little that I'd make the decision lightly, either.
iliketyla
Mar 29, 02:44 PM
Yes, didnt you know?
Every country outside the US lives in poverty, where families must raise 17 children to send them out to work, and must fight to the death over food.
Maybe Japan was a stretch, but the part about China is absolutely not an overstatement.
Or perhaps the entire debacle at Foxconn has fallen on deaf ears?
;)
Every country outside the US lives in poverty, where families must raise 17 children to send them out to work, and must fight to the death over food.
Maybe Japan was a stretch, but the part about China is absolutely not an overstatement.
Or perhaps the entire debacle at Foxconn has fallen on deaf ears?
;)
kalsta
May 5, 08:45 AM
Easy. 13/48ths of an inch.;)
Is that wink a small admission of how silly your system really is? :) Sure, the math was simple, but how meaningful are all these crazy fractions? If I actually had to try and picture what these fractions represent, I'd want to convert the denominator into a multiple of 10 first in order to try and picture it. I might note that twice 48 is roughly 100, so I know we're dealing with a bit over 26%. Other fractions could prove more difficult. With the metric system, you never have to do this. You're always dealing with base-10, which is something we all understand and can picture, without having to memorise particular fractions and what they represent.
I really don't see much functional difference between a language and a system of measures. Both express specificity using prearranged syntax and values.
Well, we could certainly argue that international communication would be a LOT simpler if there was only one language � and it would be! However, the reality is, we have a world with not only a diversity of language, but a diversity of culture, and the two are intricately linked. That makes the world a very interesting place, and being able to speak multiple languages would be a wonderful skill to have when travelling and engaging in other cultures. People are generally proud of their heritage, culture and language, and there aren't too many people suggesting the world should lose all of that richness in the interest of conformity. (Well, there are such people, but I think we can agree they're generally pretty scary.)
How many people are so nostalgic about the imperial system? With language, one communicates deep philosophical thoughts, writes beautiful poetry, tells a woman of his undying love. With a system of measurement, one� well, measures stuff. Most of the world has seen the benefits of a better system and they've moved on without regret. What is different about the US that it can't do likewise? I honestly find it perplexing. Be honest now� Is it because the French invented it?
Even beyond that, if we were to adopt the metric system 100% starting tomorrow, the transition would have to last for decades not only to encompass those who are too old to be educated, but also to deal with the infrastructure changes that would have to take place. At the very earliest it would be my grandchildren who would see a fully metricized US.
You're not stepping out onto the moon this time. Just about every other country on the planet (and there are quite a few of them!) have gone before you, and it worked out just fine. Sure, it takes some time, but not as long as you might like to imagine. Let me come back to my own experience� I was born in the 70s, around the time Australia was just starting to transition to the metric system. The older folk may well have had a difficult time with it, but if so I was blissfully unaware of it. I came to learn what an inch was, since most rulers had inches on one side and mm/cm on the other, and people still, to this day, casually talk about their height in feet and the weight of newborn babies in pounds. (Yes, some old habits die hard.) But these sort of things are the exceptions. The transition to metric was so efficient, I, as a first generation growing up with it, didn't even notice there was a transition happening.
Seriously, you should be looking to Australia and other countries with successful transitions and learning from them, instead of just perpetuating all these fanciful stories of how terrible it's going to be to change.
Is that wink a small admission of how silly your system really is? :) Sure, the math was simple, but how meaningful are all these crazy fractions? If I actually had to try and picture what these fractions represent, I'd want to convert the denominator into a multiple of 10 first in order to try and picture it. I might note that twice 48 is roughly 100, so I know we're dealing with a bit over 26%. Other fractions could prove more difficult. With the metric system, you never have to do this. You're always dealing with base-10, which is something we all understand and can picture, without having to memorise particular fractions and what they represent.
I really don't see much functional difference between a language and a system of measures. Both express specificity using prearranged syntax and values.
Well, we could certainly argue that international communication would be a LOT simpler if there was only one language � and it would be! However, the reality is, we have a world with not only a diversity of language, but a diversity of culture, and the two are intricately linked. That makes the world a very interesting place, and being able to speak multiple languages would be a wonderful skill to have when travelling and engaging in other cultures. People are generally proud of their heritage, culture and language, and there aren't too many people suggesting the world should lose all of that richness in the interest of conformity. (Well, there are such people, but I think we can agree they're generally pretty scary.)
How many people are so nostalgic about the imperial system? With language, one communicates deep philosophical thoughts, writes beautiful poetry, tells a woman of his undying love. With a system of measurement, one� well, measures stuff. Most of the world has seen the benefits of a better system and they've moved on without regret. What is different about the US that it can't do likewise? I honestly find it perplexing. Be honest now� Is it because the French invented it?
Even beyond that, if we were to adopt the metric system 100% starting tomorrow, the transition would have to last for decades not only to encompass those who are too old to be educated, but also to deal with the infrastructure changes that would have to take place. At the very earliest it would be my grandchildren who would see a fully metricized US.
You're not stepping out onto the moon this time. Just about every other country on the planet (and there are quite a few of them!) have gone before you, and it worked out just fine. Sure, it takes some time, but not as long as you might like to imagine. Let me come back to my own experience� I was born in the 70s, around the time Australia was just starting to transition to the metric system. The older folk may well have had a difficult time with it, but if so I was blissfully unaware of it. I came to learn what an inch was, since most rulers had inches on one side and mm/cm on the other, and people still, to this day, casually talk about their height in feet and the weight of newborn babies in pounds. (Yes, some old habits die hard.) But these sort of things are the exceptions. The transition to metric was so efficient, I, as a first generation growing up with it, didn't even notice there was a transition happening.
Seriously, you should be looking to Australia and other countries with successful transitions and learning from them, instead of just perpetuating all these fanciful stories of how terrible it's going to be to change.
SandynJosh
Apr 23, 09:41 PM
I will be honest and truthful and say for a mobile device on batteries, I'm very impressed as what the iPhone and iPad can do gaming wise.
However I will also state, and I think we all should be honest, that at the moment, Apple are bringing the games DOWN to what their hardware can do, as opposed to making Hardware so great that gaming is being pushed UP to take advantage of Apples industry leading performance.
In your first paragraph you talk about Apple's mobile products, which is where Apple will be putting most of their effort in the foreseeable future. To have successful portable products, having a long time between charges is highly important. The old brute force methods of throwing power and RAM at the gaming performance problem can not be part of the design mindset. Game designers know this and are becoming much better at coding for portable games, but they are not quite there yet. Meanwhile Apple is working to find ways to build in performance and not increase power draw.
THIS is the future as Apple sees it, and their acceptance in the broad general market shows that they are on the right track.
When Apple release GTX580 beating desktops, and/or Xbox360 / PS3 beating gaming devices, I will happily bow down to them being the greatest in graphics.
NOW you have switched to talking about desktop and console gaming computers. THIS is a whole different area. First off, it's a tiny segment of the whole computer market. It's big, but not nearly as huge as what Apple is aiming for with their products.
In a nutshell, Apple's strategy is to capture the mobile device market as completely as they can. They are being highly successful at that strategy from iPods to iPhones, to iPads, to Laptops.
Meanwhile they are growing rapidly in the iMac desktop and tower market due primarily to the halo effect of their success in the portable arena. They are doing this even while the desktop and tower markets are shrinking overall. Can you see why Apple will not be putting a lot of effort into this segment?
But right now, they are trailing by miles due to years of neglect as they just did not have products that could compete, and their one semi attempt at a console got nowhere.
Note: I would LOVE LOVE LOVE Apple to turn this around.
You are right. Apple did not have products that could compete in the desktop and console markets. This was primarily due to game developers not interested in writing games for Intel chips and PowerPC chips. Since the installed base for Intel-based computers was more then a order-of-magnitude larger than the installed base of Macs. Apple was never going to enjoy being a suitable gaming platform until they switched to Intel CPUs.
Once Apple made the switch, they have come a long way towards being an acceptable gaming computer, but they have no desire or plans to go after the high end of this market... it's just not that profitable or large. Remember AlienWare? They had the best gaming computer, IMO, and they had to sell themselves to another company to stay alive.
As for the console market, it's crowded with established competitors and will likely see one squeezed out. Not the kind of market that Apple or anyone else should want to jump into.
They need to ditch the "Laptops on a Stand" design of the iMac for starters, but I feel they never will as they have decided they won't compete and they cannot compete in this sector of the market.
I addressed this above. As for the "Laptops on a Stand" design, it's such a bad design that the largest computer company, HP, as well as others, have copied it.
Console wise, I'm not sure they could compete against a 360 or a PS3. Let's say Apple against a PS4 or a Xbox720
Nope, can't see that happening either.
I address this above. Apple doesn't want to be in this arena. It's small and the competition is deadly.
The low power/trimmed down, casual gamers games, seems to be the only area they are going for.
Once more you are correct. There are many many times more gamers that want a short diversion while they have a few minutes away from home, then those who want to spend thousands on an immersive game experience that requires a larger block of time. "Portability with games optional" trumps "wired to the wall and game-focused" all the way to the bank.
But Again, I would LOVE Apple to turn this around and take high end graphics seriously in their future products.
The high-end gamer is not on Apple's radar at the moment and likely never will be unless a way is found to address hi-end graphics on a portable device without impacting battery life.
I know you'd like Apple to chase this rainbow, but they won't, there's no pot of gold at the end.
However I will also state, and I think we all should be honest, that at the moment, Apple are bringing the games DOWN to what their hardware can do, as opposed to making Hardware so great that gaming is being pushed UP to take advantage of Apples industry leading performance.
In your first paragraph you talk about Apple's mobile products, which is where Apple will be putting most of their effort in the foreseeable future. To have successful portable products, having a long time between charges is highly important. The old brute force methods of throwing power and RAM at the gaming performance problem can not be part of the design mindset. Game designers know this and are becoming much better at coding for portable games, but they are not quite there yet. Meanwhile Apple is working to find ways to build in performance and not increase power draw.
THIS is the future as Apple sees it, and their acceptance in the broad general market shows that they are on the right track.
When Apple release GTX580 beating desktops, and/or Xbox360 / PS3 beating gaming devices, I will happily bow down to them being the greatest in graphics.
NOW you have switched to talking about desktop and console gaming computers. THIS is a whole different area. First off, it's a tiny segment of the whole computer market. It's big, but not nearly as huge as what Apple is aiming for with their products.
In a nutshell, Apple's strategy is to capture the mobile device market as completely as they can. They are being highly successful at that strategy from iPods to iPhones, to iPads, to Laptops.
Meanwhile they are growing rapidly in the iMac desktop and tower market due primarily to the halo effect of their success in the portable arena. They are doing this even while the desktop and tower markets are shrinking overall. Can you see why Apple will not be putting a lot of effort into this segment?
But right now, they are trailing by miles due to years of neglect as they just did not have products that could compete, and their one semi attempt at a console got nowhere.
Note: I would LOVE LOVE LOVE Apple to turn this around.
You are right. Apple did not have products that could compete in the desktop and console markets. This was primarily due to game developers not interested in writing games for Intel chips and PowerPC chips. Since the installed base for Intel-based computers was more then a order-of-magnitude larger than the installed base of Macs. Apple was never going to enjoy being a suitable gaming platform until they switched to Intel CPUs.
Once Apple made the switch, they have come a long way towards being an acceptable gaming computer, but they have no desire or plans to go after the high end of this market... it's just not that profitable or large. Remember AlienWare? They had the best gaming computer, IMO, and they had to sell themselves to another company to stay alive.
As for the console market, it's crowded with established competitors and will likely see one squeezed out. Not the kind of market that Apple or anyone else should want to jump into.
They need to ditch the "Laptops on a Stand" design of the iMac for starters, but I feel they never will as they have decided they won't compete and they cannot compete in this sector of the market.
I addressed this above. As for the "Laptops on a Stand" design, it's such a bad design that the largest computer company, HP, as well as others, have copied it.
Console wise, I'm not sure they could compete against a 360 or a PS3. Let's say Apple against a PS4 or a Xbox720
Nope, can't see that happening either.
I address this above. Apple doesn't want to be in this arena. It's small and the competition is deadly.
The low power/trimmed down, casual gamers games, seems to be the only area they are going for.
Once more you are correct. There are many many times more gamers that want a short diversion while they have a few minutes away from home, then those who want to spend thousands on an immersive game experience that requires a larger block of time. "Portability with games optional" trumps "wired to the wall and game-focused" all the way to the bank.
But Again, I would LOVE Apple to turn this around and take high end graphics seriously in their future products.
The high-end gamer is not on Apple's radar at the moment and likely never will be unless a way is found to address hi-end graphics on a portable device without impacting battery life.
I know you'd like Apple to chase this rainbow, but they won't, there's no pot of gold at the end.
toddybody
Apr 25, 10:05 AM
Hes not acting like a dick, he's just worried because of what hes heard.
I know your email to Steve would begin with "Your Royal Appleness" and end with "Your faithful Man-Servant"
The man has heard his phone is tracking his location, and is naturally, entitled to be worried.
Sorry *LTD* (Since I actually like you alot)...
But that comment is hilarious. :D
I know your email to Steve would begin with "Your Royal Appleness" and end with "Your faithful Man-Servant"
The man has heard his phone is tracking his location, and is naturally, entitled to be worried.
Sorry *LTD* (Since I actually like you alot)...
But that comment is hilarious. :D
twoodcc
Aug 4, 05:20 PM
..and in the case of x86-64 (Intel and AMD) the 64 bit mode of operation allows the CPU to expose more registers for use at compile time (and few other improvements). This can improve optimizations that the compiler can make which can improve the performance of the application it builds.
Also the ability to do integer math using 64 bit wide registers with 64 bit wide functional unit can be a decent performance win for several types of tasks.
yeah, what he said :p i knew someone would back me up
Also the ability to do integer math using 64 bit wide registers with 64 bit wide functional unit can be a decent performance win for several types of tasks.
yeah, what he said :p i knew someone would back me up
RubbishBBspeed
Mar 28, 10:35 AM
Thats codswallop, even apple wouldn't be dim enough to allow such an opportunity to go by without at least something to offer to keep market share and tabloid inches filled.
No iPhone 5 = Lost customers.
No iMac refresh = Lost customers.
No iPod Touch refresh = Lost Customers
No ACD new addition = Lost customers.
etc etc. "b"ock and "c"all is what I say.
No iPhone 5 = Lost customers.
No iMac refresh = Lost customers.
No iPod Touch refresh = Lost Customers
No ACD new addition = Lost customers.
etc etc. "b"ock and "c"all is what I say.
sth
Apr 20, 02:08 AM
People underestimate how big of a change the 3GS was on the hardware side. It was based on a whole different architecture (ARM Cortex A8 CPU + PowerVR SGX535 GPU, same as the later A4-based devices but at a lower clock speed).
Of course, the iPhone4 was the biggest refresh to the iPhone ever since the original was introduced, but I would call the 3GS number 2 on that list.
The iPhone 3G on the other hand was so close to the original iPhone in terms of hardware, that it didn't even get it's own internal revision number.
Why do we still call it iPhone 5? Everything points to iPhone 4S.
IMHO the reason why the 3GS was named like that was to bring the iPhone names in line with the respective hardware generation. In other words: New iPhones will most likely just be called iPhone 5/6/7...
to really stay ahead of the market Apple will need to:
add a 4" screen
keep the same form factor
add the dual core A5 processor
update the GPU to something similar (but most likely not as powerful) as in the iPad 2
while keeping the same or possibly even improving the battery life
add a 64GB version
(possible 8 MP backlit CMOS sensor camera along side possible 1080p recording since the iPad can now output in full 1080p through HDMI)
I guess the CPU/GPU will be the same as on the iPad 2, probably with slightly lower Clock speeds, just as they did with the iPhone4 and the iPad.
Don't know about the screen, though. I'd really like to see them getting rid of the black borders left and right, but I don't think they'll be able to fit a 4" screen without making the device physically larger. Also they couldn't just change the resolution because that would break all apps. I'd say either the device gets slightly smaller or no change at all. There's a slim chance of a just slightly bigger screen (3.7" or something like that) at the same resolution but I somehow don't think Apple would do such a thing.
Of course, the iPhone4 was the biggest refresh to the iPhone ever since the original was introduced, but I would call the 3GS number 2 on that list.
The iPhone 3G on the other hand was so close to the original iPhone in terms of hardware, that it didn't even get it's own internal revision number.
Why do we still call it iPhone 5? Everything points to iPhone 4S.
IMHO the reason why the 3GS was named like that was to bring the iPhone names in line with the respective hardware generation. In other words: New iPhones will most likely just be called iPhone 5/6/7...
to really stay ahead of the market Apple will need to:
add a 4" screen
keep the same form factor
add the dual core A5 processor
update the GPU to something similar (but most likely not as powerful) as in the iPad 2
while keeping the same or possibly even improving the battery life
add a 64GB version
(possible 8 MP backlit CMOS sensor camera along side possible 1080p recording since the iPad can now output in full 1080p through HDMI)
I guess the CPU/GPU will be the same as on the iPad 2, probably with slightly lower Clock speeds, just as they did with the iPhone4 and the iPad.
Don't know about the screen, though. I'd really like to see them getting rid of the black borders left and right, but I don't think they'll be able to fit a 4" screen without making the device physically larger. Also they couldn't just change the resolution because that would break all apps. I'd say either the device gets slightly smaller or no change at all. There's a slim chance of a just slightly bigger screen (3.7" or something like that) at the same resolution but I somehow don't think Apple would do such a thing.
darrens
Aug 4, 06:46 PM
In other words, lots of people need 64-bit for the addressing PER PROCESS, not per system (processor) as you say. (Actually, there's no "per processor" limit - a 2-way can't address more RAM than a 1-way.)
Too true. I have a Win2k app I've been developing which could use more than 4GB RAM - in fact more than 2GB RAM (Win2k won't let a process use more than 2GB for various reasons).
Even with the 32 bit processors supporting more than 4GB RAM, does Windows support it? Microsoft has a habit of not supporting things unless "a lot" of people will use it.
I don't think any of the current intel Macs support more than 4GB anyway, so it's a bit academic for Macs right now. Hopefully for not much longer...
Too true. I have a Win2k app I've been developing which could use more than 4GB RAM - in fact more than 2GB RAM (Win2k won't let a process use more than 2GB for various reasons).
Even with the 32 bit processors supporting more than 4GB RAM, does Windows support it? Microsoft has a habit of not supporting things unless "a lot" of people will use it.
I don't think any of the current intel Macs support more than 4GB anyway, so it's a bit academic for Macs right now. Hopefully for not much longer...
Arcus
Apr 25, 08:50 AM
The info circulating around is false.
So Steve is saying there is no database of locations? Thats just an outright lie.
So Steve is saying there is no database of locations? Thats just an outright lie.
SiliconAddict
Nov 23, 12:46 PM
Oh yah, there was one. It was a CD player that was soooo bad hardy a soul bought it and it's barely remembered. I think it happened while Steve was at Next abd the idjuts were in control of of Apple. It may have set a record for a short lifespan, not counting Microsoft's vaporware that was never spawned.
o.O Mactracker has no information on this. Do you have links? I would be very interested in seeing a pict of it.
o.O Mactracker has no information on this. Do you have links? I would be very interested in seeing a pict of it.
Chupa Chupa
Mar 28, 09:54 AM
Makes sense if Apple wants 10.7 and iOS5 to be the focus. Also gives a little more life to the VZW iPhone 4 (fewer bitter customers, even if caused by their own impatience). Finally, while the fall is usually iPod update time, let's face it, iPod updates are getting kinda boring. A new iPhone 5 in Sept would def be more buzzworthy. Then Apple gets back to the summer iPhone releases w/ the iPhone (6) LTE.
LagunaSol
Apr 18, 05:08 PM
It would be like Nintendo suing Sharp even though the 3DS screen is supplied by them.
You better believe Nintendo would sue Sharp if Sharp released a 3DS competitor that looked just like a 3DS.
You better believe Nintendo would sue Sharp if Sharp released a 3DS competitor that looked just like a 3DS.
Thomas2006
Mar 27, 09:36 AM
I highly doubt this is the case. The iPhone still leads the forefront for iOS devices and will receive iOS 5 when it is released. The only way this works is if the release of iPhone 5 is in September and I don't see that happening any time soon.
I think iOS 5 will be released after the iPhone 5 and iPod touch 5 are released with the A5 processor.
I also think iOS 5 and Mac OS X "Lion" will be tightly integrated, but not dependent on each other, so your Mac experience can be taken to the next level.
I think iOS 5 will be released after the iPhone 5 and iPod touch 5 are released with the A5 processor.
I also think iOS 5 and Mac OS X "Lion" will be tightly integrated, but not dependent on each other, so your Mac experience can be taken to the next level.
-aggie-
May 6, 06:08 PM
Everyone will but we can get back to the starting room quicker using "Don't Panic's" plan of having you in a separate group.
Why quicker?
Why quicker?
GQB
Mar 28, 10:47 AM
im the opposite, this would be devastating to me as my contract runs out June this year......
BRLawyer
Nov 25, 12:52 PM
But the funniest thing will be when Apple introduces iPhone and achieves a success similar to that of the iPod...fanboys will come in droves to say that phone X has "FM tuners" or phone Y has "GPS blabla", without understanding that it's not the feature set that makes a winner, but integration AND simplicity...on verra!
p.s.: and yep...without carrier agreements, no chance for a good story...most people get new phones WITH subscriptions that reduce such cell phone prices a lot...period.
p.s.: and yep...without carrier agreements, no chance for a good story...most people get new phones WITH subscriptions that reduce such cell phone prices a lot...period.
ucfgrad93
May 4, 01:49 PM
I'd think we'd want to explore this room.
Agreed, lets explore this room.
Agreed, lets explore this room.
No comments:
Post a Comment