balamw
Aug 7, 06:39 PM
Norton's GoBack, which was purchased from some other company
Yeah, I recommended GoBack to a number of users back in the day (I think it was Adaptec that owned it at one point). No-one seemed to like it at the time.
As I and others reminisce it's a feature that has been around for well over 20 years in VMS. It's only relatively new to personal computers.
B
Yeah, I recommended GoBack to a number of users back in the day (I think it was Adaptec that owned it at one point). No-one seemed to like it at the time.
As I and others reminisce it's a feature that has been around for well over 20 years in VMS. It's only relatively new to personal computers.
B
Brandon4692
Jun 22, 12:43 AM
I would sell the 3GS privately. You're almost guaranteed to get more for it. Post it somewhere tonight and I'll bet you that you get more for it than what Radio Shack will offer you.
Radio Shack's trade-in program is a decent option, but one could do much better with a little leg work.
Yeah I thought about that... But I'd rather not go through the hassle of craigs list and eBay... Just to many unknown factors. Who they are shipping meeting up with strangers scams I just feel safer trading it into the store but hey if you can get more for you phone all the power to you! I'm just a wimp about it lol
Radio Shack's trade-in program is a decent option, but one could do much better with a little leg work.
Yeah I thought about that... But I'd rather not go through the hassle of craigs list and eBay... Just to many unknown factors. Who they are shipping meeting up with strangers scams I just feel safer trading it into the store but hey if you can get more for you phone all the power to you! I'm just a wimp about it lol
rtdunham
Aug 27, 10:07 AM
As far as "legalities" go, usually corporations do have to generally not take unsolicited ideas, commercials, marketing materials, etc. developed by the public. The reason for this is that they want to avoid being sued later on if they do something similar. ...the more obvious examples would be things where, for example, someone designs a new computer and sends it to Apple; Apple eventually releases something quite similar to it, and the person who sent in the design tries to sue them for taking their idea and not paying anything for it.-Zadillo
but wouldn't it be neat to see a computer maker have a website for submission of ideas: you type in your idea, and get a message that says, "IF we choose to use your idea, you'll receive $1 per unit; if you agree to those terms, hit the "SEND" button now."
Imagine all the 'puter features, (cheap lyric theft intended) that might be in today's units, if they incorporated ideas suggested on these forums alone in the past 5 yrs. It'd be fun to see someone compile a list. Here's a start: Ports on the FRONT of desktop units; easy-swap HD bays on laptops; built-in memory card readers; built-in iPod dock; etc.
Look at the stuff on YOUR desk: how much could be consolidated into the computer itself? Think about what you wish your computer could do that it can't do, now.
but wouldn't it be neat to see a computer maker have a website for submission of ideas: you type in your idea, and get a message that says, "IF we choose to use your idea, you'll receive $1 per unit; if you agree to those terms, hit the "SEND" button now."
Imagine all the 'puter features, (cheap lyric theft intended) that might be in today's units, if they incorporated ideas suggested on these forums alone in the past 5 yrs. It'd be fun to see someone compile a list. Here's a start: Ports on the FRONT of desktop units; easy-swap HD bays on laptops; built-in memory card readers; built-in iPod dock; etc.
Look at the stuff on YOUR desk: how much could be consolidated into the computer itself? Think about what you wish your computer could do that it can't do, now.
suneohair
Sep 13, 06:05 PM
Sorry to burst your reality distortion field, but see my previous post. I ran a dual processor Pentium II NT setup ten years ago and Windows handled it just fine THEN -- back when Apple barely supported it with a hack to its cooperatively-multitasked OS and required specially written applications with special library support.
BTW my 2 year old Smithfield handles 4 processors fine (Dual Core Pentium Extreme with hyperthreading = 4 cores).
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
Didn't you get the memo, Hyperthreading was a joke.
On to this post. The current Mac Pro is not going to be upgraded. Nor will Quad be making its debut, at least at the current price points, anytime soon. It may be offered as a very expensive upgrade but thats about it looking ahead a year.
So for those who bought now, it was a good choice. When the time comes and cost is low they can take that next step and upgrade.
BTW my 2 year old Smithfield handles 4 processors fine (Dual Core Pentium Extreme with hyperthreading = 4 cores).
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
Didn't you get the memo, Hyperthreading was a joke.
On to this post. The current Mac Pro is not going to be upgraded. Nor will Quad be making its debut, at least at the current price points, anytime soon. It may be offered as a very expensive upgrade but thats about it looking ahead a year.
So for those who bought now, it was a good choice. When the time comes and cost is low they can take that next step and upgrade.
damnyooneek
Apr 25, 03:50 PM
the question is if the tracking info is sent to anyone or is it just a log of places that is in a file on your own phone.
bobthedino
Apr 27, 08:23 AM
This is a lie
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad: Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
At least our overlord will now, I hope, stop collecting location data when location services are turned off. It's a disgrace that it took a media storm to shame them into action.
But it's not "logging your location". If you look at the data that is being stored, there is one entry per location. If Apple was keeping a log of your movements over time, you'd expect there to be many entries for places you go to frequently, but there are not. consolidated.db is simply a cache used by the Core Location framework, nothing more.
This is not to say that Apple should have let the cache grow indefinitely - this is definitely bad. But they're going to fix it, and it'll be easy for us to verify, as we know how to check for the file now.
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad: Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
At least our overlord will now, I hope, stop collecting location data when location services are turned off. It's a disgrace that it took a media storm to shame them into action.
But it's not "logging your location". If you look at the data that is being stored, there is one entry per location. If Apple was keeping a log of your movements over time, you'd expect there to be many entries for places you go to frequently, but there are not. consolidated.db is simply a cache used by the Core Location framework, nothing more.
This is not to say that Apple should have let the cache grow indefinitely - this is definitely bad. But they're going to fix it, and it'll be easy for us to verify, as we know how to check for the file now.
AtHomeBoy_2000
Aug 5, 05:32 PM
I like the BitTorrent idea, would make downloading software updates very fast, could also be cool if its used for that movie store we have been hearing so much about :p
For legal uses, BitTorrent is awesome. I tried to download NeoOffice from their website, i was getting 20K. Over BitTorrent..... almost my max bandwidth. It was sweet. BitTorrent in an OS has many great possibilities.
For legal uses, BitTorrent is awesome. I tried to download NeoOffice from their website, i was getting 20K. Over BitTorrent..... almost my max bandwidth. It was sweet. BitTorrent in an OS has many great possibilities.
dclocke
Sep 19, 09:41 AM
I don't know how many times we have to go round and round with this here. I've been on MacRumors since '01 and it's always the same-old, same-old. It's not legitimate. It's "I-wantism." You have no basis to believe that a Rev B would be more "stabled and refined." That's a hope, backed by nothing -- and nothing Apple ever comments on, either. The bottom line is that you can hope if you want, and you can wait if you want, but to bash Apple for being slow on the trigger, and to make the argument that Meroms are amazing and Yonahs are crap is, frankly, horse manure. Like I said, 64 bit is pretty irrelevant for most users, and the speed and battery differences are quite negligible. And the argument that Apple is losing tons of sales to PC manufactuers is, frankly, laughable too.
Well, I've been on MacRumors since last week and I'm already tired of posts telling me what I really need. I don't recall seeing posts saying Yonah was crap. Most people just want to feel like they are making a good investment on an expensive piece of equipment that may be around for 3-4+ years. I would like a laptop with a 64-bit processor. Period. I don't care what you think I need. The problem with posts like this are that they waste my time, and the time of other users who are looking for information on the release of the new MBP models.
Edit: I should add, however, that if anyone is willing to donate the money for me to purchase a new MBP, I will gladly accept all advice on said purchase.
Well, I've been on MacRumors since last week and I'm already tired of posts telling me what I really need. I don't recall seeing posts saying Yonah was crap. Most people just want to feel like they are making a good investment on an expensive piece of equipment that may be around for 3-4+ years. I would like a laptop with a 64-bit processor. Period. I don't care what you think I need. The problem with posts like this are that they waste my time, and the time of other users who are looking for information on the release of the new MBP models.
Edit: I should add, however, that if anyone is willing to donate the money for me to purchase a new MBP, I will gladly accept all advice on said purchase.
nostaws
Apr 10, 12:59 AM
Hey. But there is something to be said for familiarity. We all know how to use it. But I agree an update would be nice.
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
epitaphic
Aug 18, 09:06 PM
Do you think a Conroe iMac will beat a Mac Pro due to lower memory latency alone? Do you have real experience or data regarding how horrendous a problem this is? Extra dual-core processor aside, the Mac Pro has a higher speed FSB, higher memory bus bandwidth, higher RAM capacity, and ability to set up internal RAID amongst other advantages over a Conroe iMac.
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac. But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
the Mac Pro (...) actually takes longer to access main memory than the Core Duo processor in the MacBook Pro. This is much worse than it sounds once you take into account the fact that the MacBook Pro features a 667MHz FSB compared to the 1333MHz FSB (per chip) used in the Mac Pro.
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
It's not Apple's fault, but FB-DIMMs absolutely kill memory latency; even running in quad channel mode, the FB-DIMM equipped Mac Pro takes 45% more time to access memory than our DDR2 equipped test bed at the same memory frequency.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac. But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
the Mac Pro (...) actually takes longer to access main memory than the Core Duo processor in the MacBook Pro. This is much worse than it sounds once you take into account the fact that the MacBook Pro features a 667MHz FSB compared to the 1333MHz FSB (per chip) used in the Mac Pro.
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
It's not Apple's fault, but FB-DIMMs absolutely kill memory latency; even running in quad channel mode, the FB-DIMM equipped Mac Pro takes 45% more time to access memory than our DDR2 equipped test bed at the same memory frequency.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
supremedesigner
Jul 14, 03:39 PM
Make a copy of Toast and use one copy for one drive and the other copy for the other drive.
Ohhhh! That could work. Have anyone tried this before? Thanks! I'll check on it when I get home! :D
Ohhhh! That could work. Have anyone tried this before? Thanks! I'll check on it when I get home! :D
chrmjenkins
Apr 6, 11:36 AM
That isn't what this story reads, and I don't think anyone but you and I have even read the actual facts supposed here.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in Tue graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I could assailed things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Given Apple's willingness to go with it on the 13", I'm inclined to go with the reasoning that they'll use it here. The argument that it will be a big step down from the 320M is kind of moot given that anyone will say you're crazy if you try to insist that a MBA should be used for anything like gaming or graphical work (read anyone as Apple). You also have to remember that the 320M is downclocked in the MBAs too compared to the 13", so the drop isn't as drastic as you state.
The combination of a lower or equal TDP, a GPU that doesn't need its own heatsink because its integrated into the CPU and the very likely prolonged battery life for the MBA, it's pretty much a done deal for the MBA.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
He didn't quite tell the whole story. A LV and ULV chip likely went through different binning as their performance at the same settings varies because the process they are built on varies. The chips that work at the extremes (say Intel's extreme desktop processors or the lowest voltage CPUs they offer) are likely the top performers in their binning tests. Just because a chip can function as a LV doesn't mean it would meet the requirements for ULV, for example. However, if the ULV chip were to be scaled to the LV's parts speed and voltage, it would function just fine.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in Tue graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I could assailed things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Given Apple's willingness to go with it on the 13", I'm inclined to go with the reasoning that they'll use it here. The argument that it will be a big step down from the 320M is kind of moot given that anyone will say you're crazy if you try to insist that a MBA should be used for anything like gaming or graphical work (read anyone as Apple). You also have to remember that the 320M is downclocked in the MBAs too compared to the 13", so the drop isn't as drastic as you state.
The combination of a lower or equal TDP, a GPU that doesn't need its own heatsink because its integrated into the CPU and the very likely prolonged battery life for the MBA, it's pretty much a done deal for the MBA.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
He didn't quite tell the whole story. A LV and ULV chip likely went through different binning as their performance at the same settings varies because the process they are built on varies. The chips that work at the extremes (say Intel's extreme desktop processors or the lowest voltage CPUs they offer) are likely the top performers in their binning tests. Just because a chip can function as a LV doesn't mean it would meet the requirements for ULV, for example. However, if the ULV chip were to be scaled to the LV's parts speed and voltage, it would function just fine.
Evangelion
Apr 8, 05:03 AM
[B]Until Apple can get more of its own stores it needs BB more than BB needs it. So I doubt Apple went all hurt or p.o.'d girlfriend on them.
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
shawnce
Jul 27, 07:04 PM
looking at reference systems - for $2049, Gateway's Core 2 Duo gets the 2.4GHz/4MB L2 cache Conroe, 2GB of RAM from the factory, an x1900 512MB graphics card, 320GB hard drive, card reader and DL DVD burner.
make sure to note that is an ATI X1900 CrossFire XT adapter
make sure to note that is an ATI X1900 CrossFire XT adapter
FF_productions
Aug 15, 01:04 PM
My main interest is in FCP the FCP results.
On a fixed budget, does anyone know the advantage/disadvantage of going for the 2.0Ghz with 1900XT over 2.6Ghz with the std video card?
Video cards won't make a difference in FCP as of now if that's what you are asking performance wise. If you are using Motion/Games, anything that really feeds off the video card, then I'd go for the higher end video card.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
On a fixed budget, does anyone know the advantage/disadvantage of going for the 2.0Ghz with 1900XT over 2.6Ghz with the std video card?
Video cards won't make a difference in FCP as of now if that's what you are asking performance wise. If you are using Motion/Games, anything that really feeds off the video card, then I'd go for the higher end video card.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 11:30 AM
The US GSM carriers suck. T-Mobile has great customer service, but their coverage stinks. Cingular has great coverage, but they have BY FAR the worst customer service.
Plus EVDO beats the pants off of EDGE. And Verizon + Sprint + Amp'd + US Cellular + a bunch of other, smaller CDMA carriers account for over 60million potential customers in the US. If they only do a GSM version of the phone, it'll be a big mistake.
Plus EVDO beats the pants off of EDGE. And Verizon + Sprint + Amp'd + US Cellular + a bunch of other, smaller CDMA carriers account for over 60million potential customers in the US. If they only do a GSM version of the phone, it'll be a big mistake.
iGary
Aug 11, 11:19 AM
I've been looking at the Treo, but they're not easy to come by for Vodafone contract, if at all.
And they suck - I had a 600, which fell into the water and was replaced by insurance with a 650, which is only marginally better.
I don't believe the rumor - Steve wouldn't blab, he just wouldn't.
We only have a month to wait, though. :)
And they suck - I had a 600, which fell into the water and was replaced by insurance with a 650, which is only marginally better.
I don't believe the rumor - Steve wouldn't blab, he just wouldn't.
We only have a month to wait, though. :)
kiwi_the_iwik
Apr 6, 02:28 AM
My wishlist?
I'd love the option for fast HD compression and ftp transfer straight from the program.
Also, greater MXF support for P2, as well as metadata compatibility would be very welcome additions.
AVC-Intra would be brilliant (without having to constantly rewrap...), to go along with existing DVCPRO HD support.
Currently, we have to resort to 3rd party strategies for all of the above, which can be a major pain (and expense).
I'd love the option for fast HD compression and ftp transfer straight from the program.
Also, greater MXF support for P2, as well as metadata compatibility would be very welcome additions.
AVC-Intra would be brilliant (without having to constantly rewrap...), to go along with existing DVCPRO HD support.
Currently, we have to resort to 3rd party strategies for all of the above, which can be a major pain (and expense).
milo
Jul 27, 03:39 PM
It's always a little alarming when a post starts "sorry if I missed it but..."
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
The 2.7 G5 will be the highest clocked chip in a mac for a while, but probably not the fastest. In a number of benchmarks, Yonah has already beaten dual G5's, the conroes and woodrests will likely widen the gap even more.
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
The 2.7 G5 will be the highest clocked chip in a mac for a while, but probably not the fastest. In a number of benchmarks, Yonah has already beaten dual G5's, the conroes and woodrests will likely widen the gap even more.
bcharna
Aug 5, 10:17 PM
EVERYONE is missing something that MUST be updated A.S.A.P.!
AirPort Base Stations!
Express and especially the Extreme. The Extreme is YEARS old!!
:eek: :eek:
AirPort Base Stations!
Express and especially the Extreme. The Extreme is YEARS old!!
:eek: :eek:
KnightWRX
Apr 9, 06:17 AM
Most people use their MBA for browsing, youtube videos, email, office apps and perhaps video conferencing. None of which will be bottlenecked by the Intel IGP. If you're doing something above and beyond this that will be negatively affected by the CPU, you are in fact, the minority.
Fixed that there for you. ;)
Goes both ways really. It's just that more casual tasks (ie, gaming and watching videos) max out the GPU more than they do the CPU. CPU bottlenecks are usually caused by niche tasks like video editing/raw photo editing/scientific number crunching.
Fixed that there for you. ;)
Goes both ways really. It's just that more casual tasks (ie, gaming and watching videos) max out the GPU more than they do the CPU. CPU bottlenecks are usually caused by niche tasks like video editing/raw photo editing/scientific number crunching.
Trowaman
Aug 7, 01:22 AM
Ok, my predictions:
Leopard (iChat 4.0 ready to go for the iPhone)
Mac Pro
XServe (MacServe?)
new displays (iSights and probably IR. If I get my wish, S-Video and RCA in)
Paris: All about the iTunes and iPod ending with Steve saying available worldwide "except here." Possible iPhone here.
the other 4 Macs will be upgraded at some point going into Q1 with MBP and iMac getting Core 2 and MB and Minis getting the top Core Duos.
Leopard (iChat 4.0 ready to go for the iPhone)
Mac Pro
XServe (MacServe?)
new displays (iSights and probably IR. If I get my wish, S-Video and RCA in)
Paris: All about the iTunes and iPod ending with Steve saying available worldwide "except here." Possible iPhone here.
the other 4 Macs will be upgraded at some point going into Q1 with MBP and iMac getting Core 2 and MB and Minis getting the top Core Duos.
Tones2
Apr 11, 01:39 PM
Yeah, like all those trailblazing Android tablets that are 1-2 years ahead of the iPad, right? :rolleyes:
I'm talking PHONE. Wait 2 years or so on the tablets and it'll be the same thing. Apple just got too big of a head start on tablets.
Tony
I'm talking PHONE. Wait 2 years or so on the tablets and it'll be the same thing. Apple just got too big of a head start on tablets.
Tony
daneoni
Aug 25, 08:26 PM
Right. Because the whole "if your battery's serial number falls within this range, this range, or this range" concept was so terribly difficult to grasp.
No, because different versions of the ranges were initially posted only recently has it been clarified...get with the program and stop trying to be a smartass
No, because different versions of the ranges were initially posted only recently has it been clarified...get with the program and stop trying to be a smartass
