StealthRider
Aug 26, 03:59 PM
Old, but still funny. A little :p
0815
Apr 6, 02:34 PM
This can't be right. MR posters have assured me that the Xoom is better than the iPad. I mean, if you can't trust MR posters, whom can you trust?
Ballmer?
As someone who likes his Apple products, part of me laughs seeing numbers like this for the Xoom, but the other part thinks the same thing you post above--that Apple needs to have a successful competitor in the space to keep Apple's progress from stagnating. More competition will make them take bigger steps more quickly.
As long as SJ has some say he (and Apple) will follow his vision, not the competition (and this is a good thing) - the competition will follow Apple [Remember how Android Phone Prototypes looked like before the iPhone was out - just a copy of BlackBerry phones]
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
Maybe it should be put in these words: iOS was designed for the iPhone with a tablet in mind ....
I didn't know the "proposing Linux" part, very interesting - do you have any links on this so that I can read up on it?
Ballmer?
As someone who likes his Apple products, part of me laughs seeing numbers like this for the Xoom, but the other part thinks the same thing you post above--that Apple needs to have a successful competitor in the space to keep Apple's progress from stagnating. More competition will make them take bigger steps more quickly.
As long as SJ has some say he (and Apple) will follow his vision, not the competition (and this is a good thing) - the competition will follow Apple [Remember how Android Phone Prototypes looked like before the iPhone was out - just a copy of BlackBerry phones]
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
Maybe it should be put in these words: iOS was designed for the iPhone with a tablet in mind ....
I didn't know the "proposing Linux" part, very interesting - do you have any links on this so that I can read up on it?
nsjoker
Aug 17, 01:41 AM
lol you mac folk and your photoshop :D
let's get some game benchmarks :rolleyes:
let's get some game benchmarks :rolleyes:
macman2790
Sep 19, 07:36 AM
apple store isn't down yet. I don't expect it today like a lot of people do
wnurse
Aug 26, 09:49 AM
Dude. You bought Rev. A machines. I've bought -- EIGHTEEN Macs over the past two years and -- nope NO problems. Granted, they are all PowerPc Macs. Just bought the final Rev. PowerPC 12" Powerbook G4 last week. I'm pleased as punch.
Sorry about your luck but you bought Rev. A machines. The only Rev A machine I ever bought from Apple was the Titanium (tibook) 400mhz G4 Powerbook in August of 2001. Three years later, almost to the day the warranty ended, Apple replaced almost the whole machine under Applecare. That was about my only trouble with Apple, and the problem with the machine was that I was really scared and all thumbs when it came to putting in a stick of memory -- broke the holders and they sent a whole new logic board. That machine is still going strong, with a DayStar CPU upgrade, in a friend's office, and it's got years left in her.
Three of my friends still are on 1998 and 1999 iMacs, going strong with new harddrives only. Two of my other friends are on 2001 and 2000 year iMacs -- one with the same hard drive. Two friends are on 2001/2000 iBooks, going strong. My sister and two other friends are on year 2002 iMacs. All kicking butt. Personally, I prefer my year 2002 667mhz VGA Titanium Powerbook (on it right now) to my other machines and will be upgrading the CPU to 1.2ghz in a few months at Daystar. All to say that Apple makes kickbutt machines. Sorry about your luck. Oh, and again, forgot to mention that since i've been on Apple since 1989, I never had a virus. I bought NOrton Anti Virus out of ignorance once inthe 90's and once in but promptly took it off the puters, unnecessary.
If I were you, I'd have started off with the top of the line G5 2.1ghz 20" iMac (with iSight) and a 14" 1.42ghz iBook. You understand, these are the top of the line of the great PowerPC line of Apple products. It's like buying a 1989 560SL Mercedes (last year) or a 1968 Mustang convertible. I'd ask Apple for a trade 'em in for your rev a machines at least until Rev C Mactels.
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
Sorry about your luck but you bought Rev. A machines. The only Rev A machine I ever bought from Apple was the Titanium (tibook) 400mhz G4 Powerbook in August of 2001. Three years later, almost to the day the warranty ended, Apple replaced almost the whole machine under Applecare. That was about my only trouble with Apple, and the problem with the machine was that I was really scared and all thumbs when it came to putting in a stick of memory -- broke the holders and they sent a whole new logic board. That machine is still going strong, with a DayStar CPU upgrade, in a friend's office, and it's got years left in her.
Three of my friends still are on 1998 and 1999 iMacs, going strong with new harddrives only. Two of my other friends are on 2001 and 2000 year iMacs -- one with the same hard drive. Two friends are on 2001/2000 iBooks, going strong. My sister and two other friends are on year 2002 iMacs. All kicking butt. Personally, I prefer my year 2002 667mhz VGA Titanium Powerbook (on it right now) to my other machines and will be upgrading the CPU to 1.2ghz in a few months at Daystar. All to say that Apple makes kickbutt machines. Sorry about your luck. Oh, and again, forgot to mention that since i've been on Apple since 1989, I never had a virus. I bought NOrton Anti Virus out of ignorance once inthe 90's and once in but promptly took it off the puters, unnecessary.
If I were you, I'd have started off with the top of the line G5 2.1ghz 20" iMac (with iSight) and a 14" 1.42ghz iBook. You understand, these are the top of the line of the great PowerPC line of Apple products. It's like buying a 1989 560SL Mercedes (last year) or a 1968 Mustang convertible. I'd ask Apple for a trade 'em in for your rev a machines at least until Rev C Mactels.
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
Bill McEnaney
Feb 28, 12:52 PM
What is a "gay lifestyle" exactly? We get up, take a shower, brush our teeth, go to work and come home to our families just like anyone else.
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
notabadname
Mar 22, 04:06 PM
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
1st point: It's factually inaccurate to make your first statement, as evidenced by your last statement. Kind of funny, don't you think?
In your second statement, you are comparing all Android software-running phones to a single model/product line, the iPhone. The iPhone (each generation) has out sold any single phone model (generation) over it's life than that of any offered by any other hardware manufacturer.
Your comparison is like saying Toyota has sold more cars than Ford has sold F-150s. That may be true, but the F-150 is still the number one selling truck in the US, even though it does not outsell the sum total of all other trucks by all other manufacturers.
You should compare a single phone model, say Motorola Droid or HTC Incredible. You are simply talking software. Apple is primarily a hardware company that happens to make the software for its hardware. (yes, I know about FCP and other software) They do not license the iOS software to other manufacturers, so comparison to Google's OS and number of DIFFERENT phones it runs on is really irrelevant to whether any hardware manufacturer has had a more successful phone than the iPhone.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
1st point: It's factually inaccurate to make your first statement, as evidenced by your last statement. Kind of funny, don't you think?
In your second statement, you are comparing all Android software-running phones to a single model/product line, the iPhone. The iPhone (each generation) has out sold any single phone model (generation) over it's life than that of any offered by any other hardware manufacturer.
Your comparison is like saying Toyota has sold more cars than Ford has sold F-150s. That may be true, but the F-150 is still the number one selling truck in the US, even though it does not outsell the sum total of all other trucks by all other manufacturers.
You should compare a single phone model, say Motorola Droid or HTC Incredible. You are simply talking software. Apple is primarily a hardware company that happens to make the software for its hardware. (yes, I know about FCP and other software) They do not license the iOS software to other manufacturers, so comparison to Google's OS and number of DIFFERENT phones it runs on is really irrelevant to whether any hardware manufacturer has had a more successful phone than the iPhone.
whooleytoo
Apr 27, 08:48 AM
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
Because, despite how Apple excel at so many things, when it comes to handling user (quality or privacy) concerns like this, they suck.
Look at their responses to the iPhone 4 antenna issue:
"You're holding it wrong" - Blame the customer.
'Every phone has the same issue' - Our phone is bad, but no worse than anyone else's
'Let's change how the signal bars are displayed' - Let's hide the problem.
'Let's give a bumper case with the iPhone' - Let's offer a solution to some users, to get them off our back for a problem we used to deny even existed.
I'm not even saying the antenna issue was a serious problem, but Apple's dismissive attitude is only throwing fuel on the fire. If they had tackled it quicker, it would be never have been newsworthy.
It's great that Apple are addressing this (location) issue much quicker, but still it only is happening after they initially denied there was any issue, and waiting for the furore to grow before acting.
Because, despite how Apple excel at so many things, when it comes to handling user (quality or privacy) concerns like this, they suck.
Look at their responses to the iPhone 4 antenna issue:
"You're holding it wrong" - Blame the customer.
'Every phone has the same issue' - Our phone is bad, but no worse than anyone else's
'Let's change how the signal bars are displayed' - Let's hide the problem.
'Let's give a bumper case with the iPhone' - Let's offer a solution to some users, to get them off our back for a problem we used to deny even existed.
I'm not even saying the antenna issue was a serious problem, but Apple's dismissive attitude is only throwing fuel on the fire. If they had tackled it quicker, it would be never have been newsworthy.
It's great that Apple are addressing this (location) issue much quicker, but still it only is happening after they initially denied there was any issue, and waiting for the furore to grow before acting.
skunk
Mar 24, 02:01 PM
discussion of motives of GOP opposition to the intervention is germane.Germane, maybe, but inevitably tainted by generalisation if applied to a whole party.
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 08:55 AM
I agree, increasing the number of cores can't be the only solution on long term. In my opinion it's time to rethink CPUs: Single, maybe dual core, high processing* power with extremly low power consumption, much lower than we have nowadays.
* Whatever that exactly means, I don't know.
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
* Whatever that exactly means, I don't know.
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
Lollypop
Jul 20, 08:41 AM
It's the future, you know, soon the clock speed will be irrelevant and we'll be expressing processor speed in number of cores octocore, hexacore, tricontradicore, hexacontetracore, hecticosoctocore, and such and such
At some point your going to have deminished returns. Sure multimedia apps can take advantage of a few more cores, but I dont see Mail running faster on 4 cores, nevermind 2! The nice thing about intel is that they seem to realise that, and have invested in improved IO as well, look at Pci express and SATA, you can have the fastest processor in the world, but if your running it with 512megs of memory your going to slow down fast!
draw the New York Yankees
New York Yankees Logo PSD
2004 New York Yankees Team
phenomenon-new-york-yankee-new
NEW YORK -- Before Tuesday
New York Yankees - Manchester
New York Yankees v
New York Yankees Wool
At some point your going to have deminished returns. Sure multimedia apps can take advantage of a few more cores, but I dont see Mail running faster on 4 cores, nevermind 2! The nice thing about intel is that they seem to realise that, and have invested in improved IO as well, look at Pci express and SATA, you can have the fastest processor in the world, but if your running it with 512megs of memory your going to slow down fast!
AidenShaw
Sep 16, 12:09 AM
Dude I'm going to sell my dell.
And buy a new Dell with these same chips and features ;)
And buy a new Dell with these same chips and features ;)
Mtn Tamale
Jul 14, 03:27 PM
If they use single woodcrest CPU's instead of Conroe in the lower end, it isn't because marketing is driving the decision, it would likely be manufacturing and operations, probably a volume/pricing decision. If the most popular Powermacs are low and high end, which I believe is true, then there is benefit to making all Woodcrest. If Apple only populated the scantily sold highest end model with Woodcrest chips they would likely have to sell them for too much.
I'm talking about Core2 Duo machines - either Conroe or Woodcrest.
Ports? My G5 tower had no more ports than any other PC I've seen. My current CD iMac actually lacks any kind of high-speed port for external hard-drives or burners.
Software? OK, I know it's supposed to be a selling point, but there's not a damn thing outside of iTunes I use in iLife enough to justify hardware prices at any level. They're nice freebies, but I happily pay the Apple Tax to have an OS that works with me rather than against me. Unquestionably worth it, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm getting good value in the (theoretical) hardware.
I think I know what the apologists will say - no one else will offer Woodcrest in a low-end pro machine, they'll use Conroe. And yeah, that's probably true, but for a reason - there's no reason to put Woodcrest in the low-end tower offering, aside from a desire to perpetuate the artifical line distinctions. Which isn't going to cut it in the Intel world.
I'm talking about Core2 Duo machines - either Conroe or Woodcrest.
Ports? My G5 tower had no more ports than any other PC I've seen. My current CD iMac actually lacks any kind of high-speed port for external hard-drives or burners.
Software? OK, I know it's supposed to be a selling point, but there's not a damn thing outside of iTunes I use in iLife enough to justify hardware prices at any level. They're nice freebies, but I happily pay the Apple Tax to have an OS that works with me rather than against me. Unquestionably worth it, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm getting good value in the (theoretical) hardware.
I think I know what the apologists will say - no one else will offer Woodcrest in a low-end pro machine, they'll use Conroe. And yeah, that's probably true, but for a reason - there's no reason to put Woodcrest in the low-end tower offering, aside from a desire to perpetuate the artifical line distinctions. Which isn't going to cut it in the Intel world.
davidcmc
Apr 6, 02:11 PM
It's funny because appletards tend to speak about numbers in different ways.
When it's related to Macs, they say they sell less than PCs but they're still much better.
When it's related to tablets, they say the iPad sells more because it's better.
So, I'm under the impression that the iPad is just like a "PC-like" market, which everyone buys because someone told it's cheaper and better.
That's what appletards say about PCs, isn't that? Something like an underground market that avoids people from knowing the "real quality" of Macs.
Ps: lol.
When it's related to Macs, they say they sell less than PCs but they're still much better.
When it's related to tablets, they say the iPad sells more because it's better.
So, I'm under the impression that the iPad is just like a "PC-like" market, which everyone buys because someone told it's cheaper and better.
That's what appletards say about PCs, isn't that? Something like an underground market that avoids people from knowing the "real quality" of Macs.
Ps: lol.
cherry38
Aug 11, 05:04 PM
You might want to read some reviews on the Chocolate before buying it. I've seen a handful of reviews that were less than favorable.
A good resource is Phonescoop.com. They usually have a decent amount of user reviews upon which you can base your purchasing decisions.
I just bought a chocolate and I absolutely love it. Great battery, great sound, best reception out of any Verizon phone I'd ever had.
The best thing - IT DOESN'T HAVE THE STANDARD VERIZON USER INTERFACE! I really hate how Verizon forces that onto all of their phones now.
I'd say go for it :)
A good resource is Phonescoop.com. They usually have a decent amount of user reviews upon which you can base your purchasing decisions.
I just bought a chocolate and I absolutely love it. Great battery, great sound, best reception out of any Verizon phone I'd ever had.
The best thing - IT DOESN'T HAVE THE STANDARD VERIZON USER INTERFACE! I really hate how Verizon forces that onto all of their phones now.
I'd say go for it :)
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 20, 10:51 AM
Depends on which model. The AT&T/Rogers Galaxy S Captivate hardly ressembles the iPhone :
http://www.droiddog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/att-samsung-captivate-photo-1.jpg
I'm also hard-pressed to see how the Nexus S comes even close :
http://blog.eches.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/samsung-nexus-s.jpg
Let's not even go there with the Epic 4G :
http://handies.phandroid.com/media/samsung-epic-4g-1288875927-196.jpg
Yet they are all included in the complaint...
Of course. Apple invented the phone, the computer, the GUI, the mouse, etc etc etc. :rolleyes:
http://www.droiddog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/att-samsung-captivate-photo-1.jpg
I'm also hard-pressed to see how the Nexus S comes even close :
http://blog.eches.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/samsung-nexus-s.jpg
Let's not even go there with the Epic 4G :
http://handies.phandroid.com/media/samsung-epic-4g-1288875927-196.jpg
Yet they are all included in the complaint...
Of course. Apple invented the phone, the computer, the GUI, the mouse, etc etc etc. :rolleyes:
Gatesbasher
Mar 31, 09:06 PM
Yeah! That's what'll happen!
Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.
To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.
To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.
And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.
Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
The everyday user has been buying Android phones in large numbers because they're cheap and are available on more carriers. This is not about everyday users, it's about the Fandroids who have been screaming "'Open' good, 'closed' bad!!" at the top of their lungs for the last three years.
I stand by my three groups: 1�indiscriminate Apple-haters (like you), 2�people who just want a team to root for: "Go Android!!" Right or wrong, and 3�the true believers in the open-source religion.
Now as I said before, the only truly "open" phones would be FreeRunners that Stallman assembles in his Mom's basement from components gleaned from dumpsters and hands out for free, so I have no idea what new savior they'll turn to to save them from the tyrant Jobs. Be funny if it was Microsoft!
And no, I see no "bias" in the article�I think you're using the Rupert Murdoch definition: "Facts I don't want anybody to hear."
Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.
To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.
To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.
And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.
Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
The everyday user has been buying Android phones in large numbers because they're cheap and are available on more carriers. This is not about everyday users, it's about the Fandroids who have been screaming "'Open' good, 'closed' bad!!" at the top of their lungs for the last three years.
I stand by my three groups: 1�indiscriminate Apple-haters (like you), 2�people who just want a team to root for: "Go Android!!" Right or wrong, and 3�the true believers in the open-source religion.
Now as I said before, the only truly "open" phones would be FreeRunners that Stallman assembles in his Mom's basement from components gleaned from dumpsters and hands out for free, so I have no idea what new savior they'll turn to to save them from the tyrant Jobs. Be funny if it was Microsoft!
And no, I see no "bias" in the article�I think you're using the Rupert Murdoch definition: "Facts I don't want anybody to hear."
gnasher729
Aug 17, 03:44 AM
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
Could you give some evidence for that, except that they are underclocked on the MacBook Pro _when they are idle_?
Could you give some evidence for that, except that they are underclocked on the MacBook Pro _when they are idle_?
Infrared
Apr 11, 07:56 AM
LOL, if you think final cut is from the 90's then Avid Media Composer is from the 50's. It's horrible GUI. I wouldn't learn it, if they paid me big bucks. Well I take that back, I would, but I would hate it. Avid Looks like a POS, the graphics designers at Avid have always been behind though. Look at Protools.
No kidding!
280734
Where's Picasso when you need him? :-)
Avid image was from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYw4vvr7Aq4
No kidding!
280734
Where's Picasso when you need him? :-)
Avid image was from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYw4vvr7Aq4
louden
Aug 27, 06:36 PM
IF new MBPs are announced tomorrow
and
IF people who had ordered new MBPs see their ship dates slip
Then wouldn't that signal that prices won't change for the various models from existing prices AND that we shouldn't assume drastic shell changes? Sure they can give us easy access and a magnetic lid, but no options on a glossy screen and no black anodized aluminum.
If I were Apple, I'd hold off on the black aluminum for a few months to get a few of us suckers to buy two of the damn things... Malibu Stacy Marketing 101.
and
IF people who had ordered new MBPs see their ship dates slip
Then wouldn't that signal that prices won't change for the various models from existing prices AND that we shouldn't assume drastic shell changes? Sure they can give us easy access and a magnetic lid, but no options on a glossy screen and no black anodized aluminum.
If I were Apple, I'd hold off on the black aluminum for a few months to get a few of us suckers to buy two of the damn things... Malibu Stacy Marketing 101.
hulugu
Mar 22, 01:02 AM
This makes me want to go have lunch at the Cafe My Lai.
Oh wow, I didn't catch that until now.
Oh wow, I didn't catch that until now.
Phobophobia
Jul 20, 01:24 PM
More like $13,950
:rolleyes:
You're both wrong. The price is infinite because it doesn't exist, and yet there is demand. ;)
:rolleyes:
You're both wrong. The price is infinite because it doesn't exist, and yet there is demand. ;)
jonnysods
Mar 31, 02:43 PM
Suckaz. What a mess.
matticus008
Nov 29, 06:30 AM
It goes to court and the 'Pirate' successfully argues that he/she has already compensated UMG by buying the iPod/Zune. The judge agrees and piracy of Universal music becomes legal so long as it's for the 'UMG taxed' iPod or Zune.
Only if all the lawyers and judges in the room are asleep at the wheel, and even then only if that mass narcolepsy extends to all appellate and supreme courts above that one for the several months it would take to shut down any of the major labels.
It would be an interesting case, and yes, it is possible.
So is teleporation, but I'm not camping out in any lines.
Only if all the lawyers and judges in the room are asleep at the wheel, and even then only if that mass narcolepsy extends to all appellate and supreme courts above that one for the several months it would take to shut down any of the major labels.
It would be an interesting case, and yes, it is possible.
So is teleporation, but I'm not camping out in any lines.
