praetorian909
Sep 13, 07:34 AM
Does anyone know how to get into the quick search on the 5G iPods? I updated mine with the 1.2 software but I only see the quick scrolling letter thing.
It seems like this feature is only available only on the new iPod (as many people previously mentioned). I can't help but wonder if this was purposefully left out, because you'd think it be easily added in a firmware update.
Oh well, the quick scroll thing is good enough for me...
It seems like this feature is only available only on the new iPod (as many people previously mentioned). I can't help but wonder if this was purposefully left out, because you'd think it be easily added in a firmware update.
Oh well, the quick scroll thing is good enough for me...
h00ligan
Apr 20, 10:53 AM
Is there a windows app for reading the data... Or cydia?
StudioGuy
Sep 10, 09:50 PM
An $800 difference in 2.66 to 3.0 GHz Xeon?
Actually, look at the Dell Precision 490 Workstation - going from dual 3.0 (Intel 5160) down to a dual 2.66 (Intel 5150) is $410/processor, or an $820 difference in price. Not Apple pushing that one.
I'm guessing any 8-core machine will initially be a top-entry (ala "fastest") if it is introduced too soon, and not affect the whole lineup. Otherwise I will have more trouble convincing myself to buy the dual 3.0 now :). That Mac + iPod promo ends this week!
Actually, look at the Dell Precision 490 Workstation - going from dual 3.0 (Intel 5160) down to a dual 2.66 (Intel 5150) is $410/processor, or an $820 difference in price. Not Apple pushing that one.
I'm guessing any 8-core machine will initially be a top-entry (ala "fastest") if it is introduced too soon, and not affect the whole lineup. Otherwise I will have more trouble convincing myself to buy the dual 3.0 now :). That Mac + iPod promo ends this week!
yellowballoon
Mar 29, 12:11 PM
Apple still doesn't have upload to a cloud or wireless syncing, and Windows Phone does. 25 GB free sky drive, as well as a beautiful hub where you choose what to access at a glance. In iOS, you have to flick and flick, especially if you have many apps. The wireless syncing is slick. Facebook integration flawless. WP7 also now has cut, copy, and paste and HTML5 before the end of the year. I'm sorry, but hooking up with the largest mobile phone manufacture is a no brainer.
DeathChill
Apr 30, 11:59 PM
I was wondering why so many people are so opposed to Apple offering Blu-Ray as a BTO option. I have read where Steve Jobs spoke negatively about Blu-Ray, I wonder if these same people would be all gung-ho for BR if Jobs had spoken positively about it?
This is true; a lot of people will side with Jobs/Apple without understanding the issue. However, I think that there are valid reasons for the current Blu-Ray issue as I understand it. I think to allow playback of Blu-Ray content, Apple is forced to lock down certain aspects of software (apparently at kernel level?) and it's a hard-sell, I guess.
Here's a translated article:
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2009/10/14/native-blu-ray-playback-in-mac-os-x-right-owners-block-implementation
This is true; a lot of people will side with Jobs/Apple without understanding the issue. However, I think that there are valid reasons for the current Blu-Ray issue as I understand it. I think to allow playback of Blu-Ray content, Apple is forced to lock down certain aspects of software (apparently at kernel level?) and it's a hard-sell, I guess.
Here's a translated article:
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2009/10/14/native-blu-ray-playback-in-mac-os-x-right-owners-block-implementation
steve_hill4
Sep 8, 01:49 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Apple released no details to retailers prior to an announcement, or if they did, they had an NDA to prevent that information leaking out to the public.
One person at work, (who seems to be desperate to know when the new iPods will be out), contacted our head offices to speak to the people in charge of buying in new products and the quantities. She was assured our branch would have "new iPods" by next Saturday.
1. If this is true, it fits in with the Tuesday announcement
2. They may have been telling her about new stocks, (unlikely since we haven't been having stock issues of late)
3. Our buyers have given us information before that has never materialised
4. It's pretty obvious to most, especially those that visit rumour sites like me, that after one year, new models are on their way, and the special event on Tuesday will see them announced
5. She is new and doesn't understand how the company works. If we were to get them in by Saturday 16th, they would have to arrive at our national warehouse around the 12th or 14th at the absolute latest. That would mean going by other shipping beforehand, the latest they could leave China would be perhaps Monday.
Since no other information like this has come forward, I remain sceptical we will get them in by then, but we got the nanos after 7 days last year, so it is possible. Four days is unlikely though, so they would have to ship them before they are announced. This would come back to others leaking information about boxes shipping and I haven't heard much along those lines yet. I again say though I remain fully confident in them being announced on Tuesday, just sceptical of the information that was given. If it was genuine, I think Apple needs to remind all of their NDAs.
We shall see.
One person at work, (who seems to be desperate to know when the new iPods will be out), contacted our head offices to speak to the people in charge of buying in new products and the quantities. She was assured our branch would have "new iPods" by next Saturday.
1. If this is true, it fits in with the Tuesday announcement
2. They may have been telling her about new stocks, (unlikely since we haven't been having stock issues of late)
3. Our buyers have given us information before that has never materialised
4. It's pretty obvious to most, especially those that visit rumour sites like me, that after one year, new models are on their way, and the special event on Tuesday will see them announced
5. She is new and doesn't understand how the company works. If we were to get them in by Saturday 16th, they would have to arrive at our national warehouse around the 12th or 14th at the absolute latest. That would mean going by other shipping beforehand, the latest they could leave China would be perhaps Monday.
Since no other information like this has come forward, I remain sceptical we will get them in by then, but we got the nanos after 7 days last year, so it is possible. Four days is unlikely though, so they would have to ship them before they are announced. This would come back to others leaking information about boxes shipping and I haven't heard much along those lines yet. I again say though I remain fully confident in them being announced on Tuesday, just sceptical of the information that was given. If it was genuine, I think Apple needs to remind all of their NDAs.
We shall see.
Bubba Satori
Mar 29, 03:24 PM
Wow, the natives are restless. IDC are just haters.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/2/1362599_02bcdea730.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/2/1362599_02bcdea730.jpg
aurichie
Apr 28, 05:51 PM
We've won everybody!!! :D :D :D :D :D We've really won!!!! :apple: :apple: :apple: :apple:
I'm going to crack open a bottle of champagne now and celebrate. :cool:
I'm going to crack open a bottle of champagne now and celebrate. :cool:
goron59
May 3, 10:30 AM
Isn't a single TB bus capable of driving more than one display.... so can you drive two displays from a single port?
Might need a powered hub perhaps.. Dunno.
:confused:
Might need a powered hub perhaps.. Dunno.
:confused:
Eidorian
Apr 14, 01:10 PM
The real question that I haven't seen anyone ask, is will this be Intel only or will other chipsets/manufacturers support it as well.It appears to be Intel only for now and it is a rather large controller compared to USB 3.0 ones.
Intel gave many other vendors a field day for profits by not supporting USB 3.0 on their PCH. Though this did drive boards costs up and certain vendors preferred to wait for Intel to simply include support. To be honest, it only appears to be Apple.
Intel gave many other vendors a field day for profits by not supporting USB 3.0 on their PCH. Though this did drive boards costs up and certain vendors preferred to wait for Intel to simply include support. To be honest, it only appears to be Apple.
hcho3
Apr 19, 09:20 AM
Respond strongly? You mean defend yourself?
Samsung has almost no chance of winning against apple in this lawsuit in phone design/UI and etc.
Samsung clearly copied apple. Samsung phones were nothing like Galaxy S phones until iPhone came out in 2007.
Samsung did copy apple. They are about to lose billions of dollars on this one.
Samsung has almost no chance of winning against apple in this lawsuit in phone design/UI and etc.
Samsung clearly copied apple. Samsung phones were nothing like Galaxy S phones until iPhone came out in 2007.
Samsung did copy apple. They are about to lose billions of dollars on this one.
spicyapple
Sep 10, 06:36 AM
The Woodcrest MacPro will suddenly feel very old if Apple manage to put Cloverton in MacPro early next year.
It appears I will be living in a cardboard box under a bridge sooner than I expected. :) All these juicy new Apples will put me in the poor house!
It appears I will be living in a cardboard box under a bridge sooner than I expected. :) All these juicy new Apples will put me in the poor house!
peharri
Sep 18, 07:52 AM
I'm sure I late getting into the argument, and that fanboyism depending on what network youre own will not change, but I really think GSM does have better voice quality than any other network.
(Before I begin, quick terminology comment: I'm going to avoid "CDMA" and use the term "IS-95" instead - I try to avoid using terms like "CDMA" and "TDMA" because it generally confuses people. Many think the next version of GSM, UMTS, is actually IS95, because it incorporates a CDMA air interface called W-CDMA, for instance. Others think GSM is the same thing as the D-AMPS/IS-136 system used by (the various phone companies that became) Cingular until they started moving to GSM because both have a "TDMA" air interface and IS-136 is usually called "TDMA".) In practice, UMTS and IS95 have almost nothing in common, UMTS is a revision of GSM, and GSM has almost nothing in common with IS-136. )
There's no way to compare the two. Both IS-95 and GSM implement a variety of different codecs that are provided differently by different operators. In the area I live, Cingular (GSM) tries to force many phones to use something called AMR-HR, which has "acceptable" voice quality when you have good reception, and drops to barely incomprehensable with any deterioration in signal strength. T-Mobile (GSM) clearly doesn't, and I can talk and listen to someone with both of us sounding like we're on a landline with one bar of signal. On the same phone.
Likewise, Verizon (IS-95) uses some awful bitrate codec for its network where I live (I believe they're heavily oversubscribed here) where pretty much everyone sounds like they're dying from some serious lung problem, and Sprint PCS (IS-95 too) doesn't and generally the call quality, at medium to good reception, seems pretty much ok. Sub-landline, but not seriously so.
With the variety of voice codecs the operators use, you can't really make a fair judgement merely on the basis of network technology. Either the operator's cheap, or it isn't. IS-95 was chosen by many networks on the basis that it's spectrum efficient (ie it's cheap), but on the other hand Sprint PCS was always content with call drops when I used it to handle network overloading rather than seriously compromising on call quality. Cingular's move to GSM has caused problems in that it's using a significantly less spectrum efficient technology than the technology it replaced, so Cingular's had to, in many places, hopefully temporarily, use the crappy half-rate codecs to boost capacity until it can get more towers online.
I wouldn't use voice quality as a way to judge the technologies.
(Before I begin, quick terminology comment: I'm going to avoid "CDMA" and use the term "IS-95" instead - I try to avoid using terms like "CDMA" and "TDMA" because it generally confuses people. Many think the next version of GSM, UMTS, is actually IS95, because it incorporates a CDMA air interface called W-CDMA, for instance. Others think GSM is the same thing as the D-AMPS/IS-136 system used by (the various phone companies that became) Cingular until they started moving to GSM because both have a "TDMA" air interface and IS-136 is usually called "TDMA".) In practice, UMTS and IS95 have almost nothing in common, UMTS is a revision of GSM, and GSM has almost nothing in common with IS-136. )
There's no way to compare the two. Both IS-95 and GSM implement a variety of different codecs that are provided differently by different operators. In the area I live, Cingular (GSM) tries to force many phones to use something called AMR-HR, which has "acceptable" voice quality when you have good reception, and drops to barely incomprehensable with any deterioration in signal strength. T-Mobile (GSM) clearly doesn't, and I can talk and listen to someone with both of us sounding like we're on a landline with one bar of signal. On the same phone.
Likewise, Verizon (IS-95) uses some awful bitrate codec for its network where I live (I believe they're heavily oversubscribed here) where pretty much everyone sounds like they're dying from some serious lung problem, and Sprint PCS (IS-95 too) doesn't and generally the call quality, at medium to good reception, seems pretty much ok. Sub-landline, but not seriously so.
With the variety of voice codecs the operators use, you can't really make a fair judgement merely on the basis of network technology. Either the operator's cheap, or it isn't. IS-95 was chosen by many networks on the basis that it's spectrum efficient (ie it's cheap), but on the other hand Sprint PCS was always content with call drops when I used it to handle network overloading rather than seriously compromising on call quality. Cingular's move to GSM has caused problems in that it's using a significantly less spectrum efficient technology than the technology it replaced, so Cingular's had to, in many places, hopefully temporarily, use the crappy half-rate codecs to boost capacity until it can get more towers online.
I wouldn't use voice quality as a way to judge the technologies.
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 07:24 AM
Samsung running Android look very very similar to Apple's, to the point where it causes confusion in the marketplace for consumers. I've seen several people mistake one of these things for an iPhone because they look that similar. It's a combination of Google's Android and Samsung's hardware.
This confusion is no accident, that was the intent all along. There is no reason why they could not create their own look and feel... change it up enough so it's not an obvious copy. Other handset makers have been able to do that.
This confusion is no accident, that was the intent all along. There is no reason why they could not create their own look and feel... change it up enough so it's not an obvious copy. Other handset makers have been able to do that.
MacBram
Apr 28, 05:18 PM
You do realize that this image could end up biting Apple in the butt? In 3 years time the iPad will be where the iPhone is now: Loosing some (not all) of its marketshare to the knockoffs.
Unless Apple has a new iToy (I.e not an MP3 player, phone or tablet) ready for say 3-4 years from now, they wont get any bigger than they now are.
More likely scenario: in three years time both the iPhone and the iPad will be where the iPod is.
With the iPod, Apple started with a high end, expensive device. People still bought it in droves. Later Apple varied it and introduced cheaper, smaller models. There are no effective competitors.
As the device matures and the Market for mp3 players is saturated, Apple takes it in a new direction and adds iOS and apps. They sell fewer, but most of those sold are mow iPod Touches.
With iPhone, Apple again started with the high-end. They haven't even begun to produce differentiated models.
With iPad, Apple has hit a sweet spot really early on -- the competition is in shambles and has no-where to go. Where are the competitive knock-offs at any price, let alone cheaper prices?
In three years, Apple is going to:
A) have three more years of experience with these devices (and who is matching the maturity of their devices today) -- particularly as Apple products are often the bench mark and define their respective industries/markets.
B) have a fully operational data centre online for three years
C) have even more and better control of components and supply chain
D) have even more high profile shops in more countries
E) have even more sales in China and India
F) have even more experience at designing and producing their own unique SoCs for their devices while competitors have to make do with all the same off-the-shelf power-hungry parts, and same off-the-shelf half-baked operating systems.
G) still remain unconcerned about its marketshare, having been making HALF the revenue and profits of the ENTIRE industry already!
Really, no-one even three years ago predicated the success of the iPhone or the existence of the iPad. What makes you think that three years is going to be more favourable to Apple competitors than to Apple?
Anyway, I wouldn't count out the possibility of new "iToys", but don't forget the MacBook Air, either. This redesigned, second gen model has been flying off the shelves the last few months. Lion is about to be released and MacBook Pros are getting refreshed. Apple never has stood still, why would they start standing still for the next three years!
Unless Apple has a new iToy (I.e not an MP3 player, phone or tablet) ready for say 3-4 years from now, they wont get any bigger than they now are.
More likely scenario: in three years time both the iPhone and the iPad will be where the iPod is.
With the iPod, Apple started with a high end, expensive device. People still bought it in droves. Later Apple varied it and introduced cheaper, smaller models. There are no effective competitors.
As the device matures and the Market for mp3 players is saturated, Apple takes it in a new direction and adds iOS and apps. They sell fewer, but most of those sold are mow iPod Touches.
With iPhone, Apple again started with the high-end. They haven't even begun to produce differentiated models.
With iPad, Apple has hit a sweet spot really early on -- the competition is in shambles and has no-where to go. Where are the competitive knock-offs at any price, let alone cheaper prices?
In three years, Apple is going to:
A) have three more years of experience with these devices (and who is matching the maturity of their devices today) -- particularly as Apple products are often the bench mark and define their respective industries/markets.
B) have a fully operational data centre online for three years
C) have even more and better control of components and supply chain
D) have even more high profile shops in more countries
E) have even more sales in China and India
F) have even more experience at designing and producing their own unique SoCs for their devices while competitors have to make do with all the same off-the-shelf power-hungry parts, and same off-the-shelf half-baked operating systems.
G) still remain unconcerned about its marketshare, having been making HALF the revenue and profits of the ENTIRE industry already!
Really, no-one even three years ago predicated the success of the iPhone or the existence of the iPad. What makes you think that three years is going to be more favourable to Apple competitors than to Apple?
Anyway, I wouldn't count out the possibility of new "iToys", but don't forget the MacBook Air, either. This redesigned, second gen model has been flying off the shelves the last few months. Lion is about to be released and MacBook Pros are getting refreshed. Apple never has stood still, why would they start standing still for the next three years!
Tones2
Apr 22, 09:31 AM
Man, stop it with the cloud service already. :rolleyes: You can't rely on the internet availability for listening to music. It's unreliable. Plus, the streaming will probably be low resolution, drain battery life, eat into data caps, not display lyrics, and generally be a crappy experience. If I wanted to stream, I can do it from my home computer where my music already resides with one of the 100 apps already available and not have to fight through all the bandwidth issues that are probably gonna result from Apple's side. What's the point? I can do this now.
Of course what we really need if more friggin' flash memory on our devices! Apple's been stuck on 32 GB on the iPhone for almost 3 years!
Tony
Of course what we really need if more friggin' flash memory on our devices! Apple's been stuck on 32 GB on the iPhone for almost 3 years!
Tony
CalfCanuck
Sep 14, 07:16 PM
That'd be very nice, but I think that's too niche for Apple to get into. Although Apple does take its photography seriously, it only really produces hardware that is versatile and can be used for many different tasks - i.e. although the Mac Pro is serious photograhpy equipment, it can also be serious movie editing or CAD equipment. Infact, I can't think of any hardware made by Apple that is specifically photography directed.
Then again, there's nothing to say they won't break the habit of a lifetime.
While I have nothing to back up this idea beyond wild speculation, it makes sense if you think about it for a while.
I used the name "Aperture.iPod" just for this thread. I think the APerture features would be targeted to special audience, but even the Photo uploading features (plus integration into iPhoto) would give it the broader appeal you correctly discuss.
Several reason why this might happen:
1. Apple has had a product called the Photo iPod since October 2004. The fact that few of it's users probably use it for Photos merely points out that it failed in it's targeted market for a number of reasons (probably lack of easy uploading from cameras when not at a computer, small screen, and lack of support for RAW).
2. Apple's announcement a few days ago about the new iTunes store: (to quote Page 1) "TV shows will now be sold at 640x480 px h264. While the updated 5G iPods announced today will be able to play the new format, there has not been any indication from Apple of yet that the new shows will be playable on older 5G iPods. Apple's official knowledge-base article still states that h264-encoded movies must be 320 x 240 at 30 fps."
So why will Apple start selling a video size that isn't designed for the current iPod? While it could be for the "iTV" device, I'd image that is a bit too small a resolution to get people excited about. And even if it is, why start selling it 6 months before the device ships?
3. If Apple was to introduce a new Video iPod with a larger screen, this new larger box would allow a number of things that can''t fit on a small iPod and are perfect for both video AND photography - a large 640 x 480 screen, FW or USB2 connections, and potentially CF/SD card slots (or at least an IO for a fast adapter via the USB2 connection.)
Hence my conclusion (based on pure speculation) - all these things point to a dual use device. Handheld, but larger than normal iPods, and suitable for both consumer video playback AND photography.
What better place to introduce this than the biggest consumer photo show in the world?
Then again, there's nothing to say they won't break the habit of a lifetime.
While I have nothing to back up this idea beyond wild speculation, it makes sense if you think about it for a while.
I used the name "Aperture.iPod" just for this thread. I think the APerture features would be targeted to special audience, but even the Photo uploading features (plus integration into iPhoto) would give it the broader appeal you correctly discuss.
Several reason why this might happen:
1. Apple has had a product called the Photo iPod since October 2004. The fact that few of it's users probably use it for Photos merely points out that it failed in it's targeted market for a number of reasons (probably lack of easy uploading from cameras when not at a computer, small screen, and lack of support for RAW).
2. Apple's announcement a few days ago about the new iTunes store: (to quote Page 1) "TV shows will now be sold at 640x480 px h264. While the updated 5G iPods announced today will be able to play the new format, there has not been any indication from Apple of yet that the new shows will be playable on older 5G iPods. Apple's official knowledge-base article still states that h264-encoded movies must be 320 x 240 at 30 fps."
So why will Apple start selling a video size that isn't designed for the current iPod? While it could be for the "iTV" device, I'd image that is a bit too small a resolution to get people excited about. And even if it is, why start selling it 6 months before the device ships?
3. If Apple was to introduce a new Video iPod with a larger screen, this new larger box would allow a number of things that can''t fit on a small iPod and are perfect for both video AND photography - a large 640 x 480 screen, FW or USB2 connections, and potentially CF/SD card slots (or at least an IO for a fast adapter via the USB2 connection.)
Hence my conclusion (based on pure speculation) - all these things point to a dual use device. Handheld, but larger than normal iPods, and suitable for both consumer video playback AND photography.
What better place to introduce this than the biggest consumer photo show in the world?
technicolor
Sep 12, 03:15 PM
why are you confused??? video play got extended, what do you expect more than that??
i'm just glad that my 5gen didn't get outdated so fast
Because they use the same battery, how can videos play longer and not music?
i'm just glad that my 5gen didn't get outdated so fast
Because they use the same battery, how can videos play longer and not music?
Dr. Echsel
Apr 30, 01:52 PM
I've been waiting to buy my first Mac desktop for some time now... and an i7 SB iMac should last me through college :D
3goldens
Apr 4, 12:05 PM
shot in the head! seems a little severe for a mall cop!
sisyphus
Sep 10, 10:05 PM
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it appears that the improvement was significantly overstated. Macrumors has now updated that thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=232126).
Doh! Oh well I still think there are many present and future uses for more cores. Especially if Apple releases a video airport express sorta thingy on Tuesday. If you could use your Mac as a video server that will do all the leg work then send it over the air to the "express" or multiple "expresses" in the house while still working on it, you've just developed yet another way to use up processor cycles on the machine. If SJ wants the Mac to be the hub of your digital lifestyle it is going to be asked to do more at once. Which is of course good!
Doh! Oh well I still think there are many present and future uses for more cores. Especially if Apple releases a video airport express sorta thingy on Tuesday. If you could use your Mac as a video server that will do all the leg work then send it over the air to the "express" or multiple "expresses" in the house while still working on it, you've just developed yet another way to use up processor cycles on the machine. If SJ wants the Mac to be the hub of your digital lifestyle it is going to be asked to do more at once. Which is of course good!
EspressoLove
Apr 22, 07:08 PM
This may have been asked and answered before, but is the common belief that USB and Firewire will be completely gone soon? For example, my Macbook Air has room for only two ports - a mini-display drive, and a USB drive. Is the idea that the Thunderbolt drive will replace the USB, and that purchasers of the new Air will use an adapter of some sort for "old" USB peripherals moving forward?
If Apple has this expectation, they had better at least sell an appropriate adapter/hub. I've long thought a thin, form-matching hub that connects to all of the ports on one side of an Apple portable would be a great idea. If Apple can make a 2- or even 3-port USB hub off of the Thunderbolt port (especially if a Mini Display-Port is also available) for ~$50, that would be golden for this type of MBA plan.
You both think into it too much:
- FireWire was gone from Apple's "future of notebooks" since the beginning of time (2008:rolleyes:)
- Thunderbolt is not replacing USBs, it's a supplement to DisplayPort (and can connect to both display and peripherals simultaneously)
If Apple has this expectation, they had better at least sell an appropriate adapter/hub. I've long thought a thin, form-matching hub that connects to all of the ports on one side of an Apple portable would be a great idea. If Apple can make a 2- or even 3-port USB hub off of the Thunderbolt port (especially if a Mini Display-Port is also available) for ~$50, that would be golden for this type of MBA plan.
You both think into it too much:
- FireWire was gone from Apple's "future of notebooks" since the beginning of time (2008:rolleyes:)
- Thunderbolt is not replacing USBs, it's a supplement to DisplayPort (and can connect to both display and peripherals simultaneously)
monaarts
Apr 4, 11:50 AM
I'm sorry but those guys deserved it. Why should the mall guard have to wait until his life in in danger before putting someone else's life in danger? Those guys were breaking the law and could have given someone a heart attack or something so screw that! Mall security guard +1 for sure! You rock man!
- Joe
- Joe
Sabenth
Aug 23, 05:23 PM
Well for a company that's almost bankrupt I guess this was a worthwhile event for them. Now Creative can continue to make "adapted copies" of the iPod and lose money all over again.
Judging by their past business practices it's only a matter of time before they teeter on the edge of insolvency then I guess they'll have to come up with another reason to sue Apple all over again. what was apple a few years ago its only cause of ipods and reacently a lot of folk taking a keen eye in a comptuer system that can dual boot osx and windows sorry aint read all replys to this 100 million is not pocket change but it sure as hell aint as bad as it could have been thats my opinion on it at least
Judging by their past business practices it's only a matter of time before they teeter on the edge of insolvency then I guess they'll have to come up with another reason to sue Apple all over again. what was apple a few years ago its only cause of ipods and reacently a lot of folk taking a keen eye in a comptuer system that can dual boot osx and windows sorry aint read all replys to this 100 million is not pocket change but it sure as hell aint as bad as it could have been thats my opinion on it at least
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder