Bonte
Sep 5, 08:24 AM
Apple also lets us rip CD's in iTunes, listen to podcasts and most of us already have a VCR or DVR, recording TV-shows is just an extra option to put it on an iPod and thats way more important than those few dollars they make on a show.
Don't hope for a $300 media-center, a PC media-center cost's between $1000 en $2000 so a $600-$800 "Mini Media" with a bigger HD and extra Front Row functionality will fit the bill perfectly.
Don't hope for a $300 media-center, a PC media-center cost's between $1000 en $2000 so a $600-$800 "Mini Media" with a bigger HD and extra Front Row functionality will fit the bill perfectly.
AvSRoCkCO1067
Aug 23, 05:11 PM
I still find the fact that Creative will be making products for the iPod the most interested aspect of this case - but damn, 85 cents a share is crazy high :eek: !
Piggie
Apr 22, 08:51 AM
How about this:
When you are born, you are given, in effect a serial number. which is yours as a human being for life.
When you buy any digital media, this is linked to our number for life.
This means for as long as you live, and whatever device you buy, you can access this media always.
So I buy and iPad and I pay for the "RIGHTS" to watch/own a movie.
I have paid my money and now that movie is mine to watch any time in the future on whatever device I buy in the future.
When you are born, you are given, in effect a serial number. which is yours as a human being for life.
When you buy any digital media, this is linked to our number for life.
This means for as long as you live, and whatever device you buy, you can access this media always.
So I buy and iPad and I pay for the "RIGHTS" to watch/own a movie.
I have paid my money and now that movie is mine to watch any time in the future on whatever device I buy in the future.
JAT
Mar 30, 12:02 PM
Yes, but that doesn't matter. The word Windows is no generic IT word, while app(lication) is. That's the difference.
"Apple" can't be used to trademark a fruit, but it can be used to trademark a computer. "Windows" can't be used to trademark "windows of a house" but it can be for an operating system. "App store" can be trademarked for a brothel but not for a store that sells computer applications.
One, windows is a generic IT word. Yes, it is. That's WHY M$ named it Windows, because it was a term that described what you see on screen. Personally, I was annoyed when they called it that for their 2bit crap OS shell. Two, that doesn't matter today, M$ is not going after people for usage of "windows". Three, Apple can certainly attempt to trademark a term. That's why we have trademarks. All these arguments are circular. "You can't because you can't." Silly.
Yeah -- makes you wonder why the American Revolution ever happened. We replaced somebody who ruled by birthright with somebody who ruled by the merits of being a better lawyer. I guess you can't win. If only all political leaders could have been like George Washington who hated political parties.
Yes, military rulers have always been so wonderful in human history. :rolleyes:
I'll say it again "App Store" is a generic term, I think everyone should be able to use it.. I hope Apple doesn't win this one.. If someone used "Mac App Store", completely understandable..
See, that's really the point. Apple was the first to use this term. It doesn't matter what letters it uses, it's the combination that is at stake, here. I don't care who wins, they could certainly trademark this no problem. That's what a trademark is, if your term was so strange and unrelated to your industry, you wouldn't need legal backup.
"Apple" can't be used to trademark a fruit, but it can be used to trademark a computer. "Windows" can't be used to trademark "windows of a house" but it can be for an operating system. "App store" can be trademarked for a brothel but not for a store that sells computer applications.
One, windows is a generic IT word. Yes, it is. That's WHY M$ named it Windows, because it was a term that described what you see on screen. Personally, I was annoyed when they called it that for their 2bit crap OS shell. Two, that doesn't matter today, M$ is not going after people for usage of "windows". Three, Apple can certainly attempt to trademark a term. That's why we have trademarks. All these arguments are circular. "You can't because you can't." Silly.
Yeah -- makes you wonder why the American Revolution ever happened. We replaced somebody who ruled by birthright with somebody who ruled by the merits of being a better lawyer. I guess you can't win. If only all political leaders could have been like George Washington who hated political parties.
Yes, military rulers have always been so wonderful in human history. :rolleyes:
I'll say it again "App Store" is a generic term, I think everyone should be able to use it.. I hope Apple doesn't win this one.. If someone used "Mac App Store", completely understandable..
See, that's really the point. Apple was the first to use this term. It doesn't matter what letters it uses, it's the combination that is at stake, here. I don't care who wins, they could certainly trademark this no problem. That's what a trademark is, if your term was so strange and unrelated to your industry, you wouldn't need legal backup.
hayesk
May 3, 07:09 PM
I agree with this completely.
And where on the MBP logic board would you like to place the second video card?
And where on the MBP logic board would you like to place the second video card?
GGJstudios
Mar 19, 02:17 PM
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
"fanboy"
Again, who are you referring to? I'm not a fanboy, or a boy of any kind. I have no allegiance or loyalty to any brand or manufacturer (except Harley-Davidson, but for very different reasons). It's amusing to see how people try to bash Apple or Macs for the wrong reasons, then resort to calling people "fanboys" when their arguments aren't accepted. Apple and Macs have plenty of weaknesses. Attack one of the legitimate ones and you'll have sensible people agree with you. Make a case against Apple or John Deere or Mattel or Coca-Cola or any other company that isn't based in fact, and you'll get resistance. That doesn't make those who oppose such a case "fanboys".
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
"fanboy"
Again, who are you referring to? I'm not a fanboy, or a boy of any kind. I have no allegiance or loyalty to any brand or manufacturer (except Harley-Davidson, but for very different reasons). It's amusing to see how people try to bash Apple or Macs for the wrong reasons, then resort to calling people "fanboys" when their arguments aren't accepted. Apple and Macs have plenty of weaknesses. Attack one of the legitimate ones and you'll have sensible people agree with you. Make a case against Apple or John Deere or Mattel or Coca-Cola or any other company that isn't based in fact, and you'll get resistance. That doesn't make those who oppose such a case "fanboys".
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
cirus
Apr 22, 08:54 PM
An important detail is that one needs to add the graphics TDP to those Intel numbers, so there's still hope for some Llano goodness.
uh... They already are included. The graphics processor is on the die and the TDP of the chip is for the CPU and the GPU. So do the Llano CPU.
At least wikipedia it.
uh... They already are included. The graphics processor is on the die and the TDP of the chip is for the CPU and the GPU. So do the Llano CPU.
At least wikipedia it.
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 15, 06:26 PM
This doesn't mean they will just re-brand a phone...it might just mean they are buying transmitters/etc. from other sources rather than engineering their own. Depending on what they buying "off the shelf," this only makes sense...why re-create the wheel?
Of course they may end up just re-branding a phone, but that doesn't really seem like the Apple thing to do.
Apple will most likely buy a platform from a manufacturer like SonyEricsson. That doesnt mean it will look or feel like a SonyEricsson. LG has bought platforms from SE and they differ quite a lot from SE's phones.
Of course they may end up just re-branding a phone, but that doesn't really seem like the Apple thing to do.
Apple will most likely buy a platform from a manufacturer like SonyEricsson. That doesnt mean it will look or feel like a SonyEricsson. LG has bought platforms from SE and they differ quite a lot from SE's phones.
Eraserhead
Apr 11, 04:15 PM
wtf, my bike gets in the low 40s! and it weighs 4xxlbs!
Its a diesel ;). But I guess it also shows how crazy US emissions regulations are.
Its a diesel ;). But I guess it also shows how crazy US emissions regulations are.
techweenie
Mar 29, 11:31 AM
One thing I learned a long time ago in technology marketing: the product you have not yet seen is infinitely capable and infinitesimally priced.
The whole article is based on some wonderful Windows phone iteration coming out in 2012... and presupposes that whatever progress Microsoft makes with Windows Mobile will not be matched or surpassed by Google and/or Apple. I say BS.
The whole article is based on some wonderful Windows phone iteration coming out in 2012... and presupposes that whatever progress Microsoft makes with Windows Mobile will not be matched or surpassed by Google and/or Apple. I say BS.
scoobydoo99
Apr 20, 12:21 PM
You certainly can't make that statement any dumber, that's true.
I'm surprised that some of you don't understand what Steve is saying. So while I am stating the obvious, here goes:
Apple is a corporation. Corporations are required BY LAW to maximize profitability for their shareholders (fiduciary duty.) This is THE ONLY thing they "care" about.
Now, does providing products that customers like help them maximize profits? Of course. But don't ever confuse their efforts to please customers as being altruistic or showing that they "care" about customers. They only care about profit. If keeping customers happy increases profits, they do it. If giving away free bumpers for iPhone4s is good PR and creates customer goodwill, which increases future profits, then they do it. If selling private data to advertisers or government agencies creates more revenue than it costs (in lost customers,) then they do it.
It is all calculated on the bottom line and they are REQUIRED to take the action that maximizes profits, like ALL corporations.
I'm surprised that some of you don't understand what Steve is saying. So while I am stating the obvious, here goes:
Apple is a corporation. Corporations are required BY LAW to maximize profitability for their shareholders (fiduciary duty.) This is THE ONLY thing they "care" about.
Now, does providing products that customers like help them maximize profits? Of course. But don't ever confuse their efforts to please customers as being altruistic or showing that they "care" about customers. They only care about profit. If keeping customers happy increases profits, they do it. If giving away free bumpers for iPhone4s is good PR and creates customer goodwill, which increases future profits, then they do it. If selling private data to advertisers or government agencies creates more revenue than it costs (in lost customers,) then they do it.
It is all calculated on the bottom line and they are REQUIRED to take the action that maximizes profits, like ALL corporations.
apolloa
Apr 25, 06:22 PM
Meh, not bothered plus I would rather keep my superdrive so I'll grab the last of the unibody's, however I don't think they will change them next year IMO.
res1233
May 1, 12:54 AM
Call me clumsy or whatever, but I hate the 'corners': I accidentally trigger them all the time on a frien's machine. Mostly because I use the Apple menu a lot. I DO miss the old mouse's side buttons/center button!
Experienced mac users know to assign modifier keys to those corners to prevent that. I have the top left corner set to turn my display off (good for porn), but only when the command key is pressed.
Experienced mac users know to assign modifier keys to those corners to prevent that. I have the top left corner set to turn my display off (good for porn), but only when the command key is pressed.
alent1234
Apr 29, 12:48 PM
x-box wasn't a money loser for that long. on the financial statements i think they had bing/live whatever in the same category making it seem as though they were losing money. recently they took it out.
microsoft had a gaming division that made money since the mid to late 1990's with some of the best games on the market.
the first x-box wasnt that big a seller as the PS and gamecube but it had a higher rate of people buying games and x-box live was a hit from the start.
same with the 360, it wasn't a top seller but people bought more games for it than for the PS or Wii. a lot of people like myself have a PS3 with no games because it's a killer media box and blu ray player. when it first came out at $499 it was the same price as a blu ray player. at $299 it's the same price as a high end internet enabled player but with better support and a hard drive to store data
i had the wii as well and only used it for the balance board. just like a lot of people that bought it. compared to a health club membership it was a killer deal
and with gamestop in the used business, it's even more profits for MS due to all the DLC that is sold now
microsoft had a gaming division that made money since the mid to late 1990's with some of the best games on the market.
the first x-box wasnt that big a seller as the PS and gamecube but it had a higher rate of people buying games and x-box live was a hit from the start.
same with the 360, it wasn't a top seller but people bought more games for it than for the PS or Wii. a lot of people like myself have a PS3 with no games because it's a killer media box and blu ray player. when it first came out at $499 it was the same price as a blu ray player. at $299 it's the same price as a high end internet enabled player but with better support and a hard drive to store data
i had the wii as well and only used it for the balance board. just like a lot of people that bought it. compared to a health club membership it was a killer deal
and with gamestop in the used business, it's even more profits for MS due to all the DLC that is sold now
G33kTech
Feb 23, 12:59 PM
It makes sense. iProducts are increasingly becoming ubiquitous, therefore they will become more profitable for malware developers to attack. It's not a McAfee sales pitch so much as it's stating the obvious. Same with Android.
I agree, but at the same time Both Apple and Android use a Unix based OS. Unix based OS's are what run the internet (linux mainly). Their operating systems will be strong security wise by default. Because Unix is an open system, security holes are found and can be easily patched in the open source community, Apple and Android both benefit from using Unix based operating systems, because Unix based systems are also responsible for holding up the fundamental infrastructure of what we call the internet.
Also, android has free anti-virus scanners available in there market. Apple may have some too. I think mcafee is just trying to sell product, but if I was them i would want to sell my product to EVERY person who had Android or iOS based phone, simply because that is a VERY large user base.
I agree, but at the same time Both Apple and Android use a Unix based OS. Unix based OS's are what run the internet (linux mainly). Their operating systems will be strong security wise by default. Because Unix is an open system, security holes are found and can be easily patched in the open source community, Apple and Android both benefit from using Unix based operating systems, because Unix based systems are also responsible for holding up the fundamental infrastructure of what we call the internet.
Also, android has free anti-virus scanners available in there market. Apple may have some too. I think mcafee is just trying to sell product, but if I was them i would want to sell my product to EVERY person who had Android or iOS based phone, simply because that is a VERY large user base.
2nyRiggz
Sep 12, 02:13 PM
So is this ipod still a 5G or 5.1G.....well this ipod is not the big news of the day.
Bless
Bless
dukebound85
Apr 11, 03:43 PM
To some extent, sure.
The big difference is that in the UK you can get cars which do 55 miles per US gallon, one that does that - the �17,345 1.6 Econetic Ford Focus does nearly 62 miles per US gallon.
And that car is made by a US company.
wtf, my bike gets in the low 40s! and it weighs 4xxlbs!
The big difference is that in the UK you can get cars which do 55 miles per US gallon, one that does that - the �17,345 1.6 Econetic Ford Focus does nearly 62 miles per US gallon.
And that car is made by a US company.
wtf, my bike gets in the low 40s! and it weighs 4xxlbs!
cube
Apr 22, 12:17 PM
Regardless of whether or not there are BDXL notebook drives, do you really think Apple's issue with Blu-Ray is the size the discs can hold? :rolleyes:
I'm not about to sit here and list off reasons why an internal optical drive is useless today. It's pretty clear that if Apple were to keep the optical drive in their machines they would've upgraded to Blu-Ray a long time ago but they haven't so it's quite clear that they have the intentions of removing it in all of their notebooks in the not so distant future.
If it were OK to remove the optical drives they would have already done so.
They are fighting against Blu-Ray. But that's where the notebook market has already moved into.
I'm not about to sit here and list off reasons why an internal optical drive is useless today. It's pretty clear that if Apple were to keep the optical drive in their machines they would've upgraded to Blu-Ray a long time ago but they haven't so it's quite clear that they have the intentions of removing it in all of their notebooks in the not so distant future.
If it were OK to remove the optical drives they would have already done so.
They are fighting against Blu-Ray. But that's where the notebook market has already moved into.
Dorkington
Apr 18, 12:07 PM
That's incredible! How can that be the case? Here it is 28 days paid days off if you work a normal 5 day week.
Welcome to America. Any regulation is called "socialism" here and painted as "Anti American". :(
Welcome to America. Any regulation is called "socialism" here and painted as "Anti American". :(
rmhop81
Apr 22, 04:06 PM
This isn't the content of music on iTunes isn't DRM protected, furthermore I still own the content (even the DRM) as I can do exactly what I want with it. I can back it up, move it between devices, and have absolutely no dependence on sustainable bandwidth, company's servers, and policy changes revolving around the use of the server.
As for your netflix comment, there have been plenty of times that Netflix has removed content from their servers that was previously available, if I actually own the content I don't even have to worry about the company removing availability of item <x>.
Streaming content is inferior to downloaded content, it depends on a reliable connection, it depends on your bandwidth not being capped or being regulated to a lower setting because you went over (it'd be pretty easy to stream videos and go over your limit especially in HD).
With the recent iPhone privacy fiasco, APPLE would be the LAST company on earth that I would want to depend on.
As a backup option I think its great, as a primary service that eliminates the concept of downloading and owning your content, its complete bull. I'm not paying money for content that essentially stays in someone else's computer that they could do what they want with it at ANY time. Forget it.
speed, quality and reliability through internet connections is absolutely INFERIOR than when it is run from a hard drive (avg transfer for a hard drive in 2007 was 1030 MBits (128MB/sec) or flash memory (even the lowest class runs at 2MB/sec, which is more than most people can get in their internet connection).
If it goes further to where computers start using cloud services just to run and store their computer it becomes a) a privacy issue, b) a security issue. People like their privacy and like to own stuff they pay for.
who is to say you can't do the same with the cloud service? why can't you download ur music from the cloud to your computer?
Why is it now OK to be a backup service? they are still going to have your data....why does it matter if it's your primary version or a backup?
There is a reason why this has come about. if it was so stupid it wouldn't be happening. People can be really weird about "owning" things. I have friends who collect thousands of dvds. wow, to view 1-2 times. what a waste.
I guess the music and documents i have in idisk i don't own either right?
I was referring to netflix bc the content one may like is there. maybe not all of it, but with the apple option on the cloud you'd have that option to load what you want to listen to.....aka you would choose the playlist.
If netflix had that option for movies. Why would you spend thousands of dollars buying dvds when you can have it at a subscription price in the cloud?
As for your netflix comment, there have been plenty of times that Netflix has removed content from their servers that was previously available, if I actually own the content I don't even have to worry about the company removing availability of item <x>.
Streaming content is inferior to downloaded content, it depends on a reliable connection, it depends on your bandwidth not being capped or being regulated to a lower setting because you went over (it'd be pretty easy to stream videos and go over your limit especially in HD).
With the recent iPhone privacy fiasco, APPLE would be the LAST company on earth that I would want to depend on.
As a backup option I think its great, as a primary service that eliminates the concept of downloading and owning your content, its complete bull. I'm not paying money for content that essentially stays in someone else's computer that they could do what they want with it at ANY time. Forget it.
speed, quality and reliability through internet connections is absolutely INFERIOR than when it is run from a hard drive (avg transfer for a hard drive in 2007 was 1030 MBits (128MB/sec) or flash memory (even the lowest class runs at 2MB/sec, which is more than most people can get in their internet connection).
If it goes further to where computers start using cloud services just to run and store their computer it becomes a) a privacy issue, b) a security issue. People like their privacy and like to own stuff they pay for.
who is to say you can't do the same with the cloud service? why can't you download ur music from the cloud to your computer?
Why is it now OK to be a backup service? they are still going to have your data....why does it matter if it's your primary version or a backup?
There is a reason why this has come about. if it was so stupid it wouldn't be happening. People can be really weird about "owning" things. I have friends who collect thousands of dvds. wow, to view 1-2 times. what a waste.
I guess the music and documents i have in idisk i don't own either right?
I was referring to netflix bc the content one may like is there. maybe not all of it, but with the apple option on the cloud you'd have that option to load what you want to listen to.....aka you would choose the playlist.
If netflix had that option for movies. Why would you spend thousands of dollars buying dvds when you can have it at a subscription price in the cloud?
chameleon
Mar 29, 12:30 PM
Look at me!
I'll make a crazy prediction and get a few minutes of fame...
... before being ridiculed for decades along with:
I'll make a crazy prediction and get a few minutes of fame...
... before being ridiculed for decades along with:
rdowns
Apr 25, 10:09 AM
He's definitely lying about some stuff
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7705428&postcount=15
In less than 3 years, your mom went to law school, passed the bar exam, and became the top attorney in the biggest law firm in your state? Impressive.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=10945954&postcount=40
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=8149540&postcount=65
So which is it? M5, Prius or big SUV?
Of course, this isn't the first time he's shown hate for the cops:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=8410206&#post8410206
I just love it when people get what's coming to them. :)
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7705428&postcount=15
In less than 3 years, your mom went to law school, passed the bar exam, and became the top attorney in the biggest law firm in your state? Impressive.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=10945954&postcount=40
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=8149540&postcount=65
So which is it? M5, Prius or big SUV?
Of course, this isn't the first time he's shown hate for the cops:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=8410206&#post8410206
I just love it when people get what's coming to them. :)
22Hertz
Mar 29, 11:31 AM
I predict in 2012 the world comes to an end
addicted44
Apr 25, 01:03 PM
Hilarious to all those people who jumped on the THUNDERBOLT bandwagon. No thunderbolt devices yet and they have the hideous old case design.
:rolleyes:
Hideous? Really?
I am guessing this is the kind of laptop you admire for its beautiful case design, right?
http://www.gearfuse.com/a-rugged-dell-laptop-john-connor-would-use/
:rolleyes:
Hideous? Really?
I am guessing this is the kind of laptop you admire for its beautiful case design, right?
http://www.gearfuse.com/a-rugged-dell-laptop-john-connor-would-use/
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder