mackiwi
Sep 4, 08:00 AM
If the movie store is announced on the 12th, I'm guessing the Aussie store will arrive some time in 2009 :) though maybe movies don't have as messed up distribution rights as music, but don't hold your breath.
Following that logic...New Zealand will get iTunes store in march 5th, 2015. Thats just a basic itunes music store. not asking for anything fancy here.
Seriously, ALL I WANT TO DO IS BUY MUSIC!!! how hard can it be?
Following that logic...New Zealand will get iTunes store in march 5th, 2015. Thats just a basic itunes music store. not asking for anything fancy here.
Seriously, ALL I WANT TO DO IS BUY MUSIC!!! how hard can it be?
AP_piano295
Apr 26, 12:13 AM
You don't understand how that could come off as racist? The many successful black role models around today simply don't exist in your world view somehow?
I'll agree some of the comment's weren't in the best taste. But take a step back and look at some of the numbers they're really are some worrying disparities between black communities and other communities in the US (and apparently Britain as well).
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-04-08/living/out.of.wedlock.births_1_out-of-wedlock-unwed-mothers-wedding-dress/2?_s=PM:LIVING
Almost 80% of black women give birth outside of wedlock. Which is roughly twice the average rate and 3 times the rate of white women. And a dis-proportionate number of crimes are committed by black men.
I'm NOT trying to claim that there aren't successful well educated black people out there. Obviously there are lots of them (including our current president) but your being delusional if you cannot recognize there are some very serious problems in the black community.
One obviously needs to consider factors like poverty, lack of education etc. And even today there are certainly lingering problematic ripples from slavery and segregation.
But there are cultural issues which members of the black community are going to have to confront.
--> Entertainment Role Models - There is a massive shortage of visible role models in the black community. Don't get me wrong I love rap and hip hop but it is abundantly clear that much of this music glorifies woefully poor behavior.
--> Language (you might be able to lump this in with education) I would never hire someone who can't speak passable English but never the less this ridiculous cultural lingo persists and propagates.
There are plenty of other problems to consider, but its seriously important that we start discussing this ****. Because the issues definitely aren't going go away if we close our ears and scream LALALALA !!
I'll agree some of the comment's weren't in the best taste. But take a step back and look at some of the numbers they're really are some worrying disparities between black communities and other communities in the US (and apparently Britain as well).
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-04-08/living/out.of.wedlock.births_1_out-of-wedlock-unwed-mothers-wedding-dress/2?_s=PM:LIVING
Almost 80% of black women give birth outside of wedlock. Which is roughly twice the average rate and 3 times the rate of white women. And a dis-proportionate number of crimes are committed by black men.
I'm NOT trying to claim that there aren't successful well educated black people out there. Obviously there are lots of them (including our current president) but your being delusional if you cannot recognize there are some very serious problems in the black community.
One obviously needs to consider factors like poverty, lack of education etc. And even today there are certainly lingering problematic ripples from slavery and segregation.
But there are cultural issues which members of the black community are going to have to confront.
--> Entertainment Role Models - There is a massive shortage of visible role models in the black community. Don't get me wrong I love rap and hip hop but it is abundantly clear that much of this music glorifies woefully poor behavior.
--> Language (you might be able to lump this in with education) I would never hire someone who can't speak passable English but never the less this ridiculous cultural lingo persists and propagates.
There are plenty of other problems to consider, but its seriously important that we start discussing this ****. Because the issues definitely aren't going go away if we close our ears and scream LALALALA !!
nsbio
Nov 8, 09:47 AM
Can anybody guess whether the new C2D Macbooks will be hotter/cooler?
Thunderhawks
Apr 18, 02:41 PM
As much as I really hate Best Buy (I will not give them a dime of my money, and it has been like this since 2001/2), I wouldn't hold this against them. They will price something they feel the market will pay. A lot of the items they sell are not ones they can make much, if any money on (laptops, computers, stuff like that. Their costs are high on those that they can't really price them higher than what they pay). So they have to make up for it in the peripherals which are dirt cheap but they can get people to pay a lot more for. Pricing isn't about only charging a little more extra than what you pay, it's about what people will pay and what will actually get you a profit enough to run the business.
My roommate worked for CompUSA 10 years ago and their employee discount was that they paid what CompUSA paid for stuff. The discount was pretty much non existant on computers cause of that reason.
Pretty much. It's too bad that Best Buy is one of the few places these days to go to look at computer stuff, it's still nice to go to the brick and mortar store. I'm lucky I at least have a Fry's relatively close (with gas prices though they're far enough to be costly to get to :( ).
But yeah, I don't shop there. I will occasionally use them to go look at a product. Last time I was in there was to check out the Nintendo 3DS. I get the feeling Best Buy isn't doing so well. Half their lights were out (like how stores will put the lighting when the store is closed and it is only employees, but this was middle of the day) and it really made it feel dingy.
I hate to tell them, but I think that's a big thing that helped killed Circuit City. When they weren't doing well they started not updating the interior of the store, and doing stuff that made it look dingy and unfun to shop at. You don't want your store to look like it's doing badly.
(and I'm just spiteful enough that if they do go out of business, I'm hoping it is their cruddy customer service chasing customers away that bit them in the a**. It will be more disappointing if it was just not being able to compete with online places - maybe it will be a combo of both. Not being able to compete with prices and having crappy customer service that doesn't convince people it's worth the extra price).
You bring up a good point. I also think that BB is not doing well.
For that matter I think the day of the big electronics superstores are numbered.
Crazy Eddie, Circuit City and a few smaller ones I know all went out of business, because all of these guys compete with Walmart, Sears etc. where the same product is available.
Many department stores also discontinued selling TVs and low margin electronics.
Anybody buying cables and extended warranties at BB is just uninformed.
Sometimes manufacturers seem to change the model number of a TV for a certain store, but the average consumer goes by price and size.
Don't think keeping the lights on will help BB:-)
My roommate worked for CompUSA 10 years ago and their employee discount was that they paid what CompUSA paid for stuff. The discount was pretty much non existant on computers cause of that reason.
Pretty much. It's too bad that Best Buy is one of the few places these days to go to look at computer stuff, it's still nice to go to the brick and mortar store. I'm lucky I at least have a Fry's relatively close (with gas prices though they're far enough to be costly to get to :( ).
But yeah, I don't shop there. I will occasionally use them to go look at a product. Last time I was in there was to check out the Nintendo 3DS. I get the feeling Best Buy isn't doing so well. Half their lights were out (like how stores will put the lighting when the store is closed and it is only employees, but this was middle of the day) and it really made it feel dingy.
I hate to tell them, but I think that's a big thing that helped killed Circuit City. When they weren't doing well they started not updating the interior of the store, and doing stuff that made it look dingy and unfun to shop at. You don't want your store to look like it's doing badly.
(and I'm just spiteful enough that if they do go out of business, I'm hoping it is their cruddy customer service chasing customers away that bit them in the a**. It will be more disappointing if it was just not being able to compete with online places - maybe it will be a combo of both. Not being able to compete with prices and having crappy customer service that doesn't convince people it's worth the extra price).
You bring up a good point. I also think that BB is not doing well.
For that matter I think the day of the big electronics superstores are numbered.
Crazy Eddie, Circuit City and a few smaller ones I know all went out of business, because all of these guys compete with Walmart, Sears etc. where the same product is available.
Many department stores also discontinued selling TVs and low margin electronics.
Anybody buying cables and extended warranties at BB is just uninformed.
Sometimes manufacturers seem to change the model number of a TV for a certain store, but the average consumer goes by price and size.
Don't think keeping the lights on will help BB:-)
gekko513
Aug 2, 07:52 PM
Can't get the video to play right now, but the text sounds like Atheros writes the drivers for the built in Airport.
Sounds like a protocol bug to me if it works on different platforms and different vendors.
Hm, perhaps, the article is a bit vague on the subject.
Apple -- like many computer manufacturers -- outsources the development of its wireless device drivers to third parties. In Apple's case, the developer in question is Atheros, a company that devises drivers for a number of different wireless cards, each designed with drivers specific to the operating systems on which they will be used.
You're right, they make it sound like Atheros also writes the drivers for the built in Airport, but it doesn't say so specifically.
OS X ships with lots of default drivers for third party hardware, external wireless cards too, I'd imagine, and those could be the one we're talking about here.
Isn't the internal wireless device made by Intel? It's not sure Apple and Intel needs the help from Atheros to get drivers for that.
But even what the article says, I don't see why the demo would use a 3rd party wireless card if they could just as well have attacked the built in Airport.
Sounds like a protocol bug to me if it works on different platforms and different vendors.
Hm, perhaps, the article is a bit vague on the subject.
Apple -- like many computer manufacturers -- outsources the development of its wireless device drivers to third parties. In Apple's case, the developer in question is Atheros, a company that devises drivers for a number of different wireless cards, each designed with drivers specific to the operating systems on which they will be used.
You're right, they make it sound like Atheros also writes the drivers for the built in Airport, but it doesn't say so specifically.
OS X ships with lots of default drivers for third party hardware, external wireless cards too, I'd imagine, and those could be the one we're talking about here.
Isn't the internal wireless device made by Intel? It's not sure Apple and Intel needs the help from Atheros to get drivers for that.
But even what the article says, I don't see why the demo would use a 3rd party wireless card if they could just as well have attacked the built in Airport.
asphalt-proof
Sep 4, 09:34 AM
That's HOT (figuratively and literally)!! I think the only way you could pull that off is with an external tuner, just like laptops have an external power supply.
Does a TV tuner add THAT much heat? Plus, with 23" of real estate to play with I would think that they could find a way to keep the heat down
Does a TV tuner add THAT much heat? Plus, with 23" of real estate to play with I would think that they could find a way to keep the heat down
Humber
Mar 14, 04:42 PM
If you're right, I might have to come and kill ya'!
I can't wait anymore.
And why do you think a silent MacBook Pro update would steal any of the "iPad thunder"? It's quite a boring update we're waiting for. A faster processor, a step up in HD sizes and maybe a faster (or slower) graphics card. That's all. No one - 'cept those of us waiting for the updated Book - cares / will notice.
I think you're staing a very good point, comrade :) The only people who are going to buy a MBP is the ones that cares and who know they're going to buy it despite of the iPad.
I dont think either that the iPad will loose customers because of a "minor" MBP update. Just look at the pre-order numbers. Haven't they passed over 50,000 now? And that in just days? I mean, it shows the interest for the iPad and people will not ask themself wether go get an iPad or the new Macbook Pro, they know they want that ****INGS iPad.
So in all, mr. Jobs have no reason to delay the launch of the new MBP. Because he know that the iPad will be a sucsess and it won't matter when the hell the MBP is released... Hmmm...that makes me wonder why he haven't released it before allready :S
I can't wait anymore.
And why do you think a silent MacBook Pro update would steal any of the "iPad thunder"? It's quite a boring update we're waiting for. A faster processor, a step up in HD sizes and maybe a faster (or slower) graphics card. That's all. No one - 'cept those of us waiting for the updated Book - cares / will notice.
I think you're staing a very good point, comrade :) The only people who are going to buy a MBP is the ones that cares and who know they're going to buy it despite of the iPad.
I dont think either that the iPad will loose customers because of a "minor" MBP update. Just look at the pre-order numbers. Haven't they passed over 50,000 now? And that in just days? I mean, it shows the interest for the iPad and people will not ask themself wether go get an iPad or the new Macbook Pro, they know they want that ****INGS iPad.
So in all, mr. Jobs have no reason to delay the launch of the new MBP. Because he know that the iPad will be a sucsess and it won't matter when the hell the MBP is released... Hmmm...that makes me wonder why he haven't released it before allready :S
nitynate
Sep 22, 10:40 PM
Screw WalMart...
Nathan prefers Target.
Nathan prefers Target.
gekko513
Aug 2, 07:12 PM
I agree....but wouldn't it be better to say, malicious hackers? I think that most hackers are good people and just like to tinker with things. Of course there's always going to be some bad apples.
Yeah, hacking is just taking something and tinkering with it to make it do something that it's not really designed to do, isn't it? This can sometimes be useful and fun, but can obviously also be done for malicious purposes, and that's sometimes referred to as "cracking" and the ones who do it as "crackers".
Here's the link to the main blog page, with video: link (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/)
What do you think?
Wait a second. They use a 3rd party wireless card, and he said in the end that "the flaw is not in the Apple operating system as we used 3rd party hardware". I'd say that's quite different from the impression I got from reading the macrumors headline here. A default MacBook using the built in Airport isn't vulnerable as far as I can tell.
He also said that the exploit isn't as trivial as a generic buffer overflow. Now, to exploit a generic buffer overflow, you need to have a certain level of l337ness to begin with, so that means you don't have to worry about your neighbour braking into your wireless network, just yet. Unless someone releases premade tools to do the exploitation, I'd say that normal people and small businesses don't have to worry at the moment.
Yeah, hacking is just taking something and tinkering with it to make it do something that it's not really designed to do, isn't it? This can sometimes be useful and fun, but can obviously also be done for malicious purposes, and that's sometimes referred to as "cracking" and the ones who do it as "crackers".
Here's the link to the main blog page, with video: link (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/)
What do you think?
Wait a second. They use a 3rd party wireless card, and he said in the end that "the flaw is not in the Apple operating system as we used 3rd party hardware". I'd say that's quite different from the impression I got from reading the macrumors headline here. A default MacBook using the built in Airport isn't vulnerable as far as I can tell.
He also said that the exploit isn't as trivial as a generic buffer overflow. Now, to exploit a generic buffer overflow, you need to have a certain level of l337ness to begin with, so that means you don't have to worry about your neighbour braking into your wireless network, just yet. Unless someone releases premade tools to do the exploitation, I'd say that normal people and small businesses don't have to worry at the moment.
gauchogolfer
Oct 16, 07:50 AM
Nice quote on Engadget's website: "iWhore, therefore iPod."
I voted Negative because we all know Steve is furious that Microsoft is releasing a wireless MP3 player before Apple. The iP$d needs some serious revamping.
What exactly is 'wireless' about this MP3 player? Sharing songs three times doesn't count in my book. There's no wireless syncing, nor wireless connection to my stereo. What's the big deal again?
I voted Negative because we all know Steve is furious that Microsoft is releasing a wireless MP3 player before Apple. The iP$d needs some serious revamping.
What exactly is 'wireless' about this MP3 player? Sharing songs three times doesn't count in my book. There's no wireless syncing, nor wireless connection to my stereo. What's the big deal again?
drlunanerd
Nov 8, 07:57 AM
The order status system is still down though on the UK store :(
macsrcool1234
Apr 17, 05:39 PM
I have an almost 9 month old boy. He was using the iPad to play games by 6 months of age. The iPad *IS* one of his favorite toys and with it's education and entertainment potential, is certainly a good investment. I need to go because he's about to attack my keyboard. I'll give him the iPad to play with :)
Are you ****ing serious? How the hell did you get this from letting his kid use the iPad occasionally?
Posters these days...:rolleyes:
So what part of that post screams "occasional?" You clearly did not read/understand the post in question properly. That's kind of surprising considering it's very simply laid out.
Read the post I quoted again and come back. Let me know if you need me to draw any pictures for you.
Posters these days....can't read worth a damn.
Are you ****ing serious? How the hell did you get this from letting his kid use the iPad occasionally?
Posters these days...:rolleyes:
So what part of that post screams "occasional?" You clearly did not read/understand the post in question properly. That's kind of surprising considering it's very simply laid out.
Read the post I quoted again and come back. Let me know if you need me to draw any pictures for you.
Posters these days....can't read worth a damn.
fivepoint
Mar 29, 08:26 AM
I don't know about that. Check out #2 ...
If the United States were under immediate threat, do you really think the president would have to write a report to congress "setting forth the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces"?
As for Rand Paul's objections, it's so geopolitically and historically ignorant, it's beyond contempt. It's been hilarious watching the right run around to find a consistent line of attack on this. Congress hasn't declared war since the 1940s.
This is a multilateral action with the backing of a Security Council resolution. The Daily Telegraph's rantings about Al Qaeda are little more than Gaddafi propaganda.
As for US interests, many of you including the racist fringe christianist Pauls, are not connecting the dots:
The entire point of this is in the long-term. Apart from denying a victorious Gaddafi an opportunity to create trouble to his neighbours and destabilise the region, it is to provide support for popular uprisings in order to deny radicalism the oxygen it needs.
It's fascinating how quickly the Democrat party has turned into the party of war... trying to justify it legally and morally at every corner. It's almost as if their anti-war stance for the past 10 years was a complete farce, and was more anti-Bush than anti-war, anti-intervention. Now that Obama is at the helm, core philosophy no longer matters, consistent morality no longer matters, only justifying war and protecting the political future of the first black president.
The constitution was written in regards to war specifically to stifle the power of the president which the founders knew would be more predisposed to war, and to put the power in the hands of the people via congress. In fact, as Tom Woods recently put it...
...here is my challenge to you. I want you to find me one Federalist, during the entire period in which the Constitution was pending, who argued that the president could launch non-defensive wars without consulting Congress. To make it easy on you, you may cite any Federalist speaking in any of the ratification conventions in any of the states, or in a public lecture, or in a newspaper article � whatever. One Federalist who took your position. I want his name and the exact quotation.
If I�m so wrong, this challenge should be a breeze. If you evade this challenge, or call me names, or make peripheral arguments instead, I will take that as an admission of defeat.
We can argue all day long about whether or not war with Libya was justified, you'll talk about the threat of mass killings, I'll talk about the tens of other nations which are in similar circumstances which receive NO American aid and the logical fallacy of suggesting it's our role to play in picking sides on every civil war around the world... but the point here is that it's straight up unconstitutional, and CANDIDATE Obama (you know, the one you voted for) completely agrees. But for some reason, now that he's president you think it's ok for him to switch his views 180 degrees and still are unwilling to admit you agree with Rand Paul even though his position is far more consistent with candidate Obama's. Sounds awfully hypocritical.
This was my impression as well. If correct, Obama has no business doing what he's done--right, wrong, paid for or not. Personally, I'm glad somebody's stopping Gaddafi from acting unchecked--but that doesn't excuse circumventing the constitution to do so.
Yes.
I'm not surprised. Every administration grabs more and more power. I get depressed just seeing how everyone takes it as the status quo and defends it. The Constitution was set up almost as if to stop one person from being able to take up to war on a whim. Well, if Obama has that right, then George Bush III, or whoever will push the limits of his powers even further. I guess that's the power of precedence. If you look at the Constitution, it vests in the Congress the exclusive power to declare war. Things just have a way of changing. I thought Bush was bad enough with Iraq. Now Obama's actions are even worse than Bush's. Obama didn't even put up the charade of making a case.
Yes.
Uh yeah. Saw that on Meet the Press. Paul is only telling a half-truth. Gates went on to say that other NATO countries felt they have a vital interest in Libya, and I think we all understand how the NATO treaty works. Whether or not you believe or agree with that, the fact is that Paul misrepresented Gates' statement.
I don't want to be the one to tell you, but Americans hold no allegiance to NATO or to the United Nations. In addition, no treaties or otherwise passed by these two organizations have any legal effect on our sovereign nation. The UN or NATO passing a resolution to engage in military action does not serve as an ALTERNATIVE to a declaration of war by the U.S. congress.
Also, I do not believe his position was misrepresented. If you watched Gates' testimony before the war, you'll see that he was dragged kicking and screaming in to this war. He is of the strong opinion that this was a bad idea and that Libya is not vital to U.S. interests. His comment that the 'mid-east' is part of our national interest was an extremely long reach in a pathetic attempt to find some sort of overlap between his position and the administration he works for. I'd say Paul's analysis of Gates' position is much better than any analysis which suggests he thinks the war is justified.
If the United States were under immediate threat, do you really think the president would have to write a report to congress "setting forth the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces"?
As for Rand Paul's objections, it's so geopolitically and historically ignorant, it's beyond contempt. It's been hilarious watching the right run around to find a consistent line of attack on this. Congress hasn't declared war since the 1940s.
This is a multilateral action with the backing of a Security Council resolution. The Daily Telegraph's rantings about Al Qaeda are little more than Gaddafi propaganda.
As for US interests, many of you including the racist fringe christianist Pauls, are not connecting the dots:
The entire point of this is in the long-term. Apart from denying a victorious Gaddafi an opportunity to create trouble to his neighbours and destabilise the region, it is to provide support for popular uprisings in order to deny radicalism the oxygen it needs.
It's fascinating how quickly the Democrat party has turned into the party of war... trying to justify it legally and morally at every corner. It's almost as if their anti-war stance for the past 10 years was a complete farce, and was more anti-Bush than anti-war, anti-intervention. Now that Obama is at the helm, core philosophy no longer matters, consistent morality no longer matters, only justifying war and protecting the political future of the first black president.
The constitution was written in regards to war specifically to stifle the power of the president which the founders knew would be more predisposed to war, and to put the power in the hands of the people via congress. In fact, as Tom Woods recently put it...
...here is my challenge to you. I want you to find me one Federalist, during the entire period in which the Constitution was pending, who argued that the president could launch non-defensive wars without consulting Congress. To make it easy on you, you may cite any Federalist speaking in any of the ratification conventions in any of the states, or in a public lecture, or in a newspaper article � whatever. One Federalist who took your position. I want his name and the exact quotation.
If I�m so wrong, this challenge should be a breeze. If you evade this challenge, or call me names, or make peripheral arguments instead, I will take that as an admission of defeat.
We can argue all day long about whether or not war with Libya was justified, you'll talk about the threat of mass killings, I'll talk about the tens of other nations which are in similar circumstances which receive NO American aid and the logical fallacy of suggesting it's our role to play in picking sides on every civil war around the world... but the point here is that it's straight up unconstitutional, and CANDIDATE Obama (you know, the one you voted for) completely agrees. But for some reason, now that he's president you think it's ok for him to switch his views 180 degrees and still are unwilling to admit you agree with Rand Paul even though his position is far more consistent with candidate Obama's. Sounds awfully hypocritical.
This was my impression as well. If correct, Obama has no business doing what he's done--right, wrong, paid for or not. Personally, I'm glad somebody's stopping Gaddafi from acting unchecked--but that doesn't excuse circumventing the constitution to do so.
Yes.
I'm not surprised. Every administration grabs more and more power. I get depressed just seeing how everyone takes it as the status quo and defends it. The Constitution was set up almost as if to stop one person from being able to take up to war on a whim. Well, if Obama has that right, then George Bush III, or whoever will push the limits of his powers even further. I guess that's the power of precedence. If you look at the Constitution, it vests in the Congress the exclusive power to declare war. Things just have a way of changing. I thought Bush was bad enough with Iraq. Now Obama's actions are even worse than Bush's. Obama didn't even put up the charade of making a case.
Yes.
Uh yeah. Saw that on Meet the Press. Paul is only telling a half-truth. Gates went on to say that other NATO countries felt they have a vital interest in Libya, and I think we all understand how the NATO treaty works. Whether or not you believe or agree with that, the fact is that Paul misrepresented Gates' statement.
I don't want to be the one to tell you, but Americans hold no allegiance to NATO or to the United Nations. In addition, no treaties or otherwise passed by these two organizations have any legal effect on our sovereign nation. The UN or NATO passing a resolution to engage in military action does not serve as an ALTERNATIVE to a declaration of war by the U.S. congress.
Also, I do not believe his position was misrepresented. If you watched Gates' testimony before the war, you'll see that he was dragged kicking and screaming in to this war. He is of the strong opinion that this was a bad idea and that Libya is not vital to U.S. interests. His comment that the 'mid-east' is part of our national interest was an extremely long reach in a pathetic attempt to find some sort of overlap between his position and the administration he works for. I'd say Paul's analysis of Gates' position is much better than any analysis which suggests he thinks the war is justified.
citizenzen
Mar 15, 12:55 PM
To all those cutting military by huge percentages, what are your plans to deal with the millions of unemployed that would produce?
What were the plans with dealing with the millions of other Americans who've lost their jobs in this last recession?
Oh, that's right, there were no plans. All those people were expected to figure it out for themselves.
I'd suggest that those who's careers are based on maintaining our military can file for unemployment and search the want ads just like everybody else.
What were the plans with dealing with the millions of other Americans who've lost their jobs in this last recession?
Oh, that's right, there were no plans. All those people were expected to figure it out for themselves.
I'd suggest that those who's careers are based on maintaining our military can file for unemployment and search the want ads just like everybody else.
lostngone
Mar 29, 12:17 AM
What about Google I/O then? It was sold in just 59 minutes!
Apple is doomed!TM :D
I am sure if Apple only charged $500 for WWDC they could have matched it.
Apple is doomed!TM :D
I am sure if Apple only charged $500 for WWDC they could have matched it.
BenRoethig
Sep 6, 08:49 AM
I assume you mean headless tower since all the iMacs and the MAC Mini are desktops......... Oh wait, isn't the MAC Pro a headless tower?
It's a workstation, not a desktop. Yes there is a difference.
It's a workstation, not a desktop. Yes there is a difference.
Doctor Q
Nov 27, 02:23 PM
agree that the mono mixes are better. but leave the stereo ones alone.I hope the Beatles catalog will include both versions. For example, the mono version of Blue Jay Way was much different than the stereo version, so I'll have to get both.
Skika
Mar 25, 12:14 PM
Is it for ipad also? I currently have my macbook in for repair, could i update in with my friend's pc who has itunes in the meantime?
Designer Dale
Mar 7, 02:48 PM
University Place and the Chambers Creek area as seen from a park near where I live. The train in the distance was involved in a wreck shortly after I packed up. No injuries.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5252/5506742653_a55144001b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43162691@N04/)
Dale
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5252/5506742653_a55144001b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43162691@N04/)
Dale
(L)
Apr 17, 12:44 AM
Toys R' Us? I though they only sold video games and...toys!?
Yes. The iPad 2 will be on sale in the Toys For Seniors aisle.
Yes. The iPad 2 will be on sale in the Toys For Seniors aisle.
gameface
Mar 2, 09:52 AM
absolutely love this, well done. such a nice picture.. the city scape in the background.. just great!
Thanks! I was waiting for the sunset over the city last night and the clouds screwed me. So I stuck around in the cold and took some night shots. Here's another from the same bench that I didn't like as much.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5179/5490697540_0732e699f3_b.jpg
Thanks! I was waiting for the sunset over the city last night and the clouds screwed me. So I stuck around in the cold and took some night shots. Here's another from the same bench that I didn't like as much.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5179/5490697540_0732e699f3_b.jpg
glassbathroom
Aug 4, 06:16 AM
I wish I lived closer to Apple, to be able to get sneak previews like this, and to be able to report on Apple News. One day I will prevail!
BTW, I cant wait for monday! Does anyone know what time the Keynote will be in Grenwich Mean Time (London). Just so I can log on and keep up with all the action.
Thanks.
6pm
BTW, I cant wait for monday! Does anyone know what time the Keynote will be in Grenwich Mean Time (London). Just so I can log on and keep up with all the action.
Thanks.
6pm
wake8260
Mar 28, 02:40 PM
Just called a few Radio Shacks around where I live and one store said they won't be getting it in but can order for me. It would take 3-5 days to get it in. The other store had no idea what I was talking about. I'll have to see what I have to do to order it from RS.. Still a little hesitant to order from them. If they had it in stock that's one thing.
Mr.Gadget
Jan 11, 05:34 PM
My vote is for cell phone provider. Apple was investigating buying up bulk minutes in the early days of the iPhone development, so, one never knows. They could make some serious change if they entered the cell business... But... What an expense for Apple!
OK... Maybe I like the iPhone front facing camera idea. Video conferencing on the go.
OK... Maybe I like the iPhone front facing camera idea. Video conferencing on the go.
No comments:
Post a Comment