BRLawyer
Sep 6, 09:49 AM
You really are full of crap, aren't you?
"Most powerful desktop". Ha!
I will leave your personally offensive remarks aside, suggesting instead that you get a transvestite, oops, Dell PC, dude. I am sure you can find a better desktop in their highly confusing webshop. As for Gisele Buendchen, she stays on our side, thanks a lot... :rolleyes:
"Most powerful desktop". Ha!
I will leave your personally offensive remarks aside, suggesting instead that you get a transvestite, oops, Dell PC, dude. I am sure you can find a better desktop in their highly confusing webshop. As for Gisele Buendchen, she stays on our side, thanks a lot... :rolleyes:
ChickenSwartz
Sep 4, 04:47 PM
i may be wrong (and don't flame me if i am,) but it seems like the 6G ipod should make its way to the shelves instead of an updated 5G. the 5G has been out for almost a year , hasn't it?
I think Apple has really reached a fork in the road when it comes to the iPod.
Do they really want to start selling these things as vidoe players, not just music players that play video? If so, everyone knows they need a bigger screen and that is going to run up the price of the iPod.
So they have a choice:
(1) Introduce a true video iPod and ask more for it.
(2) Drop in bigger HDs into the current line.
The introduction of movie rentals might be a testing ground to see if people are really buying the idea. So if the iVideo Store (?) does well, this might indicate that people really want true, big scree video iPods. If it does so-so that might tell Apple that they should just keep the iPod primarilly a music player and the vidoe playback be an extra feature.
If they do introduce a more expensive, full screen iPod, they need a cheap[er], higher capacity only-music player too. This is where the Nano comes in. They need to be sure they have a good, well built, atractive line of Nanos for their customers that do not want to take the plunge to the video side.
The introduction of a new Nano and a video store but not a 6G iPod might indicate that they are stilling trying to decide which direction to take the 6G. I would say that if they do introduce the video store and a new Nano on the 12th a new iPod will be out before Christmas (no later that Thanksgiving, late November).
All this is based on the assumption that a true video iPod would cost more than the current line. I make this assumption based on the fact that they need bigger hard drives, bigger screens, and better battery. All these improvements are bound to increase the price.
I think Apple has really reached a fork in the road when it comes to the iPod.
Do they really want to start selling these things as vidoe players, not just music players that play video? If so, everyone knows they need a bigger screen and that is going to run up the price of the iPod.
So they have a choice:
(1) Introduce a true video iPod and ask more for it.
(2) Drop in bigger HDs into the current line.
The introduction of movie rentals might be a testing ground to see if people are really buying the idea. So if the iVideo Store (?) does well, this might indicate that people really want true, big scree video iPods. If it does so-so that might tell Apple that they should just keep the iPod primarilly a music player and the vidoe playback be an extra feature.
If they do introduce a more expensive, full screen iPod, they need a cheap[er], higher capacity only-music player too. This is where the Nano comes in. They need to be sure they have a good, well built, atractive line of Nanos for their customers that do not want to take the plunge to the video side.
The introduction of a new Nano and a video store but not a 6G iPod might indicate that they are stilling trying to decide which direction to take the 6G. I would say that if they do introduce the video store and a new Nano on the 12th a new iPod will be out before Christmas (no later that Thanksgiving, late November).
All this is based on the assumption that a true video iPod would cost more than the current line. I make this assumption based on the fact that they need bigger hard drives, bigger screens, and better battery. All these improvements are bound to increase the price.
Macshroomer
Mar 21, 05:17 PM
After using our ipad-2 since the 17th, we are pretty sure we are going to return it and get an Airbook 11" to go with our pro machines at home. We just can't get anything like simple productive tasks done on it without some form of rain dance, hoop jump session. I cant even email a photo with a file name to a client to comp in a layout, pretty laughable actually.
Maybe in a few years when Apple figures out there are actually people out there who do more than game or waste time on Facebook....
Maybe in a few years when Apple figures out there are actually people out there who do more than game or waste time on Facebook....
jorasho
Nov 8, 08:11 AM
It would be really disappointing if they waited with this upgrade for mwsf 2007. I mean, what's new, apart from the very expected Core 2 Duo and the very slow upper hard drive option.
No, I expected at least a different Intel graphical chipset and an upgrade to 1 GB RAM over the full line. Also, it's still $1099, not $999.
Rather disappointing upgrade, Apple, whas this all you did in almost half a year of development?
No, I expected at least a different Intel graphical chipset and an upgrade to 1 GB RAM over the full line. Also, it's still $1099, not $999.
Rather disappointing upgrade, Apple, whas this all you did in almost half a year of development?
tsmithgolf2000
Aug 24, 12:03 PM
Powerbook G4's and Ibooks. Just announced on CNBC.
szsiddiq
Nov 8, 09:30 AM
that 4mb cache should be sweet
DavidLeblond
May 4, 10:06 PM
I can't see 3D, so I guess I wouldn't get to experience the "magic." Poo.
HyperZboy
Nov 4, 01:57 AM
Frankly, the vast majority of users, and developers, and content providers, DO NOT care what you personally want, no matter how much you roll your eyes.
Flash is on virtually every computer on Earth, and pretty soon it will be on virtually every smart phone as well. Except the iPhone, of course.
Flash works very well, for the vast majority of users. The fact that Apple has not expended the minimum effort required to get Flash working more efficiently in OS X, is mostly problem for only those relatively few of us, who prefer to use Mac OS.
(In my testing on OS 10.6.1, Safari is by far the worst of all browsers at handling Flash: it pushes the CPU to 77%, while Firefox and Camino stay at less than 49%. Safari is also by far the worst on Windows 7, where on the same video it runs to almost 30% of CPU, while IE8 is at 1%, and Firefox and Chrome are at 4%.
The vast majority of users enjoy what Flash provides.
And, Flash does things which would be impossible, or very hard, or prohibitively expensive, to do with other currently available technologies, and deploy them for all browsers and systems.
So, I repeat: the rest of the world DOES NOT care, that you, and a handful of weird backroom guys, have an irrational hatred of Flash. Move on.
The bottom line is, if Apple doesn't get Flash on the iPhone, it will quickly lose market share to Android. It's a HUGE missing feature, bigger than cut/paste and turn-by turn navigation and mms rolled together, and you can bet it will be advertised as such.
I'm amazed that you investigated so heavily the CPU usage and yet STILL came to the wrong conclusion, that this is Apple's fault.
For the record, you're completely wrong that FLASH works well on anything but Windows PCs.
Did you not notice in those numbers that FLASH doesn't work well on ALL MACS ON ALL BROWSERS ??? And FLASH is the reason for crashes on both POWERPC and INTEL Macs, even brand new Macs, from what I'm reading in other threads here on MacRumors.
So, how again is this Apple's fault that FLASH doesn't work on any recent Apple platform, iPhone, PowerPC, or INTEL?
Because Adobe doesn't care and has written crappy software. It has nothing to do with Apple.
Not much else crashes any of my Macs, so how is this Apple's fault?
Can you imagine what would happen if Apple let the current version of FLASH on the iPhone and peoples' phones started crashing like their Apple Macs are now? It would be on FOX NEWS!
Apple's making the right call here. The ball is in Adobe's court to get it right first on Macs.
Then I'll insist Apple let FLASH on the iPhone, but not a day sooner.
And I will bet dollars to doughnuts that your Android prediction turns out wrong too, FLASH or no FLASH.
I am constantly going to websites that I cannot view because the iPhone is lacking Flash player. You don't like Flash? Great, if there is something better out there, then competition will cause the better product to prevail. But for now, iPhone users are being deprived of THOUSANDS of Flash websites that other smartphone owners are able to view!!!!!!!!!! :mad:
Why is Apple blocking Flash? This is one for the FCC! Same reason that Microsoft used to block Netscape. Apple wants websites to use Apple software and not Flash. FAIL! It's a violation of free markets! Here comes a Netscape-Microsoft lawsuit in the Supreme Court, except this time with Flash-Apple.
If FLASH is an epic fail on both INTEL and POWERPC Macs and with both Safari and Firefox on Macs, how the hell do you think it's going to do on the iPhone?
This is NOT Apple's problem in my opinion. Adobe has just dropped the ball.
If FLASH crashes on most people's Macs, how do you think it will fair on the iPhone, since it's mostly the same browser?
Please people, think before you put your feet in your mouths.
Flash is on virtually every computer on Earth, and pretty soon it will be on virtually every smart phone as well. Except the iPhone, of course.
Flash works very well, for the vast majority of users. The fact that Apple has not expended the minimum effort required to get Flash working more efficiently in OS X, is mostly problem for only those relatively few of us, who prefer to use Mac OS.
(In my testing on OS 10.6.1, Safari is by far the worst of all browsers at handling Flash: it pushes the CPU to 77%, while Firefox and Camino stay at less than 49%. Safari is also by far the worst on Windows 7, where on the same video it runs to almost 30% of CPU, while IE8 is at 1%, and Firefox and Chrome are at 4%.
The vast majority of users enjoy what Flash provides.
And, Flash does things which would be impossible, or very hard, or prohibitively expensive, to do with other currently available technologies, and deploy them for all browsers and systems.
So, I repeat: the rest of the world DOES NOT care, that you, and a handful of weird backroom guys, have an irrational hatred of Flash. Move on.
The bottom line is, if Apple doesn't get Flash on the iPhone, it will quickly lose market share to Android. It's a HUGE missing feature, bigger than cut/paste and turn-by turn navigation and mms rolled together, and you can bet it will be advertised as such.
I'm amazed that you investigated so heavily the CPU usage and yet STILL came to the wrong conclusion, that this is Apple's fault.
For the record, you're completely wrong that FLASH works well on anything but Windows PCs.
Did you not notice in those numbers that FLASH doesn't work well on ALL MACS ON ALL BROWSERS ??? And FLASH is the reason for crashes on both POWERPC and INTEL Macs, even brand new Macs, from what I'm reading in other threads here on MacRumors.
So, how again is this Apple's fault that FLASH doesn't work on any recent Apple platform, iPhone, PowerPC, or INTEL?
Because Adobe doesn't care and has written crappy software. It has nothing to do with Apple.
Not much else crashes any of my Macs, so how is this Apple's fault?
Can you imagine what would happen if Apple let the current version of FLASH on the iPhone and peoples' phones started crashing like their Apple Macs are now? It would be on FOX NEWS!
Apple's making the right call here. The ball is in Adobe's court to get it right first on Macs.
Then I'll insist Apple let FLASH on the iPhone, but not a day sooner.
And I will bet dollars to doughnuts that your Android prediction turns out wrong too, FLASH or no FLASH.
I am constantly going to websites that I cannot view because the iPhone is lacking Flash player. You don't like Flash? Great, if there is something better out there, then competition will cause the better product to prevail. But for now, iPhone users are being deprived of THOUSANDS of Flash websites that other smartphone owners are able to view!!!!!!!!!! :mad:
Why is Apple blocking Flash? This is one for the FCC! Same reason that Microsoft used to block Netscape. Apple wants websites to use Apple software and not Flash. FAIL! It's a violation of free markets! Here comes a Netscape-Microsoft lawsuit in the Supreme Court, except this time with Flash-Apple.
If FLASH is an epic fail on both INTEL and POWERPC Macs and with both Safari and Firefox on Macs, how the hell do you think it's going to do on the iPhone?
This is NOT Apple's problem in my opinion. Adobe has just dropped the ball.
If FLASH crashes on most people's Macs, how do you think it will fair on the iPhone, since it's mostly the same browser?
Please people, think before you put your feet in your mouths.
mooncaine
Sep 12, 05:05 PM
Every iTunes update, I keep expecting to see this. Tags you can pile on, *in any order*.
Example: I have a song by Joe Blow, a song by Suzy Suck, and a song where they collaborated.
If I add an artist tag "Joe Blow, Suzy Suck", it's one tag. It's not Joe's tag, and Suzy's tag, and it's also not the same as "Suzy Suck, Joe Blow" ... though, to the user, it should be. A search for Suck and Blow should turn up any song that has both artists in the Artists tag[s].
Especially important for Genre tags. Many tunes could be classified as several genres, but if I put Joe's tune down as "Blues Rock", it isn't "Blues" and it isn't "Rock".
I would have suggested tags "like iPhoto's keywords", but I don't like iPhoto's implementation of them. I do like drag and drop tags, though. I guess iPhoto-style tagging would be more helpful than the current system.
Example: I have a song by Joe Blow, a song by Suzy Suck, and a song where they collaborated.
If I add an artist tag "Joe Blow, Suzy Suck", it's one tag. It's not Joe's tag, and Suzy's tag, and it's also not the same as "Suzy Suck, Joe Blow" ... though, to the user, it should be. A search for Suck and Blow should turn up any song that has both artists in the Artists tag[s].
Especially important for Genre tags. Many tunes could be classified as several genres, but if I put Joe's tune down as "Blues Rock", it isn't "Blues" and it isn't "Rock".
I would have suggested tags "like iPhoto's keywords", but I don't like iPhoto's implementation of them. I do like drag and drop tags, though. I guess iPhoto-style tagging would be more helpful than the current system.
saving107
Mar 25, 12:49 PM
on the Mac one is told to re-download a 4GB application for a few piddly updates in much the same way one is forced to re-download the whole operating system.
Thats no true.
Apple just a few days ago released Mac OS X 10.6.7 and was only 475MB, and the Combo update was only 1.12GB. Mac OS X 10.6.6 brought the Mac App Store and was only 143MB.
I don't know why your updates are 4GB.
Mac OS X 10.6.6
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/06/apple-releases-mac-os-x-10-6-6-and-launches-mac-app-store/
Mac OS X 10.6.7
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/21/apple-releases-mac-os-x-10-6-7/
Thats no true.
Apple just a few days ago released Mac OS X 10.6.7 and was only 475MB, and the Combo update was only 1.12GB. Mac OS X 10.6.6 brought the Mac App Store and was only 143MB.
I don't know why your updates are 4GB.
Mac OS X 10.6.6
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/06/apple-releases-mac-os-x-10-6-6-and-launches-mac-app-store/
Mac OS X 10.6.7
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/21/apple-releases-mac-os-x-10-6-7/
dbhays
Aug 24, 06:38 PM
On the phone with apple support now. Got right through. No CC required.
fmolly
Nov 27, 01:35 PM
Ahh A psychedelic ipod me thinks???
http://photos.yafro.com/pics3/i/20061127/11/4/2/3/4230b830d4f1f41fc2a105b91bf48479200611270_full.jpg
The iPod will sell- but the music- most people who like the Beatles already have the music- it's if they can be bothered paying again with the DRM involved.
Fmolly
http://photos.yafro.com/pics3/i/20061127/11/4/2/3/4230b830d4f1f41fc2a105b91bf48479200611270_full.jpg
The iPod will sell- but the music- most people who like the Beatles already have the music- it's if they can be bothered paying again with the DRM involved.
Fmolly
SactoGuy18
Mar 25, 09:43 PM
650 MB download to update my 4G iPod touch.
607 MB download to update my iPad 2.
THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE, in my humble opinion. http://www.en.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/negative.gif
Why can't Apple design their updates so you no longer need to essentially download the whole iOS code? Even Microsoft in their Service Packs for Windows XP/Vista/7 "polls" the system to determine the actual Service Pack download size, so in many cases the download is actually quite small. Of course, I'd like to see Apple allow for incremental updates like how Google does it with the Chrome web browser--done in the background and unobtrusively.
607 MB download to update my iPad 2.
THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE, in my humble opinion. http://www.en.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/negative.gif
Why can't Apple design their updates so you no longer need to essentially download the whole iOS code? Even Microsoft in their Service Packs for Windows XP/Vista/7 "polls" the system to determine the actual Service Pack download size, so in many cases the download is actually quite small. Of course, I'd like to see Apple allow for incremental updates like how Google does it with the Chrome web browser--done in the background and unobtrusively.
KeithJenner
Nov 25, 01:15 PM
If you still think that buying that set on iTunes is the better value then that's fine. To me it just doesn't compare.
I don't at all. I have the physical box.
As I say, I agree with many of your points.
I don't at all. I have the physical box.
As I say, I agree with many of your points.
Mr.Gadget
Apr 18, 02:23 AM
The iPad2 and all the other tablets on the market are primarily media consumption devices. I see no problem with ToysRus or anyone else from carrying it as long as they are a reputable company.
Along those lines, that is where the iPad runs circles around all other tablets out there. They allow one to do it all, from watch your favorite show, listen to music, surf the web, etc... I have a Viewsonic gTablet running (rooted) Android, and it is really great and all, but the entire Android platform lacks the ease of use of the iPad (and the smoothness) and the big name programs like Netflix.
I've been waiting for ANY of my local stores to have iPads in stock and I will be picking one up for my wife, so this is welcome news for me.
Along those lines, that is where the iPad runs circles around all other tablets out there. They allow one to do it all, from watch your favorite show, listen to music, surf the web, etc... I have a Viewsonic gTablet running (rooted) Android, and it is really great and all, but the entire Android platform lacks the ease of use of the iPad (and the smoothness) and the big name programs like Netflix.
I've been waiting for ANY of my local stores to have iPads in stock and I will be picking one up for my wife, so this is welcome news for me.
Lesser Evets
May 5, 05:32 AM
This rumor is 100% automatic BS.
You can come back and throw verbal stones at me if wrong, but this low-end computing pad is going to get that kind of unseen technology out the gate? First, the price of the device would be $900+, killing its market, unless there is some amazingly convenient reason for the 3D screens to be made as cheap as the regular ones used now. The iPad 3 + 3D making it iPad 3D seems just a tad too convenient for a dumb rumor to start. Sounds more like a joke said in a bar and spread as fact to see how far the fanboys would run.
Heck, they couldn't even bring out a retina-resolution screen yet on the iPad. Or OLED. ...and you think they'll implement 3D: the most useless innovation sparked by a Hollywood carnival barker?
You can come back and throw verbal stones at me if wrong, but this low-end computing pad is going to get that kind of unseen technology out the gate? First, the price of the device would be $900+, killing its market, unless there is some amazingly convenient reason for the 3D screens to be made as cheap as the regular ones used now. The iPad 3 + 3D making it iPad 3D seems just a tad too convenient for a dumb rumor to start. Sounds more like a joke said in a bar and spread as fact to see how far the fanboys would run.
Heck, they couldn't even bring out a retina-resolution screen yet on the iPad. Or OLED. ...and you think they'll implement 3D: the most useless innovation sparked by a Hollywood carnival barker?
simon-says
Aug 24, 01:42 PM
Mine falls in range. But the website has been saying my serial number is ineligible for a recall. Weird?
mautal
Nov 7, 09:29 AM
euro apple stores have been @ 3 days for quite sometime... france & germany @ least... the education institution has been @ 3-5 (5-7 days for blackbooks) for a couple weeks now too...
i too think soon, and not today... i usually wake up around 7:30 - 7:45am (cupertino time) and when i woke up last when MBP were updated it was alrdy on the wepage
i too think soon, and not today... i usually wake up around 7:30 - 7:45am (cupertino time) and when i woke up last when MBP were updated it was alrdy on the wepage
iVeBeenDrinkin'
Mar 19, 05:41 AM
Try squeezing 26,000 songs on your iPhone. ;)
Nice library, but do you need it with you at all times? I used to think I did, but I've found that I don't need 11,000 songs with me all the time. I have songs in my library I haven't listened to in years. Another reason why the iPod classic is dying, Apple, and iTunes, have made it very easy to manage the music you actually listen to, and add it to your iPod.
Nice library, but do you need it with you at all times? I used to think I did, but I've found that I don't need 11,000 songs with me all the time. I have songs in my library I haven't listened to in years. Another reason why the iPod classic is dying, Apple, and iTunes, have made it very easy to manage the music you actually listen to, and add it to your iPod.
twoodcc
Aug 4, 10:20 AM
Sorry if this has been posted before, but Digg has the following for an apple source on new products at WDDC:
http://digg.com/apple/Exclusive_interview_with_an_Apple_insider_on_Blu_ray_MacPro_iPods_at_WWDC
the direct article is at:
http://www.dvdnewsroom.com/news/breaking-inside-apple-on-blu-ray-macpro-and-apple�s-media-center-strategy-what-to-expect-and-not-to-expect-at-wwdc/
thanks for the link. interesting. not sure if i believe all of that though, but we'll see.
http://digg.com/apple/Exclusive_interview_with_an_Apple_insider_on_Blu_ray_MacPro_iPods_at_WWDC
the direct article is at:
http://www.dvdnewsroom.com/news/breaking-inside-apple-on-blu-ray-macpro-and-apple�s-media-center-strategy-what-to-expect-and-not-to-expect-at-wwdc/
thanks for the link. interesting. not sure if i believe all of that though, but we'll see.
shervieux
Mar 22, 07:53 AM
My wife said no too and this even includes my wish for one for my upcoming bday to get one.
I need a new iMac Quad Core or Macbook Pro quad core (would need to have 8gb ram and minimum 750gb to 1tb hard drive), plus I need a larger time machine backup drive and my wife keeps telling me no also.
But for me, it is not a toy. I've been unemployed for the last almost year and now my computer has become a work machine for free-lancing. I will need a power-horse as I am considering the reality of having to start my own business, as there are no jobs around here.
My wife really was not happy when I bought my iPad 1 last year. I had to settle for a wifi only version. Now she says "Yeah, it is awesome and you do get a lot of use out of it, but I still think the money could've been better spent".
My iPad is my mobile machine. I take it to conferences, job hunting, classes, church, meeting with my free-lance clients, etc. And my 2008 (heavily used) macbook is my home machine. Internal drive is getting full, external drives are going on 3-5 years old and with only 2gb ram, I can no longer run a VM for my very few windows-only needs (darn web hosting companies or websites that are SQL server and IE only driven).
I need a new iMac Quad Core or Macbook Pro quad core (would need to have 8gb ram and minimum 750gb to 1tb hard drive), plus I need a larger time machine backup drive and my wife keeps telling me no also.
But for me, it is not a toy. I've been unemployed for the last almost year and now my computer has become a work machine for free-lancing. I will need a power-horse as I am considering the reality of having to start my own business, as there are no jobs around here.
My wife really was not happy when I bought my iPad 1 last year. I had to settle for a wifi only version. Now she says "Yeah, it is awesome and you do get a lot of use out of it, but I still think the money could've been better spent".
My iPad is my mobile machine. I take it to conferences, job hunting, classes, church, meeting with my free-lance clients, etc. And my 2008 (heavily used) macbook is my home machine. Internal drive is getting full, external drives are going on 3-5 years old and with only 2gb ram, I can no longer run a VM for my very few windows-only needs (darn web hosting companies or websites that are SQL server and IE only driven).
xsedrinam
Sep 22, 11:33 PM
It's worth the effort to read the Update. Reuters articule (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyid=2006-09-22T185622Z_01_WEN5836_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-WALMART-STUDIOS.xml&src=rss&rpc=22).
SevenInchScrew
Sep 11, 11:17 PM
The review embargo has just lifted. Here is what they are saying...
1UP - A+
http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3181331
Destructoid - 10/10
http://www.destructoid.com/review-halo-reach-181587.phtml#ext
IGN - UK - 10/10
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/111/1119630p2.html
Joystiq - 5/5
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/09/12/halo-reach-review/
GamePro - 5/5
http://www.gamepro.com/article/reviews/216483/halo-reach/
G4 TV - 5/5
http://g4tv.com/games/xbox-360/61984/Halo-Reach/review/
IGN - 9.5/10
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/111/1117228p1.html
GameTrailer - 9.3/10
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/review-halo-reach/704382
Eurogamer - 9/10
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-09-12-halo-reach-review
GiantBomb - 4/5
http://www.giantbomb.com/halo-reach/61-26786/reviews/
1UP - A+
http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3181331
Destructoid - 10/10
http://www.destructoid.com/review-halo-reach-181587.phtml#ext
IGN - UK - 10/10
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/111/1119630p2.html
Joystiq - 5/5
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/09/12/halo-reach-review/
GamePro - 5/5
http://www.gamepro.com/article/reviews/216483/halo-reach/
G4 TV - 5/5
http://g4tv.com/games/xbox-360/61984/Halo-Reach/review/
IGN - 9.5/10
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/111/1117228p1.html
GameTrailer - 9.3/10
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/review-halo-reach/704382
Eurogamer - 9/10
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-09-12-halo-reach-review
GiantBomb - 4/5
http://www.giantbomb.com/halo-reach/61-26786/reviews/
boss.king
May 4, 10:40 PM
And it will be called:
iPad 3D.
You heard it here first folks.
Actually we heard it 2 posts above yours
iPad 3D.
You heard it here first folks.
Actually we heard it 2 posts above yours
No comments:
Post a Comment