darthraige
Dec 13, 01:40 PM
I highly doubt an early 2011 verizon iphone. LTE, doubly so. If it's coming for Verizon, it will be unveiled/launch the same time as the AT&T iphone 5.
And if you're wrong and it's announced in January? ;)
And if you're wrong and it's announced in January? ;)
AppleZilla
Apr 25, 02:15 PM
Screen is clearly faked one way or another.
The Internet is an easy mark.
The Internet is an easy mark.
Arcady
Oct 6, 10:44 PM
I don't understand people who point a video camera at their TV and record it, then upload that video to YouTube. If they can figure out how to connect the camera to the computer, why can't they figure out how to connect the TV?
JustSayGrr
Sep 29, 11:18 PM
I understand that the plans have to be submitted to local planning authorities for architectural and engineering reviews, etc. but I think I'd be a little upset at even the rough floor plans making it out on the web out of concern for personal safety. :eek:
I would hope that there are some elaborate physical security features as part of the build out. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why it's a relatively modestly sized home on a comparatively large lot size...a physical buffer zone.
I would hope that there are some elaborate physical security features as part of the build out. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why it's a relatively modestly sized home on a comparatively large lot size...a physical buffer zone.
scu
Nov 24, 08:12 AM
Well I just spent over 100 bucks on these specials. Call of Duty 2 special was too good not to pass up and I always upgrade my .mac account on this day.
I am saving the rest of my money for a iPhone or new video iPod.
I am saving the rest of my money for a iPhone or new video iPod.
belkjab
Feb 8, 03:20 PM
The article at the following URL explains "in great detail" how the Dell & Apple Flat Panels differ:
http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=2400
Apple seals the panel and associated electronics inside of a case thus protecting these delicate components from dust. Unfortunately, the Dell Flat panel has vents on the top, back of the case which expose these components to dust. I would expect Apple's display to out last that sold by Dell.
Who said anything about Dell claiming greater contrast. Which of my post said that Dell claimed greater contrast ratio and brightness?. I would never make that claim (The dell website claims that the Dell 24 inch is 700:1 contrast, same as the Apple panels, which just got that upgrade while the Dell panels where that for a while). As to brightness, Dell 24 inch is 400 cd/m2 while the apple 23 inch is also 400 cd/m2. I'm neither a Dell fanboy nor an apple fanboy (as i so fondly point out time after time, i have a apple power G5 mac with a 20 inch Dell monitor). I would never make claims such as Dell monitor is better than Apple monitor unless I knew that to be true.. I pointed out that they used the same panels. Yes, the size may be different but they come off the same manufacturing line. To see Dell specs, here is the link for the 24 inch http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=222-0863
They are the same panels except notice Dell has more features which puzzles me greatly. Apple wants to charge a premium for their monitor and that is fine with me but come on!!!.. have more features than the other guy please!!!.. you know how annonying it is for a Dell fanboy to come up to you and say.. hey, our monitor is the same but mine is better and cheaper (better in terms of more features, not brightness or contrast). If you think features don't matter, you are living in la la land. I like the fact that i can hook up more things to my Dell monitor than i could have with an apple monitor. If the apple monitor was more versatile and offered more features, i'd consider paying the premium but i am not gonna get an overpriced apple monitor cause stevie says so.. I don't see him offering me rides on his boat.. why the hell should i get trapped in his reality distortion field?. Give me something better and i will gladly hand over my money to Stevie so he can get a bigger boat (and without any complaints).
As to my first glorius revelation, you must be a newbie. you should search for my name in other apple forums. I don't suffer fools gladly (or people who reply to a post too quickly). When i post, i do not expect an instantaneous response. It's ok to google the information before you respond. I can wait!!. If you don't know or understand, say so but do not try to make a point about something you don't know about. You replied to one of my post about how wrong I was that dell and apple were using the same panel and now you claim you don't know about the lcd production process?.. and you complain about me being mean?.. you leave yourself open to such an attack when you start making statements you have no idea are true or not.
Google is a great resource.. I don't know everything either (i wish i did but unfortunately, time is finite and my brain only has so much capacity).. but I always research stuff on google before posting. It helps (also helps to view the company you are bashing website to see their monitor specs before posting).
BTW, since the apple 30 inch is definetly a better value than Dell 30 inch (although i am sure Michael will not take that lying down.. watch for dell to suddenly drop prices on their monitors) i am soliciting funds to my "get a apple 30 inch monitor" foundation. I get the feeling i will not be seeing your dollar. Oh well. Maybe I haven't antagonized everyone in all the forums and i can get some donations to my wonderful foundation (whoose sole purpose is to get me a 30 inch apple monitor).
http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=2400
Apple seals the panel and associated electronics inside of a case thus protecting these delicate components from dust. Unfortunately, the Dell Flat panel has vents on the top, back of the case which expose these components to dust. I would expect Apple's display to out last that sold by Dell.
Who said anything about Dell claiming greater contrast. Which of my post said that Dell claimed greater contrast ratio and brightness?. I would never make that claim (The dell website claims that the Dell 24 inch is 700:1 contrast, same as the Apple panels, which just got that upgrade while the Dell panels where that for a while). As to brightness, Dell 24 inch is 400 cd/m2 while the apple 23 inch is also 400 cd/m2. I'm neither a Dell fanboy nor an apple fanboy (as i so fondly point out time after time, i have a apple power G5 mac with a 20 inch Dell monitor). I would never make claims such as Dell monitor is better than Apple monitor unless I knew that to be true.. I pointed out that they used the same panels. Yes, the size may be different but they come off the same manufacturing line. To see Dell specs, here is the link for the 24 inch http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=222-0863
They are the same panels except notice Dell has more features which puzzles me greatly. Apple wants to charge a premium for their monitor and that is fine with me but come on!!!.. have more features than the other guy please!!!.. you know how annonying it is for a Dell fanboy to come up to you and say.. hey, our monitor is the same but mine is better and cheaper (better in terms of more features, not brightness or contrast). If you think features don't matter, you are living in la la land. I like the fact that i can hook up more things to my Dell monitor than i could have with an apple monitor. If the apple monitor was more versatile and offered more features, i'd consider paying the premium but i am not gonna get an overpriced apple monitor cause stevie says so.. I don't see him offering me rides on his boat.. why the hell should i get trapped in his reality distortion field?. Give me something better and i will gladly hand over my money to Stevie so he can get a bigger boat (and without any complaints).
As to my first glorius revelation, you must be a newbie. you should search for my name in other apple forums. I don't suffer fools gladly (or people who reply to a post too quickly). When i post, i do not expect an instantaneous response. It's ok to google the information before you respond. I can wait!!. If you don't know or understand, say so but do not try to make a point about something you don't know about. You replied to one of my post about how wrong I was that dell and apple were using the same panel and now you claim you don't know about the lcd production process?.. and you complain about me being mean?.. you leave yourself open to such an attack when you start making statements you have no idea are true or not.
Google is a great resource.. I don't know everything either (i wish i did but unfortunately, time is finite and my brain only has so much capacity).. but I always research stuff on google before posting. It helps (also helps to view the company you are bashing website to see their monitor specs before posting).
BTW, since the apple 30 inch is definetly a better value than Dell 30 inch (although i am sure Michael will not take that lying down.. watch for dell to suddenly drop prices on their monitors) i am soliciting funds to my "get a apple 30 inch monitor" foundation. I get the feeling i will not be seeing your dollar. Oh well. Maybe I haven't antagonized everyone in all the forums and i can get some donations to my wonderful foundation (whoose sole purpose is to get me a 30 inch apple monitor).
Sdevante
Mar 17, 11:07 AM
Retail theft is on the books everywhere and rooted in old common law. The States only vary on degrees (ie classes of misdemeanors).
Not so. Where I am from (which I guess would be Chicago, Illinois, since I am the President), there is only one theft offense and nothing specific to retail. Under that statute, I'm not sure the OP would be subject to prosecution.
I stand by my initial statement that one should not be so quick to make blanket statements.
Not so. Where I am from (which I guess would be Chicago, Illinois, since I am the President), there is only one theft offense and nothing specific to retail. Under that statute, I'm not sure the OP would be subject to prosecution.
I stand by my initial statement that one should not be so quick to make blanket statements.
resom
Apr 6, 07:26 PM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61bWpbSXkgL._SL380_.jpg
Crysis 2 on PS3
and Britney Spears Deluxe CD
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51GNTMvK2yL._SL380_.jpg
Crysis 2 on PS3
and Britney Spears Deluxe CD
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51GNTMvK2yL._SL380_.jpg
Lord Blackadder
Aug 3, 11:20 AM
While that part is true that we would burn more fuel at power planets one advantage you are forgetting about is the power planets are by far much more efficient at producing power than the internal combustion engine on your car. On top of that it is much easier to capture and clean the pollution the power planet produces over what the cars produce. On top of that we can easily most our power over to other renewable choices.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
Melrose
Aug 6, 04:24 PM
If GM had listed the Volt for a good price they'd have a major hit on their hands. This way, it's just gonna die quietly, and then they'll complain about the world not being ready for hybrids. :rolleyes:
Eric374
Mar 19, 05:32 PM
Here in England thats a pretty common figure of speech that people use all the time. It doesn't mean literally ages. I forgot this was an American forum, but what does that have to do with anything anyway?
I'm from the US and I even understood what you were saying. It's just figurative language. It looks like people just want something to rant on you about.
Same here, and I understood what you meant as well. From now on, instead of the word "ages", say "I've had my iPhone for a time, times, and half a time". That should make 'em stop and think a little!:D
I'm from the US and I even understood what you were saying. It's just figurative language. It looks like people just want something to rant on you about.
Same here, and I understood what you meant as well. From now on, instead of the word "ages", say "I've had my iPhone for a time, times, and half a time". That should make 'em stop and think a little!:D
chris975d
Dec 13, 10:34 PM
<-----Takes one
Why on earth would they create such a manufacturing and delivery nightmare??? OF COURSE they would put Verizon and AT&T on 2 separate refresh dates, it only makes sense. The situation you describe is perfectly normal and happens all the time. It's only practical for Apple to do the same.
I was acutally going to say this same thing. It makes more sense for Apple to put a Verizon/CDMA/LTE...whatever phone on a different release cycle than the GSM phone, as they typically can't even handle the logistical nightmare of releasing the current phone with adequate supply. How long is the thing backordered now when an iPhone is released? How nightmarish is it for them to produce and keep adequate supply of only a GSM iPhone? Now imagine if those production numbers were divided between a Verizon AND the GSM iPhone....you'd never be able to get one! A 6 month split would be almost perfect for releases...it'd give the production lines ample time to get decent numbers of both phones built up. The dual release (unless Apple can get a single chip LTE/CDMA/GSM solution) would be a potential nightmare for FoxConn's assembly plant.
Why on earth would they create such a manufacturing and delivery nightmare??? OF COURSE they would put Verizon and AT&T on 2 separate refresh dates, it only makes sense. The situation you describe is perfectly normal and happens all the time. It's only practical for Apple to do the same.
I was acutally going to say this same thing. It makes more sense for Apple to put a Verizon/CDMA/LTE...whatever phone on a different release cycle than the GSM phone, as they typically can't even handle the logistical nightmare of releasing the current phone with adequate supply. How long is the thing backordered now when an iPhone is released? How nightmarish is it for them to produce and keep adequate supply of only a GSM iPhone? Now imagine if those production numbers were divided between a Verizon AND the GSM iPhone....you'd never be able to get one! A 6 month split would be almost perfect for releases...it'd give the production lines ample time to get decent numbers of both phones built up. The dual release (unless Apple can get a single chip LTE/CDMA/GSM solution) would be a potential nightmare for FoxConn's assembly plant.
door4
Sep 12, 07:56 AM
To be honest I don't care about the bitrate of audio tracks..
However if they brought American TV shows onto a global release date (ie we get them the same time as they do) - THEN i'd care about the update.
Anything else is just more clutter..
Don't be to hopeful... most of our (US) tv is crap. I'd rather watch BBC.
However if they brought American TV shows onto a global release date (ie we get them the same time as they do) - THEN i'd care about the update.
Anything else is just more clutter..
Don't be to hopeful... most of our (US) tv is crap. I'd rather watch BBC.
DDustiNN
Mar 19, 03:25 AM
I can't believe how much smugness is in this thread. It almost makes me ashamed to call myself an iPhone owner.
Sure, it is the best-looking phone on the market, but come on people... it's still just a phone. It costs the same amount as any other new high-end phone with contract ($199, which is what I paid for my RAZR 2 when it came out). The OP perceiving other people's difference in taste (they chose Android) hardly equates to "envy". All phones have their pros and cons, and people choose what they want accordingly. The fact that you even came to that conclusion of "they envy me" just contributes to how smug you are.
It's great that you love your phone. I love mine too. But don't be so full of yourself... that's what gives iPhone owners a bad name, hence the stereotype.
So again, it's a freaking phone... It's not a status symbol.
Sure, it is the best-looking phone on the market, but come on people... it's still just a phone. It costs the same amount as any other new high-end phone with contract ($199, which is what I paid for my RAZR 2 when it came out). The OP perceiving other people's difference in taste (they chose Android) hardly equates to "envy". All phones have their pros and cons, and people choose what they want accordingly. The fact that you even came to that conclusion of "they envy me" just contributes to how smug you are.
It's great that you love your phone. I love mine too. But don't be so full of yourself... that's what gives iPhone owners a bad name, hence the stereotype.
So again, it's a freaking phone... It's not a status symbol.
Tones2
May 2, 09:52 AM
"iPod Bug Fixes"
I hope that they finally fix the bug where lyrics disappear when the song changes. That's been there for awhile and is extremely irritating.
Also, the even BIGGER bug where iTunes will not load any additional songs onto the iPhone / iPad if you approach having only 1 GB free space left and you use the 128 kbps conversion option. That's been there for almost two YEARS without being addressed, although this may be an iTunes thing.
Tony
I hope that they finally fix the bug where lyrics disappear when the song changes. That's been there for awhile and is extremely irritating.
Also, the even BIGGER bug where iTunes will not load any additional songs onto the iPhone / iPad if you approach having only 1 GB free space left and you use the 128 kbps conversion option. That's been there for almost two YEARS without being addressed, although this may be an iTunes thing.
Tony
caliguy
Nov 23, 08:08 PM
I hear Apple retail stores open as early as 7am!!
As early as 6am, actually.
As early as 6am, actually.
numediaman
Oct 30, 12:43 PM
I'm on the phone with AT&T right now talking about the new fees they have added to my bill -- they are, of course, bogus and will be reversed. But every month I have to call AT&T about bogus charges they have added to the bill.
I imagine that this game adds thousands, if not millions, of dollars to their bottom line.
In response, I have eliminated my home lines that go through AT&T, and would immediately go with any other carrier that could handle the iPhone.
I imagine that this game adds thousands, if not millions, of dollars to their bottom line.
In response, I have eliminated my home lines that go through AT&T, and would immediately go with any other carrier that could handle the iPhone.
wordoflife
Apr 25, 03:39 PM
It doesn't look fake to me, but who am I to judge?
Anyways, I'll welcome that screen.
Anyways, I'll welcome that screen.
jholzner
Sep 12, 08:45 AM
please read the thread....
When you come across a bit of information that seems to point to some sort of confirmation to a rumor do you read 9 pages of threads or do you just post it? I scolled through real quick to see if the image had been posted and didn't see it. Lay off.
When you come across a bit of information that seems to point to some sort of confirmation to a rumor do you read 9 pages of threads or do you just post it? I scolled through real quick to see if the image had been posted and didn't see it. Lay off.
chrono1081
Apr 15, 05:05 PM
What I meant is that a competitor, that might stick around, would be a good thing for iTunes store users in terms of both pricing & usability.
I can't really agree with this. The last thing I want is a bunch of different places to buy music.
IF and only if the same same content was offered on both stores would this be a good thing in my opinion, otherwise its kind of like the Blu Ray vs HD DVD thing.
I can't really agree with this. The last thing I want is a bunch of different places to buy music.
IF and only if the same same content was offered on both stores would this be a good thing in my opinion, otherwise its kind of like the Blu Ray vs HD DVD thing.
Illusion986
Apr 15, 03:14 PM
Real or Not....I like it
relimw
Sep 25, 11:10 AM
So... what are we supposed to run this monstrosity on? The G5 QUADS had a hard enough time running the first one. I can't imagine running this on an iMac or worse... a mac mini.
JOKE JOKE JOKE
And to think, I can run Lightroom on a G4 mini...
JOKE JOKE JOKE
And to think, I can run Lightroom on a G4 mini...
croasmun
Oct 2, 03:11 PM
Since when is Apple not a litigious company?
fsudaft
Mar 29, 12:23 AM
New Updates: The 360 is connecting to the internet. This can be seen through certain services. Our local police force have a few tricks up their sleeves, its just a matter of them being around when its connected. Based on the times that the system is on and connected it can be deduced that children are behind it. (Think about when you did bad things as a kid, you prolly did them at night. And by bad i don't mean theivery, i mean other stuff). And if its kids i'm a little miffed that their parents haven't noticed anything new around the house.
No comments:
Post a Comment