Moyank24
Apr 27, 12:30 PM
I suspected it was a copy, I've never trusted the president, and I probably never will.
You suspected what was a copy? Had you just read the article before commenting, you would have known it was a copy.
And you don't trust the President? Shocking.
You suspected what was a copy? Had you just read the article before commenting, you would have known it was a copy.
And you don't trust the President? Shocking.
macaddiict
Apr 25, 01:38 PM
money grubbers
I agree, Apple is pretty ridiculous at times.
That must be who you meant, since you clearly haven't had time to read the lawsuit yet.
Or do you think all lawsuits are 'money grubbers'?
I agree, Apple is pretty ridiculous at times.
That must be who you meant, since you clearly haven't had time to read the lawsuit yet.
Or do you think all lawsuits are 'money grubbers'?
Multimedia
Jul 23, 03:14 PM
Given the change in Clovertown schedule, I expect that at WWDC Apple will release 2 "lower end" Mac Pro configurations both with dual Woodcrests. The higher end configuration with two Clovertowns will ship early Q1 (maybe around MW'07).
I expect it will be 2.33GHz and 2.67GHz Woodcrest models with 3.0GHz as a BTO option. Conroe in Mac Pro is looking highly unlikely.
Anyone care to speculate on Intel's pricing for a 2.67GHz Clovertown? I am thinking $999.Well Swami I am going to have to call your bluff. Makes no sense to skip Conroe Dual Cores on the Mac Pro yet. This Winter 2007 with Clovertowns, perhaps post MacWorld SF. But not yet. And maybe not ever.
There are some who may never find a need for more than two cores. But therein creeps back the need for a cheaper dual core tower line in the same price range as the iMacs. Seems inevitable doesn't it? Expand the Tower line down to $999 and let it go all the way up to $3.5k. Six models instead of only 3 expensive ones.
January - March 2007
..$999 - Dual 2.13 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.4 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.67 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.67 GHz One Kentsfield
$2499 - Quad 3.2 GHz One Kentsfield
$3499 or more for Mac OctoPod Fastest On EARTH - 8 x 3.2 GHz
Two Clovertown later One Yorkfield for less money.
I found that word "OctoPod" in my Tiger's Oxford Dictionary. It's a REAL word.
When they get to 8 via a Yorkfield then the whole line can be based on the less expensive desktop family motherboards and chipsets except the extreeme top where pairs of Harpertown will make 16 etc etc.
You fill in the specs. I can't remember what speeds are being offered. This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
I expect it will be 2.33GHz and 2.67GHz Woodcrest models with 3.0GHz as a BTO option. Conroe in Mac Pro is looking highly unlikely.
Anyone care to speculate on Intel's pricing for a 2.67GHz Clovertown? I am thinking $999.Well Swami I am going to have to call your bluff. Makes no sense to skip Conroe Dual Cores on the Mac Pro yet. This Winter 2007 with Clovertowns, perhaps post MacWorld SF. But not yet. And maybe not ever.
There are some who may never find a need for more than two cores. But therein creeps back the need for a cheaper dual core tower line in the same price range as the iMacs. Seems inevitable doesn't it? Expand the Tower line down to $999 and let it go all the way up to $3.5k. Six models instead of only 3 expensive ones.
January - March 2007
..$999 - Dual 2.13 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.4 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.67 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.67 GHz One Kentsfield
$2499 - Quad 3.2 GHz One Kentsfield
$3499 or more for Mac OctoPod Fastest On EARTH - 8 x 3.2 GHz
Two Clovertown later One Yorkfield for less money.
I found that word "OctoPod" in my Tiger's Oxford Dictionary. It's a REAL word.
When they get to 8 via a Yorkfield then the whole line can be based on the less expensive desktop family motherboards and chipsets except the extreeme top where pairs of Harpertown will make 16 etc etc.
You fill in the specs. I can't remember what speeds are being offered. This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
Peace
Aug 5, 05:49 PM
snippet:
Finally, I think if there's any support for Front Row in the Mac Pros or Xserves, then the displays must have built-in iSight.
Why is Front Row dependent on iSight ?
Finally, I think if there's any support for Front Row in the Mac Pros or Xserves, then the displays must have built-in iSight.
Why is Front Row dependent on iSight ?
peskaa
Apr 28, 06:15 AM
Wow, this thread and the ridiculous nature of this issue are hilarious. Seriously, you wonder why the US is going down the pan when the entire nation seems to get caught up in a fight over a bloody birth certificate?
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 6, 10:31 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
only the 13" mbp has integrated graphics, they are not quite as good as the 320m on older models or in the current mba, but they are much better than integrated graphics of the past. All other mbp models come with the integrated graphics as well as a discrete graphics processor.
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
only the 13" mbp has integrated graphics, they are not quite as good as the 320m on older models or in the current mba, but they are much better than integrated graphics of the past. All other mbp models come with the integrated graphics as well as a discrete graphics processor.
AlligatorBloodz
Apr 8, 02:23 AM
Well right now I'm looking at both their online stores. Both sites have the Apple TV @ $99, so... uh.. Lol.
Wait ... I don't think I mentioned Best Buy paying customers to buy Apple products. I don't fully understand your post :/
What don't you get. Best buy gets the ATV2 from apple for $90, then sells it for $99. The same price apple sells it for. Best buy makes $10 or less on every atv2 they sell.
Also my point about the student discount was it wouldn't make sense for best buy to honor it if they lost money. It would make more sense not to sell it.
Wait ... I don't think I mentioned Best Buy paying customers to buy Apple products. I don't fully understand your post :/
What don't you get. Best buy gets the ATV2 from apple for $90, then sells it for $99. The same price apple sells it for. Best buy makes $10 or less on every atv2 they sell.
Also my point about the student discount was it wouldn't make sense for best buy to honor it if they lost money. It would make more sense not to sell it.
Cougarcat
Mar 25, 10:50 PM
So is there real resolution independence or just a x2 mode?
Neither, but there's the beginnings of support for "retina displays."
maybe they will release it in late july instead of late august like snow leopard. does anyone remember how much leopard cost. snow leopard wasnt really a new OS. just a speed bump from leopard so thats why it was $30. i just want to get an idea of what they price lion at because i heard $120 a while ago.
If they start pumping out release candidates now, I think late July is is too far away. WWDC early June is more likely.
Major OS releases have historically been $129. I don't think that'll happen this time--$99 or $79 makes more sense (Apple likes people to upgrade, and their software prices aren't as high as they used to be). But that's just me speculating.
i wonder if apple will release a version in the app store???
Almost definitely, that's how developers are getting it now.
Maybe not such a big update after all? Where are all the secrets? The UI could use more of an overhaul IMO.
It is a big update. Versions and Resume alone are huge, IMO. (Which you don't really appreciate until you start using them.)
The UI may not look radically different, but there's hardly a part of it that hasn't been retouched.
Neither, but there's the beginnings of support for "retina displays."
maybe they will release it in late july instead of late august like snow leopard. does anyone remember how much leopard cost. snow leopard wasnt really a new OS. just a speed bump from leopard so thats why it was $30. i just want to get an idea of what they price lion at because i heard $120 a while ago.
If they start pumping out release candidates now, I think late July is is too far away. WWDC early June is more likely.
Major OS releases have historically been $129. I don't think that'll happen this time--$99 or $79 makes more sense (Apple likes people to upgrade, and their software prices aren't as high as they used to be). But that's just me speculating.
i wonder if apple will release a version in the app store???
Almost definitely, that's how developers are getting it now.
Maybe not such a big update after all? Where are all the secrets? The UI could use more of an overhaul IMO.
It is a big update. Versions and Resume alone are huge, IMO. (Which you don't really appreciate until you start using them.)
The UI may not look radically different, but there's hardly a part of it that hasn't been retouched.
JM-Prod
Apr 10, 08:17 AM
Faster horses.
Hmm, you want a faster horse or did you think my comments were screaming for them?
If my expectation are met, it would be a revolution in editing.
The second since introducing digital non-linear editing in the late 80's.
Not faster horses.
Hmm, you want a faster horse or did you think my comments were screaming for them?
If my expectation are met, it would be a revolution in editing.
The second since introducing digital non-linear editing in the late 80's.
Not faster horses.
BoRegardless
Mar 26, 10:42 AM
OS evolution is like classifying cats by size.
Each one gets a bit bigger, but they are still cats.
The only time I would be excited, literally, about a MAJOR release is if they went to an OS which was slated to be described by Canines.
Then I would be reasonably assured something astounding was coming.
Each one gets a bit bigger, but they are still cats.
The only time I would be excited, literally, about a MAJOR release is if they went to an OS which was slated to be described by Canines.
Then I would be reasonably assured something astounding was coming.
iJawn108
Aug 26, 04:47 PM
I hope they put them into the macbooks soon or they will loose a customer untill santarosa/leopard/iLife '07 are all out.
sachamun
Nov 28, 11:57 PM
In the words of Tony Montana...
"Shu know wha' Capitalism is? Ge' *********"
http://www.blknblu.com/voxart/lts/img/tony3.gif
"Shu know wha' Capitalism is? Ge' *********"
http://www.blknblu.com/voxart/lts/img/tony3.gif
0815
Mar 31, 06:18 PM
Tightening controls? How about Google having final right of refusal toward any mass production Bill of Materials for any Android phone going into production? That will keep the manufacturing accountants from screwing over the developers taking a $0.76 of parts out to save on a run but generate a million man hours of bug fixing in the third party developer community.
True - but what happend to the 'open is good', 'everyone can customize as they want', 'open is the freedom to do with it what you want'. The one big argument that was always made for Android is gone - it is no longer as open as people think. Anyway, 'open' was in this context anyway a hyped up buzzword ... I understood the 'open' argument since (with exception of the Nexus) everyone got dependent on what the provider chooses to adopt and what not. It is not good if the provider decides what to remove or add on top of the OS.
True - but what happend to the 'open is good', 'everyone can customize as they want', 'open is the freedom to do with it what you want'. The one big argument that was always made for Android is gone - it is no longer as open as people think. Anyway, 'open' was in this context anyway a hyped up buzzword ... I understood the 'open' argument since (with exception of the Nexus) everyone got dependent on what the provider chooses to adopt and what not. It is not good if the provider decides what to remove or add on top of the OS.
aly
Aug 27, 01:38 PM
Just a few hours left, let's hope we see new MacBook Pros tomorrow, I think we'll see the new iMacs with Merom in Paris, because it's a very good announcement for consumers, and get the Pro MB's tomorrow.
As in Paris Expo? Cause I do believe that apple aren't going to be making a keynote speech. And won't make any annoucements at all or am I still believing in old news proved wrong?
As in Paris Expo? Cause I do believe that apple aren't going to be making a keynote speech. And won't make any annoucements at all or am I still believing in old news proved wrong?
gnasher729
Mar 26, 10:19 AM
There is no way this is a GM. The "reporter" is obviously confused. If it was a GM version that means they would be sending it off for duplication soon. Since WWDC is months away this makes no sense.
To be fair, they are saying "nearing a Golden Master candidate". Which is quite meaningless, because Lion is "nearing a Golden Master candidate" from the time when the first line of code for Lion was written.
Apple has a list of features that need adding to produce Lion, and a list of known problems that need to be fixed. The developers' job is to add the features and to fix the known problems; someone else's job is to find yet unknown problems before customers find them. You get a "Golden Master candidate" when all features are implemented (or management decided that something wouldn't be a feature), and all problems known at that moment in time are fixed. If new problems are found in the "Golden Master candidate" then the developers fix them and create a new "Golden Master candidate". If no new problems are found then the "Golden Master" candidate turns into a "Golden Master", and that will be the released version of MacOS X 10.7.0.
To be fair, they are saying "nearing a Golden Master candidate". Which is quite meaningless, because Lion is "nearing a Golden Master candidate" from the time when the first line of code for Lion was written.
Apple has a list of features that need adding to produce Lion, and a list of known problems that need to be fixed. The developers' job is to add the features and to fix the known problems; someone else's job is to find yet unknown problems before customers find them. You get a "Golden Master candidate" when all features are implemented (or management decided that something wouldn't be a feature), and all problems known at that moment in time are fixed. If new problems are found in the "Golden Master candidate" then the developers fix them and create a new "Golden Master candidate". If no new problems are found then the "Golden Master" candidate turns into a "Golden Master", and that will be the released version of MacOS X 10.7.0.
SevenInchScrew
Dec 9, 01:09 AM
DoFoT:
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 03:30 PM
I don't get nearly as many dropped calls when switching between towers like I did when I used T-Mobile and Cingular.
You know as well as I do that has to do with the signal, not whether it is Code division or time division. If you claim differently, show me reputable references.
You know as well as I do that has to do with the signal, not whether it is Code division or time division. If you claim differently, show me reputable references.
Macnoviz
Jul 21, 02:22 AM
<offtopic>
That would require Artificial Intelligence. If a computer can understand your speech, recognise your choice of words and understands that you don't neccessarily mean what you say all the time, then that's AI. If it can recognise specific objects in an "analogue" media such as a photograph, (I don't care if its a digital photo or not), it's AI. If it can then implement what it has learned alongside its infinite computational precision to remake a photo, while keeping it completely realistic, and making it look exactly how we wanted it to look, that's amazing, and lots of people will be out of jobs.
-Macnoviz
Woah. Well, there's more than raw computing involved there, there is context for the computer to understand. What is the "sun" what does "Dominant" really mean? What are power lines? What does "remove" really mean? And let's not go into what kind of DB would be needed to describe all of the differences a person's face exhibits over a lifetime!
I'm sure we'll get there and such 'life' DB's built I hope there is a standard set! Who says we don't need this really big drives!
That's where the internet comes in. Of course, it's a pipe dream, at least for the next thirthy years. But who knows, maybe some day they will unleash a web crawler with a rough AI onto the internet to soak up all information, thus creating one superbrain, connected to the internet. Isaac Asimov anyone?
That would require Artificial Intelligence. If a computer can understand your speech, recognise your choice of words and understands that you don't neccessarily mean what you say all the time, then that's AI. If it can recognise specific objects in an "analogue" media such as a photograph, (I don't care if its a digital photo or not), it's AI. If it can then implement what it has learned alongside its infinite computational precision to remake a photo, while keeping it completely realistic, and making it look exactly how we wanted it to look, that's amazing, and lots of people will be out of jobs.
-Macnoviz
Woah. Well, there's more than raw computing involved there, there is context for the computer to understand. What is the "sun" what does "Dominant" really mean? What are power lines? What does "remove" really mean? And let's not go into what kind of DB would be needed to describe all of the differences a person's face exhibits over a lifetime!
I'm sure we'll get there and such 'life' DB's built I hope there is a standard set! Who says we don't need this really big drives!
That's where the internet comes in. Of course, it's a pipe dream, at least for the next thirthy years. But who knows, maybe some day they will unleash a web crawler with a rough AI onto the internet to soak up all information, thus creating one superbrain, connected to the internet. Isaac Asimov anyone?
mdriftmeyer
Aug 27, 07:45 PM
Yes, people have every right to complain when they receive faulty products, particularly so when they're paying good money, as they do when buying Apple. But whether Apple's QC has suffered significantly as they try to keep costs down due to the market pressures of increasingly feasible like-with-like comparisons with PCs, as well as meeting an increasing consumer demand, is debatable? Though there certainly seems to be a worrying increase in complaints about the new Intel Macs, I wonder how much of that is down to perception as more people use the internet as a channel to vent their complaints? Regarding the new Intel Macs, the jury here is still very much out (& will remain so for at least another 6 months). Not least because...
Recent surveys continue to give Apple an excellent rating for overall quality when compared to other brands. (Only Sony's computers get similar ratings). Talking about "25% crap products" may feel good as a rhetorical release, but it doesn't really help the debate here.
Good point, however, about how Apple's market share could've been so much greater if only SJ had licensed out OS X. A great opportunity missed.
OEM licensing OS X would not be a panacea. I supported NeXTSTEP/Openstep for NeXT and Apple. We had a nightmare dealing with OEMs who pushed us into the trash heap.
When the merger happened they showed no more interest knowing that we could move the OS to Intel since we had it running on Intel.
Motherboard manufacturers cut corners. OEMs cut all sorts of corners on their I/O cards.
Corralling all necessary OEMs to stick to a specific spec would be a nightmare.
Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS. Five years and counting.
Apple is both a hardware and software company.
The price for their latest Mac Pro shows how price competitive it is with the rest of the industry.
Having built several clone boxes none of them from the case design, integrated motherboard design, controller design, heat transfer requirements, etc comes close to the Mac Pro. It doesn't include Hardware RAID out of the box. Big deal.
When the clone industry can produce cases in general that compete for structural integrity, motherboards with as few cables, easily maintanable cases that are easy to keep dust free then Apple might feel concerned about it's claim to having the most complete experience.
OS X has shortcomings in areas for Engineering (CAD/CAM, FEM, etc. All 3rd party concerns), Games (3rd party concerns, OpenGL 2 concerns that Apple will fix), Vertical Solution concerns (assuming Apple wants to attack the business sectors they will have to address this lack of productivity tools for Finance & Accounting within iWorks) and some other deficiencies.
They are covering their bases and growing their base, quarter by quarter.
When ROME is finally built are we all going to whine that you can save $50 here or there with a clone?
I expect no less.
Recent surveys continue to give Apple an excellent rating for overall quality when compared to other brands. (Only Sony's computers get similar ratings). Talking about "25% crap products" may feel good as a rhetorical release, but it doesn't really help the debate here.
Good point, however, about how Apple's market share could've been so much greater if only SJ had licensed out OS X. A great opportunity missed.
OEM licensing OS X would not be a panacea. I supported NeXTSTEP/Openstep for NeXT and Apple. We had a nightmare dealing with OEMs who pushed us into the trash heap.
When the merger happened they showed no more interest knowing that we could move the OS to Intel since we had it running on Intel.
Motherboard manufacturers cut corners. OEMs cut all sorts of corners on their I/O cards.
Corralling all necessary OEMs to stick to a specific spec would be a nightmare.
Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS. Five years and counting.
Apple is both a hardware and software company.
The price for their latest Mac Pro shows how price competitive it is with the rest of the industry.
Having built several clone boxes none of them from the case design, integrated motherboard design, controller design, heat transfer requirements, etc comes close to the Mac Pro. It doesn't include Hardware RAID out of the box. Big deal.
When the clone industry can produce cases in general that compete for structural integrity, motherboards with as few cables, easily maintanable cases that are easy to keep dust free then Apple might feel concerned about it's claim to having the most complete experience.
OS X has shortcomings in areas for Engineering (CAD/CAM, FEM, etc. All 3rd party concerns), Games (3rd party concerns, OpenGL 2 concerns that Apple will fix), Vertical Solution concerns (assuming Apple wants to attack the business sectors they will have to address this lack of productivity tools for Finance & Accounting within iWorks) and some other deficiencies.
They are covering their bases and growing their base, quarter by quarter.
When ROME is finally built are we all going to whine that you can save $50 here or there with a clone?
I expect no less.
marksman
Apr 25, 03:04 PM
Dumb people.
Case dismissed.
If Apple was smart they would ban these two idiots from ever buying an Apple product again.
Case dismissed.
If Apple was smart they would ban these two idiots from ever buying an Apple product again.
DJMastaWes
Aug 26, 08:29 PM
Updated Wesbite Is Usually by 9 Eastern. Occasionally later. But usually then. :)
Eastern? That's 6:00AM Pacific? You think?
9:00AM Pacific sounds good.
Eastern? That's 6:00AM Pacific? You think?
9:00AM Pacific sounds good.
MacAddict1978
Mar 26, 01:47 AM
I tested Lion, and removed it after a month. Not buying it. I'll use Snow Leopard, it's the best OS so far. I'll see the one after Lion, maybe there will be something interesting.
Would you mind elaborating? Like, why you didn't like it? What about it made you compelled to remove and decide not to buy? And please don't say bugs. It was a beta.
Would you mind elaborating? Like, why you didn't like it? What about it made you compelled to remove and decide not to buy? And please don't say bugs. It was a beta.
Shagrat
Jul 21, 12:28 AM
You realize there are probably only four people on this board who are old enough to get that joke, right?
5.
:(
5.
:(
Buschmaster
Aug 16, 10:36 PM
Was there any doubt it wouldn't be a lot faster? I mean, I know it was already plenty fast, but come on...
No comments:
Post a Comment