gorgeousninja
Apr 19, 04:27 PM
I'm surprised to see iPhones have outsold iPod Touches by so much; I've never really considered the figures but just assumed that there would be way more iPod Touches around than iPhones.
Maybe your hanging out with too many kids/Android users. Why, otherwise would you need an iPhone and and iPod Touch?
Maybe your hanging out with too many kids/Android users. Why, otherwise would you need an iPhone and and iPod Touch?
portishead
Apr 5, 04:46 PM
I can't wait. Exciting times for FCP editors!
aswitcher
Aug 27, 05:17 AM
What would be competitive:
SNIP
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
I agree, it would be really good if Apple did what they did with the Mac Pro, and made sure the next updates used the best appropriate tech available.
Alternatively, they should release a grunty half sized Mac Pro for those who need more power and customisation, but dont need a full on work station.
SNIP
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
I agree, it would be really good if Apple did what they did with the Mac Pro, and made sure the next updates used the best appropriate tech available.
Alternatively, they should release a grunty half sized Mac Pro for those who need more power and customisation, but dont need a full on work station.
Zargot
Jul 20, 01:07 PM
New Apple Mac Pro Dual Quad
Dual Intel Xeon 8400 Quardro processors at 3.4Ghz (2 x 4 core)
2Gb Buffered DDR2 RAM
750 Gb Sata2 Hard drive
Blue Ray Super drive 2x
Regular DVD rom in second bay
ATI X1900 video card 512mb PCI express x16
$3950
More like $13,950
:rolleyes:
Dual Intel Xeon 8400 Quardro processors at 3.4Ghz (2 x 4 core)
2Gb Buffered DDR2 RAM
750 Gb Sata2 Hard drive
Blue Ray Super drive 2x
Regular DVD rom in second bay
ATI X1900 video card 512mb PCI express x16
$3950
More like $13,950
:rolleyes:
faroZ06
Apr 8, 12:53 AM
I am in the Geek Squad at a Best Buy, and at least at my store there is no such thing happening, nor have we ever been instructed to tell a customer that we don't have a certain product, unless it's unreleased such as new movies etc,,, but once something is released, if we have it we sell it.
I agree, this rumor is sketchy. It looks like they have one unreliable source. Still, I don't see why BB is good for Apple stuff unless the Apple store is too crowded.
I agree, this rumor is sketchy. It looks like they have one unreliable source. Still, I don't see why BB is good for Apple stuff unless the Apple store is too crowded.
badpup
Apr 10, 06:17 AM
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
Lets not forget that Avid ISIS and unity storage products have been FCP compliant for some time now. + the amount of times I go FCP > pro-tools, which is also an Avid piece of kit :p
I'm a long standing FCP user - I cut my own work on it, but the post place I work in uses Avid. Lately I've really been thinking FCP (FCS in general) needs to catch up in a few areas... it'll be interesting to see what they update.
What sounds bad to me about apple hogging the whole stage is the wording in the original article... "demanded all lectern time". Whatever way you dress it "demanding" stuff seems mean, but as others have mentioned I bet it was all properly discussed. The sad thing is I wouldn't put it past Apple to demand something like this.
Lets not forget that Avid ISIS and unity storage products have been FCP compliant for some time now. + the amount of times I go FCP > pro-tools, which is also an Avid piece of kit :p
I'm a long standing FCP user - I cut my own work on it, but the post place I work in uses Avid. Lately I've really been thinking FCP (FCS in general) needs to catch up in a few areas... it'll be interesting to see what they update.
What sounds bad to me about apple hogging the whole stage is the wording in the original article... "demanded all lectern time". Whatever way you dress it "demanding" stuff seems mean, but as others have mentioned I bet it was all properly discussed. The sad thing is I wouldn't put it past Apple to demand something like this.
Evangelion
Apr 8, 05:03 AM
[B]Until Apple can get more of its own stores it needs BB more than BB needs it. So I doubt Apple went all hurt or p.o.'d girlfriend on them.
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
Nuck81
Dec 1, 11:18 AM
Cool thanks. I will give this a try. Anything to get this bus done. I hate the tasks where whatever it is you are driving is real slow!
Heh, if you like driving the bus, you'll LOVE the next two races at Top Gear...
Heh, if you like driving the bus, you'll LOVE the next two races at Top Gear...
hulugu
Mar 22, 01:02 AM
This makes me want to go have lunch at the Cafe My Lai.
Oh wow, I didn't catch that until now.
Oh wow, I didn't catch that until now.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 09:26 AM
Just returned from Radio Shack.
I turned in my 32GB 3GS (with all accessories)
which was in almost excellent condition except
for a chip and a scratch and received a $247 credit.
They handed my SIMM card back to me so essentially
the phone is rendered useless.
That falls between what their website pays for
a pristine phone ($301) and a moderate wear ($226).
So, not bad, a $247 credit off of iPhone 4.
Radio Shack is taking preorders starting Thursday.
Essentially, they special order the phone for you.
That pretty much guarantees you a phone on opening day.
All you need to do is leave a $50 deposit when ordering.
They are not certain if they will have the phone
accessories or not.
I turned in my 32GB 3GS (with all accessories)
which was in almost excellent condition except
for a chip and a scratch and received a $247 credit.
They handed my SIMM card back to me so essentially
the phone is rendered useless.
That falls between what their website pays for
a pristine phone ($301) and a moderate wear ($226).
So, not bad, a $247 credit off of iPhone 4.
Radio Shack is taking preorders starting Thursday.
Essentially, they special order the phone for you.
That pretty much guarantees you a phone on opening day.
All you need to do is leave a $50 deposit when ordering.
They are not certain if they will have the phone
accessories or not.
ictiosapiens
Aug 17, 04:39 AM
Could you give some evidence for that, except that they are underclocked on the MacBook Pro _when they are idle_?
And the Macbook... Nearly 50% underclocked, like the 950 was so amazing that it could be crippled by half of its mindblowing performance...
And the Macbook... Nearly 50% underclocked, like the 950 was so amazing that it could be crippled by half of its mindblowing performance...
mdlooker
Apr 8, 05:56 AM
Well I wonder what lesson will be taught here? I don't think Apple will trust them ever again with blockbuster items. I wonder if companies hold grudges?
Frobozz
Mar 31, 02:38 PM
The best way to achieve a user friendly platform is to control it. Period. And since we know Google can't possibly be naive enough to think Android would really be "open," one can conclude this was planned. If you gain enough steam, you can start getting hardware vendors reliant on your platform. At which point, you tighten the strings to create a consistent and satisfying user experience.
I have used Honeycomb. There are nice features to it, just as there are nice features to Android. But I felt like I had to "learn" Android. I have never felt that way with iOS. Although advanced features can be opaque, the navigation and interaction model are intuitive and simple. They are based on real world gestures and interactions. That makes the learning curve less severe. Android doesn't really do this. It attempts to shove desktop metaphors and all the mess that comes with it. User's don't want to interact with the file system. They don't want to have to have 3 or 4 ways to achieve the same tasks; case in point, application switching. And, just like windows, everything seems to be buried under a pile of menus.
Google hasn't figured out UI design yet. They don't know how to conceptualize an experience FIRST, and implement features later. They are talented developers, but they don't understand users yet. I have confidence they will get there over time, however.
I have used Honeycomb. There are nice features to it, just as there are nice features to Android. But I felt like I had to "learn" Android. I have never felt that way with iOS. Although advanced features can be opaque, the navigation and interaction model are intuitive and simple. They are based on real world gestures and interactions. That makes the learning curve less severe. Android doesn't really do this. It attempts to shove desktop metaphors and all the mess that comes with it. User's don't want to interact with the file system. They don't want to have to have 3 or 4 ways to achieve the same tasks; case in point, application switching. And, just like windows, everything seems to be buried under a pile of menus.
Google hasn't figured out UI design yet. They don't know how to conceptualize an experience FIRST, and implement features later. They are talented developers, but they don't understand users yet. I have confidence they will get there over time, however.
cozart
Jul 31, 12:00 PM
so i'm having a difficult time deciding what to do.
North Carolina's sales tax holiday is this coming weekend, just a couple of days before WWDC (of course!). i had every intention of buying a MacBook Pro during the holiday, but now i have no idea what to do.
assuming there's not a silent release of an updated MBP tomorrow...
will waiting be worth losing the 7.5% (somewhere between $150 and $200 depending on how i customize it) that i'll have to pay if i don't get it during the holiday?
should i go ahead and get it during tax free weekend in case there's not even an announcement at WWDC? or, if there is an announcement, should i go ahead and get it and then return it within the 14-day window, losing the 10% restocking fee.
so many options and this first-time mac buyer doesn't know what to do!
North Carolina's sales tax holiday is this coming weekend, just a couple of days before WWDC (of course!). i had every intention of buying a MacBook Pro during the holiday, but now i have no idea what to do.
assuming there's not a silent release of an updated MBP tomorrow...
will waiting be worth losing the 7.5% (somewhere between $150 and $200 depending on how i customize it) that i'll have to pay if i don't get it during the holiday?
should i go ahead and get it during tax free weekend in case there's not even an announcement at WWDC? or, if there is an announcement, should i go ahead and get it and then return it within the 14-day window, losing the 10% restocking fee.
so many options and this first-time mac buyer doesn't know what to do!
SiliconAddict
Aug 6, 11:36 PM
I'm not a long time apple user, and don't know about the classic to OS X transition, but i do know that 2 service packs and bug fixes every month did nothing to XP, hence my move to OS X. So, ok i assumed that this will be the same case with vista, but considering the fact that (i think) concept viruses have already been written, and that microsoft really are up against the clock; i think that for at least the first year vista will be hellish.
After that, ok, maybe things will change, but it seems to me that this isn't the biggest upgrade ever (i'm an end user, and mainly use PC's for web-browsing and school work, so i haven't seen any major good things in vista) and microsoft have struggled to get it out. (sorry kinda off topic)
I've been using and supporting every version of Windows since 2.0 including Windows NT and 2003 server and while the casual user may not have noticed much difference between XP Pro, XP Pro SP1, and XP Pro SP2 but as someone who manages desktop/laptop images for corp distribution I can tell you right now there has been massive changes in the last 5 years but nothing that is visible from the surface either. Its the same as OS X. While you might not see it more and more of the graphics subsystem has been shifted from the CPU to the GPU with something like 99% of it on the GPU in Tiger.
After that, ok, maybe things will change, but it seems to me that this isn't the biggest upgrade ever (i'm an end user, and mainly use PC's for web-browsing and school work, so i haven't seen any major good things in vista) and microsoft have struggled to get it out. (sorry kinda off topic)
I've been using and supporting every version of Windows since 2.0 including Windows NT and 2003 server and while the casual user may not have noticed much difference between XP Pro, XP Pro SP1, and XP Pro SP2 but as someone who manages desktop/laptop images for corp distribution I can tell you right now there has been massive changes in the last 5 years but nothing that is visible from the surface either. Its the same as OS X. While you might not see it more and more of the graphics subsystem has been shifted from the CPU to the GPU with something like 99% of it on the GPU in Tiger.
shrimpdesign
Aug 7, 11:56 PM
does anyone see a potential for a security breach with the ichat feature that lets you take over someone's desktop? (the purpose is of course to collaborate or to help them fix a problem)
I think it's an invitation .. like "Come share my screen with me" not "Let me use your screen"
So basically you have to allow your screen to be shared with someone you don't trust ... which is generally a bad idea anyways.
If there's a problem, you can always unplug the computer.
I think it's an invitation .. like "Come share my screen with me" not "Let me use your screen"
So basically you have to allow your screen to be shared with someone you don't trust ... which is generally a bad idea anyways.
If there's a problem, you can always unplug the computer.
lyzardking
Apr 7, 04:13 PM
I run Handbrake and Photoshop among other things when I need to (in a pinch (and zoom)).
Not on an iPad... (which was my point)
:)
Not on an iPad... (which was my point)
:)
gauriemma
Aug 25, 08:06 PM
and there was a lot of confusion as to what batteries were affected.
Right. Because the whole "if your battery's serial number falls within this range, this range, or this range" concept was so terribly difficult to grasp.
Right. Because the whole "if your battery's serial number falls within this range, this range, or this range" concept was so terribly difficult to grasp.
Reddmanz
Apr 27, 08:09 AM
Since I'm neither a criminal nor paranoid, I thought it was kind of cool/interesting too.
I was looking forward to seeing mine seeing as I've been doing a lot of travelling last few months, then I remembered I'm still running 3.1.3.
I was looking forward to seeing mine seeing as I've been doing a lot of travelling last few months, then I remembered I'm still running 3.1.3.
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
robotx21
Sep 19, 12:57 PM
I don't know if that's proof or a reason enough to think they'll have more than a chip drop-in, but I'm certainly hoping that it does get announced, and that you're right. :)
Well, like I have said before, brenthaven is releasing new "macbook pro" carrying cases next week the same time around the photokina event, and they are about 1/4" thicker in terms of "minimum/maximum" laptop specifications. This gives me reason to believe the case will be approx. .1-.3 inches thicker than current models, possibly making room for a better graphics card and dvd drive? Don't know...
Well, like I have said before, brenthaven is releasing new "macbook pro" carrying cases next week the same time around the photokina event, and they are about 1/4" thicker in terms of "minimum/maximum" laptop specifications. This gives me reason to believe the case will be approx. .1-.3 inches thicker than current models, possibly making room for a better graphics card and dvd drive? Don't know...
chrono1081
Apr 10, 08:08 AM
Anyone else call BS on that whole article?
First, off: Its poorly written. As soon as I saw the "The Apple fan-boys out there will say that..."
Really? Speculation on what Apple "fanyboys" will say? Sounds like Engadget forums.
Second: Didn't ANYONE realize this is all rumor and speculation? Not fact?
I used to come to Macrumors to read about Mac news, but now its all anit-apple crap.
First, off: Its poorly written. As soon as I saw the "The Apple fan-boys out there will say that..."
Really? Speculation on what Apple "fanyboys" will say? Sounds like Engadget forums.
Second: Didn't ANYONE realize this is all rumor and speculation? Not fact?
I used to come to Macrumors to read about Mac news, but now its all anit-apple crap.
opinioncircle
Mar 20, 07:56 AM
Until we have publicly funded campaigns, there will be no change. As long as it costs millions to get elected, business will continue to set policy, maintain the farce of two different parties and basically run the country, a situation I think the OP of this thread is in favour of.
Agreed. The 2012 race seems to be one for the books as far as campaign contributions are concerned.
This should all go public.
Agreed. The 2012 race seems to be one for the books as far as campaign contributions are concerned.
This should all go public.
ryanx27
Aug 27, 11:01 AM
The current Yonah MacBook is more powerful than any G5 - even dual core G5's. So why would you even make a fake joke about a weak mobile G5 coming? It's a joke that was only briefly funny two years ago. :rolleyes:
It isn't the G5 part that's funny about it. The whole point of the joke is to make fun of the Rumor Article --> Wild Speculation --> Guessing the Specific Release Date cycle.
It isn't the G5 part that's funny about it. The whole point of the joke is to make fun of the Rumor Article --> Wild Speculation --> Guessing the Specific Release Date cycle.
No comments:
Post a Comment