rezenclowd3
Nov 25, 01:18 PM
:mad::mad::mad::mad:
Just found out...the gamesave is locked. Fudge....
One can make a system backup, but I would like to move my save about. Ugh..
Another note, redeeming my Gamestop code only netted me the Nascar car, not the stealth Mclaren, which is the ENTIRE reason I purchased the Collectors Edition. Others are reporting the same issue. BTW it DID download, its just not in the dealership.
Anyone see where the Red Bull prototype car is in the game?
Just found out...the gamesave is locked. Fudge....
One can make a system backup, but I would like to move my save about. Ugh..
Another note, redeeming my Gamestop code only netted me the Nascar car, not the stealth Mclaren, which is the ENTIRE reason I purchased the Collectors Edition. Others are reporting the same issue. BTW it DID download, its just not in the dealership.
Anyone see where the Red Bull prototype car is in the game?
NY Guitarist
Apr 5, 08:50 PM
I agree I for see FCP needing Mac OS X Lion
I'm just guessing but it's possible that Apple will announce the new FCS and ship it when Lion ships, perhaps around the June WWDC.
I'm just guessing but it's possible that Apple will announce the new FCS and ship it when Lion ships, perhaps around the June WWDC.
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
Tacitus
Apr 10, 05:23 AM
Although the presentation is going to be about FCP, I wonder if Apple will announce any upgrades to the Mac Pro? An updated MP with Thunderbolt would surely be of interest to those in pro video.
Optimus Frag
Apr 27, 09:11 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Iraqis are dying, Afghani are dying, Syrians are dying, American soldiers are dying, British soldiers are dying, Australian soldiers are dying, elderly around the world are losing medical services... And civvies and senators are busy complaining about a location log in an iPhone? There are some screwed up heads in this world!
Exactly. Some need to develop a sense of perspective.
Iraqis are dying, Afghani are dying, Syrians are dying, American soldiers are dying, British soldiers are dying, Australian soldiers are dying, elderly around the world are losing medical services... And civvies and senators are busy complaining about a location log in an iPhone? There are some screwed up heads in this world!
Exactly. Some need to develop a sense of perspective.
grue
Apr 11, 06:29 AM
Well, I can say this much:
I don't care if they change the interface, because if the new version doesn't fix the LONGSTANDING issues with FCP, my post house is dumping FCP and moving to Avid and I'll have to get used to a new interface anyway.
Sick of bad file handling, sick of flawed roundtripping, sick of crappy multicore support, sick of flaky-as-hell Qmaster, sick of stupid little idiosyncrasies that make sense to nobody I've ever spoken to in the industry.
Apple needs to get their crap in gear or they're going to lose a lot of their FCP install base, not many places are happy with it anymore. I'm sure the idiot fanboys will buy it no matter what, but people like myself (who actually make a living and want reliable, efficient software) are ready to leave.
I don't care if they change the interface, because if the new version doesn't fix the LONGSTANDING issues with FCP, my post house is dumping FCP and moving to Avid and I'll have to get used to a new interface anyway.
Sick of bad file handling, sick of flawed roundtripping, sick of crappy multicore support, sick of flaky-as-hell Qmaster, sick of stupid little idiosyncrasies that make sense to nobody I've ever spoken to in the industry.
Apple needs to get their crap in gear or they're going to lose a lot of their FCP install base, not many places are happy with it anymore. I'm sure the idiot fanboys will buy it no matter what, but people like myself (who actually make a living and want reliable, efficient software) are ready to leave.
ArkabaS
Aug 7, 03:45 PM
Why does no one ever mention the Dock? It is a HUGE part of OS X and hasn't changed since Jaguar. It could be so much more useful if it allowed for dividers, more customization, etc. I hope the Top Secret stuff includes major improvements to Finder, the Dock, and Expose.
skellener
Apr 8, 01:38 AM
WTF??? I have a ********** credit I've been wanting to use at BB for an iPad2 since before it even came out. They sold out so fast I've been waiting for the restock, and now this? F%*$#!!!!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
alec
Sep 19, 10:54 AM
lol lol power book g5 rofl rofl OMG hahahahhahahahahahahahha
...
......
for the love of god kill me
...
......
for the love of god kill me
dernhelm
Aug 7, 03:48 PM
Hey nice to see osx will have system restore =D
YOU MUST BE KIDDING. Have you actually used System Restore to restore a single file? Oh that's right, you can't. All you can do it reset your system back to a point where the file existed.
This is MUCH more powerful, and more like something users would actually want.
System Restore is great for those times when you want to apply a system patch that could be iffy, and you are willing to "snap" a restore point, apply the patch, and roll back if something didn't fly.
But for the normal user, it is much more useless.
YOU MUST BE KIDDING. Have you actually used System Restore to restore a single file? Oh that's right, you can't. All you can do it reset your system back to a point where the file existed.
This is MUCH more powerful, and more like something users would actually want.
System Restore is great for those times when you want to apply a system patch that could be iffy, and you are willing to "snap" a restore point, apply the patch, and roll back if something didn't fly.
But for the normal user, it is much more useless.
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 20, 09:57 AM
http://cultofmac.cultofmaccom.netdna-cdn.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Screen-shot-2011-04-19-at-8.37.05-PM.png
feel free to point out how difficult it is to see any similarities...
I think 3M should sue apple because the Notes icon looks like a 3M notepad.
feel free to point out how difficult it is to see any similarities...
I think 3M should sue apple because the Notes icon looks like a 3M notepad.
bretm
Aug 17, 12:07 AM
Was there any doubt it wouldn't be a lot faster? I mean, I know it was already plenty fast, but come on...
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
sparkleytone
Mar 26, 12:45 AM
What is it with all the complaining? Lion is a fresh direction for OS X, of course it will be paid. It will probably cost $129, so go ahead and get yourself all cried out now about it. If you think it’s just a minor revision that should be given away for free or $29:
1) Don’t buy it
2) You’re wrong
Full-screen apps along is just…why haven’t we been doing this all along?
1) Don’t buy it
2) You’re wrong
Full-screen apps along is just…why haven’t we been doing this all along?
ConnorTurnbull
Apr 25, 01:37 PM
They cant lose this surely?
Even Android stores your location in the exact same way iOS does.
What are you talking about? This is Apple. When they do something wrong, it's ten times worse than if one of their competitors had done it!
Even Android stores your location in the exact same way iOS does.
What are you talking about? This is Apple. When they do something wrong, it's ten times worse than if one of their competitors had done it!
aloshka
Apr 25, 03:03 PM
"a perfect storm", "overreaction", "typical for the us to sue.."
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
... apple deserves to get a beating for this.
they're known for focussing on the user in terms of design and UI of theirdevices... they should also make the step to focus on their users best interest in terms of privacy and freedom, rather than their own greed.
You obviously missed the point that they do not track anything. It's just a log file on your iphone, it stays with your iphone. I GOT even more news!! I FOUND a file on the iphone that stores text messages. YES PEOPLE text messages. I can read your text messages from this file if I have your phone!! Oh ya, I know you can launch the SMS app, but WHY WOULD APPLE NEED TO STORE TEXT MESSAGES ON MY DEVICE?!?! I'm suing!!
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
... apple deserves to get a beating for this.
they're known for focussing on the user in terms of design and UI of theirdevices... they should also make the step to focus on their users best interest in terms of privacy and freedom, rather than their own greed.
You obviously missed the point that they do not track anything. It's just a log file on your iphone, it stays with your iphone. I GOT even more news!! I FOUND a file on the iphone that stores text messages. YES PEOPLE text messages. I can read your text messages from this file if I have your phone!! Oh ya, I know you can launch the SMS app, but WHY WOULD APPLE NEED TO STORE TEXT MESSAGES ON MY DEVICE?!?! I'm suing!!
theBB
Mar 31, 07:13 PM
If you're going to licence your project as open source, then you do actually have to release the source. I know there's often a delay with commercial products. I suppose the tolerance of the open source community depends on the reason and the amount of time the code is held back.
Well, the rules for GPL say you need to release the source code along with the software and you actually have to offer them through the same channel, so that you cannot make it practically impossible for people to get to the source even if it is theoretically available. Of course, GPL is not the only "open source" license. This is Google's playground, so they get to define it any way they wish.
Well, the rules for GPL say you need to release the source code along with the software and you actually have to offer them through the same channel, so that you cannot make it practically impossible for people to get to the source even if it is theoretically available. Of course, GPL is not the only "open source" license. This is Google's playground, so they get to define it any way they wish.
Hellhammer
Apr 6, 11:11 AM
I am shocked that anyone finds this as a positive.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
I find this completely backwards from Apple's current position on both CPU and graphics, and I don't think anyone would end up with a faster or better 13" MBA than the current generation. Apple would certainly have to bring back the backlit keyboard and introduce Thunderbolt to sucker anyone into buying such inferior junk! I would recommend people buy the current generation on clearance rather than lose performance everywhere like this. If this is the chip Apple uses in the 13" MBA, prepare for a big drop in capabilities!
I am still in shock anyone finds this a positive? Have you all read the clock speed? The facts about the chip and IGP in ultra low voltage variants?
I'm pretty sure you are aware that Apple would use LV CPU in 13", not ULV. That bumps us to 2.3GHz plus Turbo. You have said this yourself too and I already covered the reason in my other post.
This is just a MR article and surprisingly, they don't have much idea about the TDPs. Hopefully they will correct their article so people won't live in confusion.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
I find this completely backwards from Apple's current position on both CPU and graphics, and I don't think anyone would end up with a faster or better 13" MBA than the current generation. Apple would certainly have to bring back the backlit keyboard and introduce Thunderbolt to sucker anyone into buying such inferior junk! I would recommend people buy the current generation on clearance rather than lose performance everywhere like this. If this is the chip Apple uses in the 13" MBA, prepare for a big drop in capabilities!
I am still in shock anyone finds this a positive? Have you all read the clock speed? The facts about the chip and IGP in ultra low voltage variants?
I'm pretty sure you are aware that Apple would use LV CPU in 13", not ULV. That bumps us to 2.3GHz plus Turbo. You have said this yourself too and I already covered the reason in my other post.
This is just a MR article and surprisingly, they don't have much idea about the TDPs. Hopefully they will correct their article so people won't live in confusion.
padr�
Sep 19, 01:12 PM
then i will have to work just a little bit harder i'm afraid ;)
i'll start with the 1 gig ram, maybe 2, and later i will be upgrading,it can't stay expansive forever.
thx again for your reply
i'll start with the 1 gig ram, maybe 2, and later i will be upgrading,it can't stay expansive forever.
thx again for your reply
Thunderhawks
Apr 6, 04:35 PM
Don't understand that there needs to be a pissing contest about Xoom OR ipad.
Why are the Xoom guys even here on a Mac site, to tell us THEIR device is better?
Let's even assume they are right.
Go buy your Xoom and be happy if it does what you want No harm, no foul.
The Apple users buy Apple until something better comes along also as long as it does what they want.
They love the possible integration with their other devices and when that comes to Xoom or something else is better they will switch.
Technology pace is amazingly fast and nobody knows what is next.
Why are the Xoom guys even here on a Mac site, to tell us THEIR device is better?
Let's even assume they are right.
Go buy your Xoom and be happy if it does what you want No harm, no foul.
The Apple users buy Apple until something better comes along also as long as it does what they want.
They love the possible integration with their other devices and when that comes to Xoom or something else is better they will switch.
Technology pace is amazingly fast and nobody knows what is next.
wovel
Apr 19, 04:22 PM
Well Rovio (Angry Birds) thinks otherwise:
http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2011/03/13/angry-birds-android-ios/
"The company said in December that it expected to make $1 million per month from Android by the end of 2010. (...) Now that the app has seen about 100 million installs across all platforms, Rovio is not getting the same initial bump in paid download revenue from Apple�s app store. On Android, the company doesn�t offer paid Angry Birds apps, but sees recurring revenue from advertising."
So they make more money with their free Android version than they do with the paid iOS version.
They will make more if they actually reach the 1 million a month and then sustain it for 3 years... RIF
http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2011/03/13/angry-birds-android-ios/
"The company said in December that it expected to make $1 million per month from Android by the end of 2010. (...) Now that the app has seen about 100 million installs across all platforms, Rovio is not getting the same initial bump in paid download revenue from Apple�s app store. On Android, the company doesn�t offer paid Angry Birds apps, but sees recurring revenue from advertising."
So they make more money with their free Android version than they do with the paid iOS version.
They will make more if they actually reach the 1 million a month and then sustain it for 3 years... RIF
samcraig
Apr 27, 09:32 AM
How is the talk of slower performance because the database isn't as large any different than the discussion about the data in the first place.
Several people were criticizing people for having tin foil hats when it came to what the data was being used for, etc
And now the same people are wearing the same tin foil hats/complaining about some mythological "slow down" by having a smaller database.
Hypocrisy LOL
Several people were criticizing people for having tin foil hats when it came to what the data was being used for, etc
And now the same people are wearing the same tin foil hats/complaining about some mythological "slow down" by having a smaller database.
Hypocrisy LOL
charlituna
Apr 11, 10:00 PM
This is bunk. Apple will not miss Christmas.
Dear Steve.
I read on macrumors.com that the new iPhone won't be ready for Christmas. What should we do.
-- Santa.
Dear Santa.
Move Christmas.
-- Steve
Dear Steve.
I read on macrumors.com that the new iPhone won't be ready for Christmas. What should we do.
-- Santa.
Dear Santa.
Move Christmas.
-- Steve
rdowns
Mar 24, 12:52 PM
Where does race come into this? I don't ask rhetorically. I may have missed it.
I believe a lot of the anti-Obama crap spewed by the Tea Party and Republicans is based more on his race than his party.
I believe a lot of the anti-Obama crap spewed by the Tea Party and Republicans is based more on his race than his party.
kevin.rivers
Jul 15, 04:42 PM
You can be quiet now. Go on Dell's medium/large business site, which is the *only* section you can find the Woodcrests in single/dual configs (HP doesn't have theirs out yet), and configure one with a decent video card, 250GB HD, no monitor, and any of the rumored processor configurations (which I think some are not correct), a DL DVD+/-RW burner, and optical mouse and you tell ME how much it costs.
I will tell you how much... Very Expensive.
I must say it boils my blood to read some of the ignorant posts on here. Give me the top parts in a small box, all for $999.
Jiggie2g, your assumptions are way off. I configured the Dell Silentwave mentioned with:
One 5130
1GB DDR2 667
250GB HD
DVD+/-RW burner
price: $2983
Far from $1199. Oh but wait, you pulled a good move. Talking about woodcrest systems and giving a theoretical pricing for a Conroe system. Nice move. ;)
Anyway. Us loyalist Mac buyers are fully aware of current pricing and when price and specs are announced we will make a decision to buy or not to buy. I doubt Apple insults us. Maybe you, even when the data puts the pricing in the same spectrum, you will buy Dell anyway to make yourself feel good. Cheers.
I will tell you how much... Very Expensive.
I must say it boils my blood to read some of the ignorant posts on here. Give me the top parts in a small box, all for $999.
Jiggie2g, your assumptions are way off. I configured the Dell Silentwave mentioned with:
One 5130
1GB DDR2 667
250GB HD
DVD+/-RW burner
price: $2983
Far from $1199. Oh but wait, you pulled a good move. Talking about woodcrest systems and giving a theoretical pricing for a Conroe system. Nice move. ;)
Anyway. Us loyalist Mac buyers are fully aware of current pricing and when price and specs are announced we will make a decision to buy or not to buy. I doubt Apple insults us. Maybe you, even when the data puts the pricing in the same spectrum, you will buy Dell anyway to make yourself feel good. Cheers.
No comments:
Post a Comment