wclyffe
Nov 22, 08:10 AM
I can't believe your BlueAnt is working for you. Yes my phone is a 3Gs. I had other replies to an earlier post that indicated that Apple did not allow some of the BT technology to work on their phone.
I will try and "pair" again to iPhone and see if it works. I agree with you re hitting a button on the visor.
I've had no issues with the BluAnt at all. That said, Voice Control occasionally comes up with some pretty funny ways that it pronounces names, and you have to pronounce it that way if you want that particular name to come up.
I will try and "pair" again to iPhone and see if it works. I agree with you re hitting a button on the visor.
I've had no issues with the BluAnt at all. That said, Voice Control occasionally comes up with some pretty funny ways that it pronounces names, and you have to pronounce it that way if you want that particular name to come up.
derbothaus
Apr 28, 11:54 AM
Wow. You brought actual stats to the table. I stand corrected on the melting bit:o
Glideslope
Mar 28, 10:57 AM
If there is no new iphone in June/July I am getting a Thunderbolt.
Buy it now. :apple:
Buy it now. :apple:
ravenvii
May 3, 07:55 PM
i took the liberty to re-write the rules AS I UNDERSTANND THEM, which incorporate all the Q&A
there are a couple of passages that are still unclear to me, which are higlighted in red:
Don't panic: decent re-write, but there's a few comments:
While there are certain scenarios where some heroes can win while others lose, it's possible for all heroes to win the game. And I sent all heroes PMs with their own secret agency, so they know exactly what they want the endgame to be.
Yes, you have to both kill the Villain and obtain the Artifact to win the game.
You're right that a team split means the other team has to move to a different room. However, if they meet up in the same room, they do not necessarily merge.
You're correct re: the Villain being able to place more than one trap or monster during a turn provided he has enough turns saved up. But it does not have to be a monster and a trap, it can be two monsters or two traps or whatever.
Note that the villain can wait two turns and earn two turns that round. It is not limited to one turn per round.
Traps trigger as soon as a hero attempts to leave the room. It does not matter which turn the heroes are on that round, the only thing needed is that a hero attempts to leave the room in where a trap is present.
Finally, the healing treasure is even better than you thought - it heals ALL party members by 5 HP.
there are a couple of passages that are still unclear to me, which are higlighted in red:
Don't panic: decent re-write, but there's a few comments:
While there are certain scenarios where some heroes can win while others lose, it's possible for all heroes to win the game. And I sent all heroes PMs with their own secret agency, so they know exactly what they want the endgame to be.
Yes, you have to both kill the Villain and obtain the Artifact to win the game.
You're right that a team split means the other team has to move to a different room. However, if they meet up in the same room, they do not necessarily merge.
You're correct re: the Villain being able to place more than one trap or monster during a turn provided he has enough turns saved up. But it does not have to be a monster and a trap, it can be two monsters or two traps or whatever.
Note that the villain can wait two turns and earn two turns that round. It is not limited to one turn per round.
Traps trigger as soon as a hero attempts to leave the room. It does not matter which turn the heroes are on that round, the only thing needed is that a hero attempts to leave the room in where a trap is present.
Finally, the healing treasure is even better than you thought - it heals ALL party members by 5 HP.
Thunderhawks
Apr 6, 08:25 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
The jailbreak haters make me laugh. My phone works just fine and while I do use a bit more memory, it's perfectly stable and I get a phone with far more utility. Any resultant perfomance issues are so negligible stock is not even competition.
I understand some people bite off more than they can chew when they JB. I also know that scenario doesn't apply to everyone.
While I am not a jailbreak hater (do as you please:-), I am wondering why people buy a product that is not perfect for them and then change it.
My point is that if it works fine, but if it doesn't work don't go and blame Apple or use their services for FREE to restore your messed up device.
I have been able to help people restore several JB ipods (kids in school).
Most of these were about eye candy or screen looks, wallpapers.
Something I don't need, but to each her/his own.
I liken JB to somebody buying a car and then going under the hood and change things in the way the motor works, so they can add boosters, compression changers, modify valves and ignition features or similar stuff.
When it then croaks out they blame the car manufacturer.
Always blaming somebody else seems to be the norm a lot these days.
Luckily JB people can restore their devices. If that was not possible JB would not be happening.
Maybe Apple should be looking into blocking restoring? I am sure they can come up with a way that JB would be recognized.
The jailbreak haters make me laugh. My phone works just fine and while I do use a bit more memory, it's perfectly stable and I get a phone with far more utility. Any resultant perfomance issues are so negligible stock is not even competition.
I understand some people bite off more than they can chew when they JB. I also know that scenario doesn't apply to everyone.
While I am not a jailbreak hater (do as you please:-), I am wondering why people buy a product that is not perfect for them and then change it.
My point is that if it works fine, but if it doesn't work don't go and blame Apple or use their services for FREE to restore your messed up device.
I have been able to help people restore several JB ipods (kids in school).
Most of these were about eye candy or screen looks, wallpapers.
Something I don't need, but to each her/his own.
I liken JB to somebody buying a car and then going under the hood and change things in the way the motor works, so they can add boosters, compression changers, modify valves and ignition features or similar stuff.
When it then croaks out they blame the car manufacturer.
Always blaming somebody else seems to be the norm a lot these days.
Luckily JB people can restore their devices. If that was not possible JB would not be happening.
Maybe Apple should be looking into blocking restoring? I am sure they can come up with a way that JB would be recognized.
beebler
Apr 23, 10:13 PM
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) Mobile/8H7)
As I said a while ago, the next gen of MBP's will have a really good screen as a main selling point.
No one listens!
As I said a while ago, the next gen of MBP's will have a really good screen as a main selling point.
No one listens!
thejadedmonkey
Nov 26, 03:38 PM
So there's those...
OLED screens
Touch input/non-touch
Docking staton
modular input
ULV CPU's
This could become a reality. I want.
OLED screens
Touch input/non-touch
Docking staton
modular input
ULV CPU's
This could become a reality. I want.
pmz
May 4, 03:12 PM
Thanks for alerting me to this. I had no idea that Macrumors took up GBs of my bandwidth cap. :p
Gotcha. I don't have bandwidth caps, so I wouldn't know about that.
Gotcha. I don't have bandwidth caps, so I wouldn't know about that.
Optimus Frag
May 6, 04:11 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)
Not gonna happen. Just isn't.
I can't even see them switching to ARM for their ultra portables like the Air.
UNLESS...
Apple already a running version of OSX working on existing ARM like the secret version of Intel OSX they 'announced' at switch.
I'm more inclined to believe that Apple have a back up version of ARM compatible OSX working in their labs and this the reason for the rumour of a possible change.
But I'd put money on Intel keeping the gig.
Not gonna happen. Just isn't.
I can't even see them switching to ARM for their ultra portables like the Air.
UNLESS...
Apple already a running version of OSX working on existing ARM like the secret version of Intel OSX they 'announced' at switch.
I'm more inclined to believe that Apple have a back up version of ARM compatible OSX working in their labs and this the reason for the rumour of a possible change.
But I'd put money on Intel keeping the gig.
applesith
Mar 29, 01:34 PM
Hard for me, even as an Apple fan, to weep too much for a company that chooses to do business overseas isntead of here in America, employing Americans.
Hopefully the situation in Japan improves -- for reasons beyond this.
Are you willing to pay more for your Mac gadgets so they can be made here?
Hopefully the situation in Japan improves -- for reasons beyond this.
Are you willing to pay more for your Mac gadgets so they can be made here?
Multimedia
Sep 15, 10:37 PM
Santa Rosa isn't a chipset, it's the name of the platform.
It consists of Merom (eventually Penryn?), Crestline (i965 express chipset) and Kedron (802.11n).
Santa Rosa won't affect performance a great deal.
The faster FSB will make a difference of maybe 3-5%. Maybe a little more in bandwidth-sensitive applications (say, some forms of decompression).
Less than than the difference between Yonah and Merom.
The other big differences are the new graphics core -- which the MBP won't use, the 802.11n - for which the spec hasn't yet been ratified, and is something easily added by changing/adding a wifi card, and the Robson flash caching technology, which is probably the biggest difference.
Note that Crestline is currently specced at consuming ~50% more power than the i945 chipset in Napa. Robson, however, should reduce some of that.
It's quite ironic that after years of Powerbooks getting new G4's with tiny clockspeed boosts, something like Merom is considered "bland"(?)Thank You For This Excellent Analysis Of Santa Rosa And What It Will And Won't Be ergle2. Best I've read anywhere here so far.
It consists of Merom (eventually Penryn?), Crestline (i965 express chipset) and Kedron (802.11n).
Santa Rosa won't affect performance a great deal.
The faster FSB will make a difference of maybe 3-5%. Maybe a little more in bandwidth-sensitive applications (say, some forms of decompression).
Less than than the difference between Yonah and Merom.
The other big differences are the new graphics core -- which the MBP won't use, the 802.11n - for which the spec hasn't yet been ratified, and is something easily added by changing/adding a wifi card, and the Robson flash caching technology, which is probably the biggest difference.
Note that Crestline is currently specced at consuming ~50% more power than the i945 chipset in Napa. Robson, however, should reduce some of that.
It's quite ironic that after years of Powerbooks getting new G4's with tiny clockspeed boosts, something like Merom is considered "bland"(?)Thank You For This Excellent Analysis Of Santa Rosa And What It Will And Won't Be ergle2. Best I've read anywhere here so far.
ChrisTX
Mar 27, 12:16 AM
If true...sounds like iPhone 3GS and iPad 1 owners are going to be shown the door.
We'll see, but I plan to upgrade from my iPad 1 to an iPad 3 when available anyways.
We'll see, but I plan to upgrade from my iPad 1 to an iPad 3 when available anyways.
marksman
Apr 7, 01:03 PM
Ehh, purposeful or not (as a sabotage)...not good news for iPad competition:( Which isnt good news for us iPad users...Apple needs constant pressure to release revolutionary products.
People keep saying this like if they say it enough it will make it true.
The iPad and iPad 2 were designed, created, released and supported with ZERO Competition.
Apple creates products and experiences for their customers. I know it is hard to believe that everyone is just not as lazy as they need to be, and only do something if someone else pushes them but it is possible.
What people don't seem to realize is APPLE is the COMPETITION that pushes the others, not the other way around. Apple destroyed the MP3 player market made with sucky products. They destroyed the smartphone market made with sucky products, they created the tablet market. They don't need competition, but all these other companies need Apple to steamroll them I guess.
People keep saying this like if they say it enough it will make it true.
The iPad and iPad 2 were designed, created, released and supported with ZERO Competition.
Apple creates products and experiences for their customers. I know it is hard to believe that everyone is just not as lazy as they need to be, and only do something if someone else pushes them but it is possible.
What people don't seem to realize is APPLE is the COMPETITION that pushes the others, not the other way around. Apple destroyed the MP3 player market made with sucky products. They destroyed the smartphone market made with sucky products, they created the tablet market. They don't need competition, but all these other companies need Apple to steamroll them I guess.
powerbooks
Mar 27, 07:39 AM
No problem. I kind of thought that you might be outside the US and not factoring in the Verizon models.
Think about it: it might be 24, with iPad1 still on the market......:)
Think about it: it might be 24, with iPad1 still on the market......:)
MorphingDragon
May 6, 04:27 AM
I wonder if removing the optical drive would provide the room needed for proper ventilation of a dual-CPU laptop... Dual-CPU MBP anyone?
Not possible with current laptop architecture. The only x86 CPUs AFAIK that are capable of multi-socket systems are Opterons and Xeons.
Not possible with current laptop architecture. The only x86 CPUs AFAIK that are capable of multi-socket systems are Opterons and Xeons.
Eidorian
Aug 4, 11:39 AM
How many people plan to dump their Core Duo Macs for Core 2 Duo Macs?I sold my iMac G5 back in June. :rolleyes:
peharri
Nov 25, 09:06 PM
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
robotx21
Sep 15, 09:10 PM
I believe the new macbook pro merom's will be .1-.3 inches thicker, and POSSIBLY incorporate a new blu-ray DVD burner, 160GB HD, ATI X1800 Graphics card, and improved display to 1920X1200 for 17". I believe this to be true based on the information gathered from brenthaven's website, showing the 12/15 pro case that is out of stock is 1/4" thicker in the space needed to hold the macbook. The only reason for this is if they know "something" we don't...such as a thicker machine. Also, they are coming out around the 26th-30th. Maybe? what do you guys think?
bboucher790
Apr 25, 10:29 AM
You're tracking us wrong.
Multimedia
Jul 23, 01:53 PM
I was wondering where you heard that there is going to be a 4 core mobile version of Merom coming Fall '07. Any roadmaps i've read for intel, including that one you linked to (and the Tom's Hardware one) don't mention it. In fact, I didn't even read of a desktop 4 core processor being released until let alone 2007 in a laptop.
Desktop 4 core processors with 8 MiB L2 cache - called Kentsfield are now planned for release in 4th quarter of this year 2006. Desktop 8 core processors with 12 MiB L2 cache - called Yorkfield are planned for next Spring 2007.
On the server-worstation front these are the planned processors coming next year and in 2008:
Woodcrest, first eighth-generation server and workstation chip, 65 nm, dual-core, 4 MiB L2 cache (Released on June 26, 2006)
Clovertown, quad-core MCM, consists of two Woodcrests, with 2 × 4 MiB L2
Tigerton, quad-core MCM. MP-capable version of Clovertown.
Harpertown, either a dual-core, 45 nm shrink of Woodcrest, or an eight-core, 45 nm MCM with 12 MiB L2
Dunnington, four to thirty-two cores, successor to Tigerton
I'm wondering where you heard this because I'm getting a MBP for college next summer and if there were quad core MBPs coming out in the fall I would wait.
(Oh, and if I misinterpreted 4 cores to equal Quad core on a single processor, please clarify what you meant.)4 Mobile Cores In One MBP by end of 2007 Is An Expectation Not A Known Fact. Obviously Intel is not going to project that possability until it knows it can do it sometime next year either possibly by end of 2007 or almost certainly by end of 2008. Sorry for the certain tone of my mention. I put a smillie after that sentence to indicate it was sort of a hopeful joke. :)
We will all have to wait for the '07 WWDC next summer to tell what's going on for the mobile Macs then. Way too early to tell now. I would just be as patient as possible before you have to pull the trigger for school in the fall of '07. In other words, don't put any weight into my hopeful expectation for 4 cores in a mobile Mac by two years from now.
I think it will depend on how well the 45nm production process develops as to how soon Intel will feel confident they can put 4 mobile cores with 12-16 MB of L2 cache in one piece of 45nm silicon and still keep it cool and energy efficient. This is a long term hope and dream for me, nothing substantiated by any sources. Not fantasy. But a realistic hopeful expectation that will most likely be fulfilled in 3 years worst case after Core 3 comes to market which will be about 2 years from now. :)
Each of these Core Families has a life expectancy of about two years of reign plus the half year preceeding early deployment and ramp up.
Core 2 - late 2006-2008
Core 3 - late 2008-2010
Core 4 - late 2010-2012
etc.
And each Family represents significant changes in both the processor architecture and the manufacturing process. We will have to see how the Intel long range plan unfolds as planned or not as planned to determine what will be available in long range future. IE - nobody knows for sure. Right now I can't see beyond a 2.33 GHz Merom with the Santa Rosa support set + 802.11n and 10-Gigabit Ethernet next Spring. Can anyone else here see further?
Desktop 4 core processors with 8 MiB L2 cache - called Kentsfield are now planned for release in 4th quarter of this year 2006. Desktop 8 core processors with 12 MiB L2 cache - called Yorkfield are planned for next Spring 2007.
On the server-worstation front these are the planned processors coming next year and in 2008:
Woodcrest, first eighth-generation server and workstation chip, 65 nm, dual-core, 4 MiB L2 cache (Released on June 26, 2006)
Clovertown, quad-core MCM, consists of two Woodcrests, with 2 × 4 MiB L2
Tigerton, quad-core MCM. MP-capable version of Clovertown.
Harpertown, either a dual-core, 45 nm shrink of Woodcrest, or an eight-core, 45 nm MCM with 12 MiB L2
Dunnington, four to thirty-two cores, successor to Tigerton
I'm wondering where you heard this because I'm getting a MBP for college next summer and if there were quad core MBPs coming out in the fall I would wait.
(Oh, and if I misinterpreted 4 cores to equal Quad core on a single processor, please clarify what you meant.)4 Mobile Cores In One MBP by end of 2007 Is An Expectation Not A Known Fact. Obviously Intel is not going to project that possability until it knows it can do it sometime next year either possibly by end of 2007 or almost certainly by end of 2008. Sorry for the certain tone of my mention. I put a smillie after that sentence to indicate it was sort of a hopeful joke. :)
We will all have to wait for the '07 WWDC next summer to tell what's going on for the mobile Macs then. Way too early to tell now. I would just be as patient as possible before you have to pull the trigger for school in the fall of '07. In other words, don't put any weight into my hopeful expectation for 4 cores in a mobile Mac by two years from now.
I think it will depend on how well the 45nm production process develops as to how soon Intel will feel confident they can put 4 mobile cores with 12-16 MB of L2 cache in one piece of 45nm silicon and still keep it cool and energy efficient. This is a long term hope and dream for me, nothing substantiated by any sources. Not fantasy. But a realistic hopeful expectation that will most likely be fulfilled in 3 years worst case after Core 3 comes to market which will be about 2 years from now. :)
Each of these Core Families has a life expectancy of about two years of reign plus the half year preceeding early deployment and ramp up.
Core 2 - late 2006-2008
Core 3 - late 2008-2010
Core 4 - late 2010-2012
etc.
And each Family represents significant changes in both the processor architecture and the manufacturing process. We will have to see how the Intel long range plan unfolds as planned or not as planned to determine what will be available in long range future. IE - nobody knows for sure. Right now I can't see beyond a 2.33 GHz Merom with the Santa Rosa support set + 802.11n and 10-Gigabit Ethernet next Spring. Can anyone else here see further?
amols
Aug 11, 12:22 PM
Quite incorrect actually. The dfifference is not minimal and this isn't just a "speed bump". If you read up on the Yonah and Merom chip architectures, you'll see that that Merom has significant architectural improvements over Yonah, including a 4MB L2 cache and most notably 64-bit support over Yonah's 32-bit support. This is very significant since Jobs is pushing Leopard and its 64-bit goodness. :cool:
Umm..technically you are right, but the the difference of 5-15% is not very significant, especially compared to Conroe's 40% jump. Merom's power is limited by slower FSB which is not going to see any change anytime soon. I just hope they fix current MBP issues first like battery life, underclocked graphic card and Superdrives. CPU upgrade is just a ritual Apple has to perform to stay in the league.
Umm..technically you are right, but the the difference of 5-15% is not very significant, especially compared to Conroe's 40% jump. Merom's power is limited by slower FSB which is not going to see any change anytime soon. I just hope they fix current MBP issues first like battery life, underclocked graphic card and Superdrives. CPU upgrade is just a ritual Apple has to perform to stay in the league.
superleccy
Sep 15, 04:20 PM
MBP updates? About time too!
RebootD
Mar 31, 12:26 AM
So what part of 'iOS' fluff do Versions, Air Drop, Mission Control, Auto Save and Lion Server fit under?
'Useful' UI improvements? So what would you consider useful? Personally full screen apps, a native application launcher that can be organized, and resume are all useful to me. Get out of the mindset that just because it originated from iOS means that it won't be useful.
Wasn't talking 'features' I was talking "user interface" as in getting rid of aqua, standardize their apps GUI etc.
As for 'features" Versions and Air drop are great but most of my apps already autosave or I do every 10 minutes, don't care about mission control, don't really care about full screen apps because I have many open at once side by side and I don't run a server.
'Useful' UI improvements? So what would you consider useful? Personally full screen apps, a native application launcher that can be organized, and resume are all useful to me. Get out of the mindset that just because it originated from iOS means that it won't be useful.
Wasn't talking 'features' I was talking "user interface" as in getting rid of aqua, standardize their apps GUI etc.
As for 'features" Versions and Air drop are great but most of my apps already autosave or I do every 10 minutes, don't care about mission control, don't really care about full screen apps because I have many open at once side by side and I don't run a server.
slackintosh
Jul 30, 09:53 PM
As the previous post states, the typeface of that add should have caught anyone, apple undertook a subtle identity change around the time it introduced G4 ibooks, most significant was a change in typeface.....
I think the rumour is nothing but a rumour, wasn't it a similar mysterious source who mentioned to a gas station attendant the pending arrival of 42" Plasmas or some $#!+???
I think the rumour is nothing but a rumour, wasn't it a similar mysterious source who mentioned to a gas station attendant the pending arrival of 42" Plasmas or some $#!+???
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar