spencers
Jun 15, 02:29 PM
So did I! She called me and gave me my pin 24000000xxxxx.
Neat, I'm 22000000xxxxx
Neat, I'm 22000000xxxxx
AwakenedLands
Apr 25, 02:38 PM
Thinking it's only stored on the device and not used by Apple is naive. What's the point of logging your every location if it's not going to be used in some way.
I'm going to assume if you wipe your phone, your location data isn't lost... it will still be in Apple's possession. What else is iOS storing and sending to Apple that we don't know about? Slippery slope if you ask me.
I'm going to assume if you wipe your phone, your location data isn't lost... it will still be in Apple's possession. What else is iOS storing and sending to Apple that we don't know about? Slippery slope if you ask me.
Scottsdale
Apr 6, 11:31 AM
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.
That isn't what this story reads, and I don't think anyone but you and I have even read the actual facts supposed here.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in the graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It
definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I
could assume things all day, but that isn't the story written.
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.
That isn't what this story reads, and I don't think anyone but you and I have even read the actual facts supposed here.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in the graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It
definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I
could assume things all day, but that isn't the story written.
dante@sisna.com
Sep 13, 11:22 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
Not pointless at all if a person uses a lot of applications. You can justify all 8 cores right now. For sure. My quad core shines in multitasking.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
Not pointless at all if a person uses a lot of applications. You can justify all 8 cores right now. For sure. My quad core shines in multitasking.
adamfilip
Jul 21, 10:13 AM
Now you just need to decide what color your want your new computer... (again)
I want Apple to take the current PowerMac G5 Case
make it 25% shorter, add a second optical drive
and two more Internal hard drives
add some External Sata ports. and 4 more USB2 ports
1 more front usb2 port
make the mic port powered
and then make the case black anodized aluminum. and have the apple logo on the sides backlit just like the notebooks
I want Apple to take the current PowerMac G5 Case
make it 25% shorter, add a second optical drive
and two more Internal hard drives
add some External Sata ports. and 4 more USB2 ports
1 more front usb2 port
make the mic port powered
and then make the case black anodized aluminum. and have the apple logo on the sides backlit just like the notebooks
ergle2
Sep 14, 08:09 PM
Not sure about beyond 8 which can be paired into a 16 core Mac. Perhaps. Too far out to tell although it is casually mentioned in the roadmap.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
tekmoe
Jul 27, 02:57 PM
Actually, the merom in not completely compatible with the yonah chips. There will have to be some redesign on Apple's part that is supposed to delay the new MBPs. This article somewhat explains it:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=249
Also, since Apple is now kind of competeing with PCs who get the newest and fastest, it would be in Apple's best interest to get these chips in MBPs asap. Also, it is easy to see that a lot of people are waiting to purchase a new Apple laptop with this technology. MBP's current sales are going to slump from here on out until this technology is put into some new computers.
this blog was also written by jason o'grady, aka the PowerPage rumor site. his writing means nothing to me.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=249
Also, since Apple is now kind of competeing with PCs who get the newest and fastest, it would be in Apple's best interest to get these chips in MBPs asap. Also, it is easy to see that a lot of people are waiting to purchase a new Apple laptop with this technology. MBP's current sales are going to slump from here on out until this technology is put into some new computers.
this blog was also written by jason o'grady, aka the PowerPage rumor site. his writing means nothing to me.
dougny
Nov 28, 10:58 PM
Universal has already stated that half of the money will be going to the artists.
k995
Mar 23, 04:13 AM
Also, your ignorance and arrogance didn't let you understand my point. Every new version of Office, specially the Windows version, requires a bigger and faster computer to run. And when you compare features, there's no real gain from one version to the next, just nice looking colors and animations, which are a waste of processor speed.
Go learn some manners, and mature at least a little. Idiots like you shouldn't be allowed in these forums.
And every new version of itunes requires a bigger and faster computer to run, your point? Hardware moves on , every companys takes advantage of that.
office 2010 runs fine on older hardware just like windows 7 does. I would suggest you tr it out yourself before making such statements. Office 2010 runs fine on my 5 year old computer my wife uses.
Go learn some manners, and mature at least a little. Idiots like you shouldn't be allowed in these forums.
And every new version of itunes requires a bigger and faster computer to run, your point? Hardware moves on , every companys takes advantage of that.
office 2010 runs fine on older hardware just like windows 7 does. I would suggest you tr it out yourself before making such statements. Office 2010 runs fine on my 5 year old computer my wife uses.
iAlan
Nov 28, 08:16 PM
I haven't read all the post as yet, got to around post #50 but my sentiments pretty much reflect those of most posters.
However, if there is evidence that a bulk of the royalty (and I mean more than 50%) will go to artists then I can see justification in the process (but it should not be a flat $1 per device as the cost/profit of devices varies). But at the same time, Apple should get a higher share of the 99c per track as I believe the money they get per song pretty much only covers there management of the stored data and hosting on iTunes with very little profit per song - and this is understandable as Apple can leverage the iTunes store to drive iPod sales.
If the record companies want a profitable piece of Apple�s pie (no pun intended) then Apple should be entitled to a profitable piece of the 99c download.
Same logic me thinks�
However, if there is evidence that a bulk of the royalty (and I mean more than 50%) will go to artists then I can see justification in the process (but it should not be a flat $1 per device as the cost/profit of devices varies). But at the same time, Apple should get a higher share of the 99c per track as I believe the money they get per song pretty much only covers there management of the stored data and hosting on iTunes with very little profit per song - and this is understandable as Apple can leverage the iTunes store to drive iPod sales.
If the record companies want a profitable piece of Apple�s pie (no pun intended) then Apple should be entitled to a profitable piece of the 99c download.
Same logic me thinks�
ugp
Jun 11, 01:57 PM
We are being told that inventory will be limited for non preorder customers. Basically, if you want one, you better preorder.
About opening before apple stores...
Thats what i thought too, but the only thing we were told is no later than 8am opening. Basically we can open anytime up to 8am.
I am praying that the Managers here get told the same thing by the DMs as well. Would make things a lot easier. If Radio Shack announces they are opening before everyone else you better prepare for a lot of customers.
About opening before apple stores...
Thats what i thought too, but the only thing we were told is no later than 8am opening. Basically we can open anytime up to 8am.
I am praying that the Managers here get told the same thing by the DMs as well. Would make things a lot easier. If Radio Shack announces they are opening before everyone else you better prepare for a lot of customers.
moochermaulucci
Apr 8, 12:50 AM
How does that create demand? Instead of actually getting the sale, you deny a sale and hope it "creates demand" so that they'll come back and buy it in fear? Especially considering that they could have just purchased it in the first place and avoided the whole issue. Actually selling out the product and then having no more available in stock would create demand AND generate revenue. Doing what they did would generate SOME revenue and likely cause customers to look elsewhere for iPads.
Edit: This isn't to say that I don't recognize the concept of reaching quotas for the day and saving products for the next day's quota. That's a different argument. What I'm referring to is that this is likely not about demand but about selfishly wanting to meet quotas and turning away customers in the process. Not creating demand. It's immoral, but business/retail and morality don't always work so well together.
Now, now, we'll have none of that common sense in these here forums.:D
Well said, btw.
Edit: This isn't to say that I don't recognize the concept of reaching quotas for the day and saving products for the next day's quota. That's a different argument. What I'm referring to is that this is likely not about demand but about selfishly wanting to meet quotas and turning away customers in the process. Not creating demand. It's immoral, but business/retail and morality don't always work so well together.
Now, now, we'll have none of that common sense in these here forums.:D
Well said, btw.
Stridder44
Aug 7, 05:10 PM
I'm not comparing it to system restore but to Volume Shadow Copy from Windows Server 2003. File-by-file snapshot by MS 3 years ago!
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
APPLE!? Arrogant??? Naaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh.
And how do you know you guys are going to hate it? You never even used it yet. My God some of you people are such complainers. Put some dirt on it, make a hill, and get over it.
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
APPLE!? Arrogant??? Naaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh.
And how do you know you guys are going to hate it? You never even used it yet. My God some of you people are such complainers. Put some dirt on it, make a hill, and get over it.
ergle2
Sep 14, 10:49 PM
Really, completely new? As in, to Core 2 what the G5 was to G4? In just two years?? I guess they're really ramping things up... Core 3 Hexa Mac Pros, anyone?
Intel's stated plans as I understand them are thus:
A new micro-arch every 2 years. I don't think they mean brand new so much as "significant changes/improvements". Whether this is akin to Yonah->Conroe or Netburst->Conroe remains to be seen, but more like the former (or perhaps Pentium-M -> Merom -- Core Duo was very much a stop-gap). Little has been released about Nehalem, but at one time it was slated as "based on Banias/Dothan", due in 2005 and expected to ramp to 9/10GHz.
"Off" years will recieve derivative versions (e.g. Merom->Penryn), which appears to be mostly stuff like L2 cache increases, faster FSB speeds (at least while we have FSBs - 2008 looks like the year for DCI, finally), die shrinks, increasing the number of cores (expect at least one to be more cores on a single die instead of two dice/package), etc.
Die shrinks are currently scheduled for "off" years, in order to stablize the process ready for the new micro-arch in the following year so Intel doesn't need to deal with both new process and new arch at the same time, and presumably in part to keep speed increases coming in "off" years
Of course, roadmaps can change quite rapidly -- it's not that long ago that Whitfield was expected to debut late 2006 with DCI (FSB replacement). Whitfield was replaced by Tigerton which is now due sometime in 2007...
One thing's for sure, Intel appears to have learnt a great deal from the Netburst fiasco -- how not to do things, if nothing else. Unfortunately, they still estimate ~50% of processors shipping in 1Q2007 will be netburst-based (mostly Pentium-D).
Intel's stated plans as I understand them are thus:
A new micro-arch every 2 years. I don't think they mean brand new so much as "significant changes/improvements". Whether this is akin to Yonah->Conroe or Netburst->Conroe remains to be seen, but more like the former (or perhaps Pentium-M -> Merom -- Core Duo was very much a stop-gap). Little has been released about Nehalem, but at one time it was slated as "based on Banias/Dothan", due in 2005 and expected to ramp to 9/10GHz.
"Off" years will recieve derivative versions (e.g. Merom->Penryn), which appears to be mostly stuff like L2 cache increases, faster FSB speeds (at least while we have FSBs - 2008 looks like the year for DCI, finally), die shrinks, increasing the number of cores (expect at least one to be more cores on a single die instead of two dice/package), etc.
Die shrinks are currently scheduled for "off" years, in order to stablize the process ready for the new micro-arch in the following year so Intel doesn't need to deal with both new process and new arch at the same time, and presumably in part to keep speed increases coming in "off" years
Of course, roadmaps can change quite rapidly -- it's not that long ago that Whitfield was expected to debut late 2006 with DCI (FSB replacement). Whitfield was replaced by Tigerton which is now due sometime in 2007...
One thing's for sure, Intel appears to have learnt a great deal from the Netburst fiasco -- how not to do things, if nothing else. Unfortunately, they still estimate ~50% of processors shipping in 1Q2007 will be netburst-based (mostly Pentium-D).
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 06:49 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
C.:confused:
The biggest difference would be that in europe we use GSM-system (900 Mhz and 1800Mhz) whereas US use both CDMA and GSM (850MHz and 1900Mhz)
A typical triband GSM phone enables you to call more or less all over the world whereas a CDMA is more or less restricted to use it in US and some countries in Asia. CDMA and GSM are two incompatible system like windows and OSX, i.e they dont "speak" with each other. One difference you notice as a user is that GSM phones has a SIM card which more or less is your identity. That is, if you have an unlocked cellphone you can change operators whenever you feel like it. This is not possible with CDMA cellphones.
Celphones are also much more common in europe and the "typical" cellphone user is not that tied up to an operator as a "typical" US user. Carriers in europe don't cripple the phones like some do in US.
I am sure there are man more differences, but these were the only that came to my mind right now.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
C.:confused:
The biggest difference would be that in europe we use GSM-system (900 Mhz and 1800Mhz) whereas US use both CDMA and GSM (850MHz and 1900Mhz)
A typical triband GSM phone enables you to call more or less all over the world whereas a CDMA is more or less restricted to use it in US and some countries in Asia. CDMA and GSM are two incompatible system like windows and OSX, i.e they dont "speak" with each other. One difference you notice as a user is that GSM phones has a SIM card which more or less is your identity. That is, if you have an unlocked cellphone you can change operators whenever you feel like it. This is not possible with CDMA cellphones.
Celphones are also much more common in europe and the "typical" cellphone user is not that tied up to an operator as a "typical" US user. Carriers in europe don't cripple the phones like some do in US.
I am sure there are man more differences, but these were the only that came to my mind right now.
NJRonbo
Jun 23, 05:32 PM
Good luck with that one as that is not going to happen. They did not advertise Pre-Orders. They said reserves only. They told no money from you nor did they hold credit card information on file like Apple does.
No...
...but what they did do was waste people's time.
How can you ask customers to stand in line last
week -- in my case (and certainly others) arriving
to the store early to be first in line and then wait
an additional 90 minutes for the store to attempt
to generate a PIN --- and be told that none of
what you just did will guarantee you a phone?
Imagine only 9,000 pins available and every Radio
Shack Store online at the same time trying to get
one for their customers on line. It's like a
Beatles Reunion concert going on sale nationwide
through Ticketmaster and everyone is trying to get
their ticket at the same time.
All the inconvenience and wasted time that RS
put their customers through last week all in the
name of asking for a phone that is not officially
being called a "preorder."
Now, all those people that stood in line and
had to go through the hassle of wasting their
afternoon to not officially preorder an iPhone
aren't seemingly going to get one at all.
Radio Shack really screwed this one up.
At least people who lined up at AT&T to
preorder a phone weren't told that they
were doing so just to gauge a number of
requests and none of them would be
guaranteed a phone.
It's really sad that all of us that spent
an hour, two or three in the stores last
week did it all for naught.
No...
...but what they did do was waste people's time.
How can you ask customers to stand in line last
week -- in my case (and certainly others) arriving
to the store early to be first in line and then wait
an additional 90 minutes for the store to attempt
to generate a PIN --- and be told that none of
what you just did will guarantee you a phone?
Imagine only 9,000 pins available and every Radio
Shack Store online at the same time trying to get
one for their customers on line. It's like a
Beatles Reunion concert going on sale nationwide
through Ticketmaster and everyone is trying to get
their ticket at the same time.
All the inconvenience and wasted time that RS
put their customers through last week all in the
name of asking for a phone that is not officially
being called a "preorder."
Now, all those people that stood in line and
had to go through the hassle of wasting their
afternoon to not officially preorder an iPhone
aren't seemingly going to get one at all.
Radio Shack really screwed this one up.
At least people who lined up at AT&T to
preorder a phone weren't told that they
were doing so just to gauge a number of
requests and none of them would be
guaranteed a phone.
It's really sad that all of us that spent
an hour, two or three in the stores last
week did it all for naught.
Spoony
Mar 22, 01:08 PM
What's with all these tablets being advertised in landscape??
I've had the first ipad since it came out last year and I'd say my Portrait to landscape usage ratio is like 70% portrait / 30% landscape.
I view webpages, read the WSJ, NYPost, books, ipod etc.. all in portrait.
Landscape is for tv shows / movies and some games.
Why are these tablets all designed as if the user is going to hold them landscape 90% of the time? Are magazines designed to be held landscape? I don't get these horizontal tablets.
I've had the first ipad since it came out last year and I'd say my Portrait to landscape usage ratio is like 70% portrait / 30% landscape.
I view webpages, read the WSJ, NYPost, books, ipod etc.. all in portrait.
Landscape is for tv shows / movies and some games.
Why are these tablets all designed as if the user is going to hold them landscape 90% of the time? Are magazines designed to be held landscape? I don't get these horizontal tablets.
firewood
Mar 26, 06:47 PM
I'm glad rosetta is going away. Maybe the dev will finally update the app.
The dev is dead, too old to program anymore, or has long ago moved on to other companies and hobbies, etc. Maybe the source code depends on the PowerPlant framework, or is on a floppy disk that the dog chewed up. But thousands of Mac users still like using the old application a lot better than any of the new cr*plets.
Maybe you'll volunteer to rewrite a new app as good or better, in every regard, for free?
The dev is dead, too old to program anymore, or has long ago moved on to other companies and hobbies, etc. Maybe the source code depends on the PowerPlant framework, or is on a floppy disk that the dog chewed up. But thousands of Mac users still like using the old application a lot better than any of the new cr*plets.
Maybe you'll volunteer to rewrite a new app as good or better, in every regard, for free?
Dan==
Jul 27, 02:29 PM
While I like your thinking, your mock-up is wrong. If Apple are going to release a mid-Tower it has to appeal to both gamers and those looking for a headless iMac. They would really have to bring out about three main models, one which was basically an upgradable iMac spec for a couple to few hundred bucks less than the real deal and two higher spec conroes, (short of Mac Pro though). From what I can see, yours looks too small to easily customise, which would appeal to gamers.
Single optical, single HD (2nd slot free), assume better specs will mainly lie with graphics and ram.
I'm not much of a gamer, so take this with a healthy grain of salt...
Gamers seem to like to do a few things:
Single optical, single HD (2nd slot free), assume better specs will mainly lie with graphics and ram.
I'm not much of a gamer, so take this with a healthy grain of salt...
Gamers seem to like to do a few things:
ergle2
Sep 13, 07:19 PM
Obviously, since Intel is no longer creating new processors with HT.
By the way, previous poster, HT does not double the number of cores. Just the number of virtual cores. A Pentium 4 system with HT will run slower than a dual Pentium 4 system (with HT disabled) at the same clock speed.
Actually, many tasks were faster.
HyperThreading was thrown in to mask other deficiencies in the NetBurst arch by exploiting resources that were otherwise wasted.
There were a few cases where HT ran slower when HT first debuted, but with OS scheduler tweaks and BIOS updates (microcode changes, likely), HT was a net win in most cases.
Core 2 doesn't have the same design issues - mostly down to that excessively long pipeline - that Prescott had, and hence HT makes no sense.
The problem, however, lay with Netburst as a whole, rather than HT -- which offered a minor improvement in performance - a band-aid if you will.
By the way, previous poster, HT does not double the number of cores. Just the number of virtual cores. A Pentium 4 system with HT will run slower than a dual Pentium 4 system (with HT disabled) at the same clock speed.
Actually, many tasks were faster.
HyperThreading was thrown in to mask other deficiencies in the NetBurst arch by exploiting resources that were otherwise wasted.
There were a few cases where HT ran slower when HT first debuted, but with OS scheduler tweaks and BIOS updates (microcode changes, likely), HT was a net win in most cases.
Core 2 doesn't have the same design issues - mostly down to that excessively long pipeline - that Prescott had, and hence HT makes no sense.
The problem, however, lay with Netburst as a whole, rather than HT -- which offered a minor improvement in performance - a band-aid if you will.
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.
bushido
Mar 26, 05:29 AM
been using the preview as my main OS since its release and havent had any problems besides sagari being a bitch sometimes. havent touched my snow leopard ever since.
will we be able to get the GM by software update or will it be a complete nee upgrade disc image?
oh and dashboard isnt pointless. i use it A LOT. for weather, world clock, istats, translator, notes and so on. i would rly miss it if it were to be replaced
will we be able to get the GM by software update or will it be a complete nee upgrade disc image?
oh and dashboard isnt pointless. i use it A LOT. for weather, world clock, istats, translator, notes and so on. i would rly miss it if it were to be replaced
Lone Deranger
Mar 31, 05:30 PM
To put it in Nelson's words:
deannnnn
Jun 9, 08:44 AM
I have a feeling that those trade-in prices will be substantially reduced once the iPhone 4 is released.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario