Northgrove
Apr 20, 03:31 AM
Springing for just a faster processor. Dont't think thats gonna happen. I'll just stick with my iP4 until the following year...
Same, and I'm saying that as a 3GS user. I'm not feeling the slowness here, and the only thing I miss from the iPhone 4 is the better camera. I've seen the Retina display but while it's a nice resolution bump, it still didn't make my display feel horrible. I'm not annoyed by a particularly low or below average resolution.
I'm hoping the iPhone 5 has something more to it than this. I don't even know how it would make use of an even faster CPU than that in the iPhone 4. Are we annoyed by things going slow?
Same, and I'm saying that as a 3GS user. I'm not feeling the slowness here, and the only thing I miss from the iPhone 4 is the better camera. I've seen the Retina display but while it's a nice resolution bump, it still didn't make my display feel horrible. I'm not annoyed by a particularly low or below average resolution.
I'm hoping the iPhone 5 has something more to it than this. I don't even know how it would make use of an even faster CPU than that in the iPhone 4. Are we annoyed by things going slow?
LobsterDK
Apr 24, 02:04 AM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ? Well whatever that GPU is , apple will ship with the one released 2 years ago and half the RAM it shipped with on the PC .
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Desktop rendering performance at a retina display resolution would not be an issue with any modern Mac that shipped with a retina display. As for games, you do not have to render the game at the native screen resolution. The OS X implementation will almost certainly be the same as the iOS implementation. That is, a doubling of the vertical and horizontal resolution.
A game running on a 3840x2160 retina display can render at 1920x1080. No filtering need be applied by the monitor as it is an exact multiple in each direction. A 1920x1080 output resolution from a game would look exactly the same on a 3840x2160 display as it would on a 1920x1080 display. Every 1 pixel in the rendered image would take up 4 pixels on the higher res display. You can test this out on your Mac now with any game that allows you to select a resolution that is half the vertical/horizontal resolution of your current monitor. That is assuming the display is not stupid enough to filter resolutions that are an even division of it's native resolution. Most won't apply any filtering in those cases.
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Desktop rendering performance at a retina display resolution would not be an issue with any modern Mac that shipped with a retina display. As for games, you do not have to render the game at the native screen resolution. The OS X implementation will almost certainly be the same as the iOS implementation. That is, a doubling of the vertical and horizontal resolution.
A game running on a 3840x2160 retina display can render at 1920x1080. No filtering need be applied by the monitor as it is an exact multiple in each direction. A 1920x1080 output resolution from a game would look exactly the same on a 3840x2160 display as it would on a 1920x1080 display. Every 1 pixel in the rendered image would take up 4 pixels on the higher res display. You can test this out on your Mac now with any game that allows you to select a resolution that is half the vertical/horizontal resolution of your current monitor. That is assuming the display is not stupid enough to filter resolutions that are an even division of it's native resolution. Most won't apply any filtering in those cases.
BRLawyer
Nov 27, 12:10 PM
ps. No point abusing others' ideas.
No point in what? I am stating my OWN ideas.
No point in what? I am stating my OWN ideas.
iJawn108
Jul 21, 06:10 PM
I'm excited but... :( I kind of want to wait for the 800 Mhz FSB that will most likely come out next year. if it comes with a new case with the macbook styled keyboard ill snatch it up. :p
griz
Apr 23, 08:36 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
3200x2000 is only a little higher than what the current 27" boasts.
Also, it would depend on the viewing distance to be able to call it a retina display. Heck, a 1080p TV from 10 feet away is a retina display.
3200x2000 is only a little higher than what the current 27" boasts.
Also, it would depend on the viewing distance to be able to call it a retina display. Heck, a 1080p TV from 10 feet away is a retina display.
ravenvii
May 3, 12:35 PM
So, I'm confused from reading the rules. You stated the villain wins once everyone is dead. How does a hero die? That's not clear to me in the rules.
Uh, a hero dies once all of his HP is gone.
Also, this:
is unclear. You said he can't level up, so what does that mean? This "add two points" makes no sense??
That should've be more clear. Basically I'm just stating *why* the villain is at level 16. It's not an arbitrary number - it's the number of players multiplied by two. # of players (8) multiplied by 2 = villain's level (16). That's all.
Uh, a hero dies once all of his HP is gone.
Also, this:
is unclear. You said he can't level up, so what does that mean? This "add two points" makes no sense??
That should've be more clear. Basically I'm just stating *why* the villain is at level 16. It's not an arbitrary number - it's the number of players multiplied by two. # of players (8) multiplied by 2 = villain's level (16). That's all.
GoodWatch
May 4, 03:11 PM
That makes sense, while not incredibly expensive, the cost of manufacturing is still overhead if they can reduce it by providing a mechanism for the consumer to d/l it why not.
Whilst I think I have a connection with enough bandwidth to cope with the size, I do want the DVD. The cost of manufacturing (50 cents per DVD?) are costs we as customers pay for, not Apple. I you buy a carton of milk you pay for the milk plus the carton.
Whilst I think I have a connection with enough bandwidth to cope with the size, I do want the DVD. The cost of manufacturing (50 cents per DVD?) are costs we as customers pay for, not Apple. I you buy a carton of milk you pay for the milk plus the carton.
gnasher729
Apr 25, 09:50 AM
+1. My IP is being logged right now most likely. No matter where you go, using any communication device, you can be tracked. If you're that paranoid, get off the grid. Every phone company tracks your location. This for iPhone users is just a log of it on your phone.
I do agree, however, that the consolidated.db file should at least be encrypted if it is to remain on the device. Now any good crook knows all they need is your iphone to find out when best to rob you.
What is actually tracked is not _your_ location, it is the location of WiFi basestations around the country. Which Google, Apple, and Skyhook use for their "poor man's GPS" that allows a device with WiFi but without working GPS to find its location. Skyhook started this by having cars drive round the country, recording the position of WiFi devices. Google and Apple, having the infrastructure, use a more efficient method to do this - instead of driving cars throught the country, they use people's iPhones or Android phones to collect the same data. Note they are not collecting _your_ data, they are collecting the data of WiFi base stations that you happen to pass with your iPhone.
The database file is most likely there so your phone knows which information it has already sent, so it doesn't send info about the same basestation twice. That should be easily checkable - is the database full with hundreds of copies of your home location or not? Does it have dozens of copies of locations along your way to work? I think each location is recorded only once, so a crook stealing the phone would know places where I have been, but not how often I go where. So they would have very little clue where to find me.
And the whole scenario seems very unlikely. It would be very, very rare that a specific person is robbed intentionally. That robber will most likely come to your home without having any idea who lives there, or wait in a dark alleyway and rob the next person to come along, not stealing your phone in order to find other information about you and rob you again. It is just a hypothetical danger that is not actually going to happen.
But what actually does happen and worries me (well, I'm not worried, but some people should be), is that apparently it is possible to access Google's database. There is a website where you can enter the MAC address of your router, and it will find its location. It found mine within about 100 meters. That might make it possible to find people who don't want to be found. So anyone who moves to escape a stalker, or goes into witness protection, they better not take their router with them to the new home.
I do agree, however, that the consolidated.db file should at least be encrypted if it is to remain on the device. Now any good crook knows all they need is your iphone to find out when best to rob you.
What is actually tracked is not _your_ location, it is the location of WiFi basestations around the country. Which Google, Apple, and Skyhook use for their "poor man's GPS" that allows a device with WiFi but without working GPS to find its location. Skyhook started this by having cars drive round the country, recording the position of WiFi devices. Google and Apple, having the infrastructure, use a more efficient method to do this - instead of driving cars throught the country, they use people's iPhones or Android phones to collect the same data. Note they are not collecting _your_ data, they are collecting the data of WiFi base stations that you happen to pass with your iPhone.
The database file is most likely there so your phone knows which information it has already sent, so it doesn't send info about the same basestation twice. That should be easily checkable - is the database full with hundreds of copies of your home location or not? Does it have dozens of copies of locations along your way to work? I think each location is recorded only once, so a crook stealing the phone would know places where I have been, but not how often I go where. So they would have very little clue where to find me.
And the whole scenario seems very unlikely. It would be very, very rare that a specific person is robbed intentionally. That robber will most likely come to your home without having any idea who lives there, or wait in a dark alleyway and rob the next person to come along, not stealing your phone in order to find other information about you and rob you again. It is just a hypothetical danger that is not actually going to happen.
But what actually does happen and worries me (well, I'm not worried, but some people should be), is that apparently it is possible to access Google's database. There is a website where you can enter the MAC address of your router, and it will find its location. It found mine within about 100 meters. That might make it possible to find people who don't want to be found. So anyone who moves to escape a stalker, or goes into witness protection, they better not take their router with them to the new home.
SandynJosh
Apr 23, 09:41 PM
I will be honest and truthful and say for a mobile device on batteries, I'm very impressed as what the iPhone and iPad can do gaming wise.
However I will also state, and I think we all should be honest, that at the moment, Apple are bringing the games DOWN to what their hardware can do, as opposed to making Hardware so great that gaming is being pushed UP to take advantage of Apples industry leading performance.
In your first paragraph you talk about Apple's mobile products, which is where Apple will be putting most of their effort in the foreseeable future. To have successful portable products, having a long time between charges is highly important. The old brute force methods of throwing power and RAM at the gaming performance problem can not be part of the design mindset. Game designers know this and are becoming much better at coding for portable games, but they are not quite there yet. Meanwhile Apple is working to find ways to build in performance and not increase power draw.
THIS is the future as Apple sees it, and their acceptance in the broad general market shows that they are on the right track.
When Apple release GTX580 beating desktops, and/or Xbox360 / PS3 beating gaming devices, I will happily bow down to them being the greatest in graphics.
NOW you have switched to talking about desktop and console gaming computers. THIS is a whole different area. First off, it's a tiny segment of the whole computer market. It's big, but not nearly as huge as what Apple is aiming for with their products.
In a nutshell, Apple's strategy is to capture the mobile device market as completely as they can. They are being highly successful at that strategy from iPods to iPhones, to iPads, to Laptops.
Meanwhile they are growing rapidly in the iMac desktop and tower market due primarily to the halo effect of their success in the portable arena. They are doing this even while the desktop and tower markets are shrinking overall. Can you see why Apple will not be putting a lot of effort into this segment?
But right now, they are trailing by miles due to years of neglect as they just did not have products that could compete, and their one semi attempt at a console got nowhere.
Note: I would LOVE LOVE LOVE Apple to turn this around.
You are right. Apple did not have products that could compete in the desktop and console markets. This was primarily due to game developers not interested in writing games for Intel chips and PowerPC chips. Since the installed base for Intel-based computers was more then a order-of-magnitude larger than the installed base of Macs. Apple was never going to enjoy being a suitable gaming platform until they switched to Intel CPUs.
Once Apple made the switch, they have come a long way towards being an acceptable gaming computer, but they have no desire or plans to go after the high end of this market... it's just not that profitable or large. Remember AlienWare? They had the best gaming computer, IMO, and they had to sell themselves to another company to stay alive.
As for the console market, it's crowded with established competitors and will likely see one squeezed out. Not the kind of market that Apple or anyone else should want to jump into.
They need to ditch the "Laptops on a Stand" design of the iMac for starters, but I feel they never will as they have decided they won't compete and they cannot compete in this sector of the market.
I addressed this above. As for the "Laptops on a Stand" design, it's such a bad design that the largest computer company, HP, as well as others, have copied it.
Console wise, I'm not sure they could compete against a 360 or a PS3. Let's say Apple against a PS4 or a Xbox720
Nope, can't see that happening either.
I address this above. Apple doesn't want to be in this arena. It's small and the competition is deadly.
The low power/trimmed down, casual gamers games, seems to be the only area they are going for.
Once more you are correct. There are many many times more gamers that want a short diversion while they have a few minutes away from home, then those who want to spend thousands on an immersive game experience that requires a larger block of time. "Portability with games optional" trumps "wired to the wall and game-focused" all the way to the bank.
But Again, I would LOVE Apple to turn this around and take high end graphics seriously in their future products.
The high-end gamer is not on Apple's radar at the moment and likely never will be unless a way is found to address hi-end graphics on a portable device without impacting battery life.
I know you'd like Apple to chase this rainbow, but they won't, there's no pot of gold at the end.
However I will also state, and I think we all should be honest, that at the moment, Apple are bringing the games DOWN to what their hardware can do, as opposed to making Hardware so great that gaming is being pushed UP to take advantage of Apples industry leading performance.
In your first paragraph you talk about Apple's mobile products, which is where Apple will be putting most of their effort in the foreseeable future. To have successful portable products, having a long time between charges is highly important. The old brute force methods of throwing power and RAM at the gaming performance problem can not be part of the design mindset. Game designers know this and are becoming much better at coding for portable games, but they are not quite there yet. Meanwhile Apple is working to find ways to build in performance and not increase power draw.
THIS is the future as Apple sees it, and their acceptance in the broad general market shows that they are on the right track.
When Apple release GTX580 beating desktops, and/or Xbox360 / PS3 beating gaming devices, I will happily bow down to them being the greatest in graphics.
NOW you have switched to talking about desktop and console gaming computers. THIS is a whole different area. First off, it's a tiny segment of the whole computer market. It's big, but not nearly as huge as what Apple is aiming for with their products.
In a nutshell, Apple's strategy is to capture the mobile device market as completely as they can. They are being highly successful at that strategy from iPods to iPhones, to iPads, to Laptops.
Meanwhile they are growing rapidly in the iMac desktop and tower market due primarily to the halo effect of their success in the portable arena. They are doing this even while the desktop and tower markets are shrinking overall. Can you see why Apple will not be putting a lot of effort into this segment?
But right now, they are trailing by miles due to years of neglect as they just did not have products that could compete, and their one semi attempt at a console got nowhere.
Note: I would LOVE LOVE LOVE Apple to turn this around.
You are right. Apple did not have products that could compete in the desktop and console markets. This was primarily due to game developers not interested in writing games for Intel chips and PowerPC chips. Since the installed base for Intel-based computers was more then a order-of-magnitude larger than the installed base of Macs. Apple was never going to enjoy being a suitable gaming platform until they switched to Intel CPUs.
Once Apple made the switch, they have come a long way towards being an acceptable gaming computer, but they have no desire or plans to go after the high end of this market... it's just not that profitable or large. Remember AlienWare? They had the best gaming computer, IMO, and they had to sell themselves to another company to stay alive.
As for the console market, it's crowded with established competitors and will likely see one squeezed out. Not the kind of market that Apple or anyone else should want to jump into.
They need to ditch the "Laptops on a Stand" design of the iMac for starters, but I feel they never will as they have decided they won't compete and they cannot compete in this sector of the market.
I addressed this above. As for the "Laptops on a Stand" design, it's such a bad design that the largest computer company, HP, as well as others, have copied it.
Console wise, I'm not sure they could compete against a 360 or a PS3. Let's say Apple against a PS4 or a Xbox720
Nope, can't see that happening either.
I address this above. Apple doesn't want to be in this arena. It's small and the competition is deadly.
The low power/trimmed down, casual gamers games, seems to be the only area they are going for.
Once more you are correct. There are many many times more gamers that want a short diversion while they have a few minutes away from home, then those who want to spend thousands on an immersive game experience that requires a larger block of time. "Portability with games optional" trumps "wired to the wall and game-focused" all the way to the bank.
But Again, I would LOVE Apple to turn this around and take high end graphics seriously in their future products.
The high-end gamer is not on Apple's radar at the moment and likely never will be unless a way is found to address hi-end graphics on a portable device without impacting battery life.
I know you'd like Apple to chase this rainbow, but they won't, there's no pot of gold at the end.
Benjy91
Apr 25, 09:38 AM
He's saying Apple do not keep records of your location.
Why would they want to know where their customers are?
It's already been discovered Android phones keep a record of their movements in an identical way to iPhone.
Why would they want to know where their customers are?
It's already been discovered Android phones keep a record of their movements in an identical way to iPhone.
CmdrLaForge
Nov 26, 01:58 PM
I see this being used as the interface remote for iTV. As a full-blown PDA device, no.
I assume it is just a tablet Mac.
Cheers
LaForge
P.S: What does the ribbon mean?
I assume it is just a tablet Mac.
Cheers
LaForge
P.S: What does the ribbon mean?
MacNut
Apr 14, 09:22 PM
So do you think the best idea is to just cut everybody equally?
To me that is mind-bogglingly simplistic.
We have to be intelligent enough to identify areas of need vs. those that are operating at a decent level of efficiency.
Here's an example ...
I work at a university that is undergoing cuts. But some departments actually make the university money. Does it make sense to cut departments that generate income as much as departments that don't? At least the people in charge here understand the difference and aren't applying "across the board cuts".If something is making money why would you cut it? You expand on it to make even more money. Trim the programs that are dead weight and is sinking the rest of the ship. Government gets into a mentality that once a program is created no matter how much it might fail they have to keep it around to stroke their ego. They can never admit that something might not be working.
To me that is mind-bogglingly simplistic.
We have to be intelligent enough to identify areas of need vs. those that are operating at a decent level of efficiency.
Here's an example ...
I work at a university that is undergoing cuts. But some departments actually make the university money. Does it make sense to cut departments that generate income as much as departments that don't? At least the people in charge here understand the difference and aren't applying "across the board cuts".If something is making money why would you cut it? You expand on it to make even more money. Trim the programs that are dead weight and is sinking the rest of the ship. Government gets into a mentality that once a program is created no matter how much it might fail they have to keep it around to stroke their ego. They can never admit that something might not be working.
braddouglass
Mar 30, 01:46 PM
Prices way to high.. just buy an external hard drive.. even if you bought a ridiculously expensive fireproof one it would be more practical
nuckinfutz
May 7, 12:05 PM
I've been a long time .mac/mobileme user - I would say I've been using their service for about 7 years. Only recently, I started using iDisk. I started using it for text documents, and it seems to work great. But recently, I have been hearing a lot about dropbox and its speed. Is dropbox that much better and what is this speed people are referring to? I played around with it a bit and its nice. It gives you a few more features, but these feature I wouldn't use. Is there any point to switch?
!
Ok in a nutshell here's why iDisk and Drop Box have speed differences.
iDisk:
You are creating a WebDAV tunnel to the storage server that must remain open and in sync with your Mac. You drop a file on the iDisk icon and it transfers that file to the server.
Drop Box
Drop Box sits on top of Amazon's S3 storage. What they've done is built up the front end so that when you drop a file on your Drop Box it caches the file locally and then syncs to the cloud "behind the scene". So when you open a file sitting in your Drop Box it feels like working on a local file because you "are" working on the local file. Any changes made from you or anyone the file has shared with will be sync'd in the background.
Most people don't understand the fundamental differences between iDisk and Drop Box. If Apple was to build a front end to iDisk that stored the file locally and then sync'd over WebDAV in the background they'd be able to offer the same performance.
Hope this helps.
!
Ok in a nutshell here's why iDisk and Drop Box have speed differences.
iDisk:
You are creating a WebDAV tunnel to the storage server that must remain open and in sync with your Mac. You drop a file on the iDisk icon and it transfers that file to the server.
Drop Box
Drop Box sits on top of Amazon's S3 storage. What they've done is built up the front end so that when you drop a file on your Drop Box it caches the file locally and then syncs to the cloud "behind the scene". So when you open a file sitting in your Drop Box it feels like working on a local file because you "are" working on the local file. Any changes made from you or anyone the file has shared with will be sync'd in the background.
Most people don't understand the fundamental differences between iDisk and Drop Box. If Apple was to build a front end to iDisk that stored the file locally and then sync'd over WebDAV in the background they'd be able to offer the same performance.
Hope this helps.
Popeye206
Apr 25, 11:18 AM
Jobs is spinning his BS again as usual. Even when there is overwheming evidence to the contrary...he still insults the intelligence of his customers who he clearly regards as beneath him.
Apple is:
Image (http://www.ukscience.org/BB.jpg)
LOL! Funny! Good one! :rolleyes:
Can you share the "evidence" thats sooooo overwhelming?
Apple is:
Image (http://www.ukscience.org/BB.jpg)
LOL! Funny! Good one! :rolleyes:
Can you share the "evidence" thats sooooo overwhelming?
mscriv
May 6, 04:14 PM
I'm quaking in my boots at the solidarity and quick decision making that you troglodytes are demonstrating. Do whatever you like. It matters little in changing your fate. Split up and I'll pick you apart. Stay together and you get to watch each other die.
I would say the end is coming soon, but the way you fools are bumbling about my mansion it might take a little while to destroy the lot of you. Good thing I'm a patient villain. http://serve.mysmiley.net/evilgrin/evilgrin0007.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net)
I would say the end is coming soon, but the way you fools are bumbling about my mansion it might take a little while to destroy the lot of you. Good thing I'm a patient villain. http://serve.mysmiley.net/evilgrin/evilgrin0007.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net)
coder12
Apr 5, 04:42 PM
Does anyone read the stories before commenting on them anymore? :rolleyes:
You didn't even need to click to read the full story.
I was thinking the same thing as you... :(
It may be too late already though, did any other repos get the package?
You didn't even need to click to read the full story.
I was thinking the same thing as you... :(
It may be too late already though, did any other repos get the package?
Popeye206
Apr 5, 02:32 PM
I don't see what the big deal is. Of course Apple is going to try to minimize the risk of the jailbreak community. They want to avoid headlines about spyware and such that creep out of the jailbroken community. It's just good PR.
Guys this is so simple.
JB'ing your device is a user risk related thing. Not for the general public. It also voids your warrantee with Apple.
So... do you think it's good business practice for Toyota to encourage customers of another device to void their warrantee and put their product at risk of other issues if they don't know what they're doing?
That would be like Apple saying, download this App and plug into our Camry and we'll modify your engine to give you 20 more HP, but it's not approved by Toyota.
Not well thought out by Toyota.
Guys this is so simple.
JB'ing your device is a user risk related thing. Not for the general public. It also voids your warrantee with Apple.
So... do you think it's good business practice for Toyota to encourage customers of another device to void their warrantee and put their product at risk of other issues if they don't know what they're doing?
That would be like Apple saying, download this App and plug into our Camry and we'll modify your engine to give you 20 more HP, but it's not approved by Toyota.
Not well thought out by Toyota.
Don't panic
May 6, 10:30 PM
we don't enter otHer Rooms without exploting.
we delegate the exploring.
we had just explored that closet ("that's how we got the golden ... rooster)
so it's safe to leave.
now We are in another room. ucf join us by himself. then when it's our turn again FIRST ucf explores, THEN we move. the next round he moves, then we explore.
at the end of the round we are one turn ahead.
easy.
we delegate the exploring.
we had just explored that closet ("that's how we got the golden ... rooster)
so it's safe to leave.
now We are in another room. ucf join us by himself. then when it's our turn again FIRST ucf explores, THEN we move. the next round he moves, then we explore.
at the end of the round we are one turn ahead.
easy.
h0mi
Mar 29, 10:14 AM
I was excited about this at first but... this just seems like an incredibly stupid fad. Instead of spending time to put the music on my PMP, I sync to the digital cloud, then stream the music to said player. Yeah, in an era where unlimited data is becoming more not less scarce, that's just what I need, data surcharges. This just appears to be yet another fad intending to push consumer technology in the wrong direction.
Detlev
Jul 30, 11:16 AM
Firstly I think the phone itself will be called "iPod Phone" as the trademark for iPhone is already taken...
But then the acronym would be iPP :D
But then the acronym would be iPP :D
basesloaded190
Apr 18, 03:09 PM
I did not know that TSMC produces LCD panels, RAM, SSD drives or flash memory. If Samsung stops supplying those to Apple, Apple is dead.
Same goes to Samsung. I don't think either company would die without each other, but they would both struggle without the business
Same goes to Samsung. I don't think either company would die without each other, but they would both struggle without the business
zacman
Apr 18, 03:07 PM
Ooop. Apple already so afraid? No wonder when a phone OS (Galaxy tab with Android 2.2) takes almost 20% marketshare in less than 3 months in the tablet market...
BWhaler
Sep 17, 01:49 AM
Hello everyone,
this is my first post, but I've been reading you all for a while now. I'm waiting for the MBP merom like most of the people here, but do you think there a possibility to see new Displays as well at Photokina? Maybe built-in iSight?
No one knows for sure, but I doubt it. The displays just got a spec bump and price drop a month ago.
this is my first post, but I've been reading you all for a while now. I'm waiting for the MBP merom like most of the people here, but do you think there a possibility to see new Displays as well at Photokina? Maybe built-in iSight?
No one knows for sure, but I doubt it. The displays just got a spec bump and price drop a month ago.
No comments:
Post a Comment