cohibadad
Nov 5, 10:34 AM
Now Sophos can begin developing viruses against which their software can defend us.
Now that is cynical ;)
Now that is cynical ;)
wclyffe
Nov 20, 09:35 AM
I just got this email!!
Hi Robert,
Thank you for your email. Your order is fine and will be filled normally.
We've simply restricted new backorders on the item until currently placed
orders such as yours are filled.
Please don't hesitate to contact us should you have any additional
questions or concerns. Thank you for your business!
Sam S.
Bottom Line Telecommunications
Hi Robert,
Thank you for your email. Your order is fine and will be filled normally.
We've simply restricted new backorders on the item until currently placed
orders such as yours are filled.
Please don't hesitate to contact us should you have any additional
questions or concerns. Thank you for your business!
Sam S.
Bottom Line Telecommunications
rmhop81
Apr 26, 03:00 PM
Too bad Android makers are basically giving them away to gain market share.
And doesn't Nokia still making more money on ovi than Google's android store?
exactly. most of the people get them bc they are free or next to nothing.
And doesn't Nokia still making more money on ovi than Google's android store?
exactly. most of the people get them bc they are free or next to nothing.
squirrellydw
Apr 26, 03:34 PM
Of course, because Apple is making the same mistakes that let Windows get +95% market share in spite of Apple's early lead in PCs.
A "closed" eco-system has no chance against an "open" eco-system.
When will you people learn.....Apple is not about market share, they are in business to make MONEY. Yes they would like to have as much market share as they can but they make high end products and sell them at a high price. No phone or product is better than another, it's all in what YOU like. I like Apple products, I switched from MS for a reason, I liked what OSX and iLife did more than what MS offered. For me it's the best, maybe not for you. What's better a FORD or a BWM? They both get you from point A to point B one just has more style. That doesn't mean it's better, it's what YOU like.
Also both eco systems are CLOSED. Google just licenses Android out, you still have to ROOT or JAILBREAK both to add more features.
A "closed" eco-system has no chance against an "open" eco-system.
When will you people learn.....Apple is not about market share, they are in business to make MONEY. Yes they would like to have as much market share as they can but they make high end products and sell them at a high price. No phone or product is better than another, it's all in what YOU like. I like Apple products, I switched from MS for a reason, I liked what OSX and iLife did more than what MS offered. For me it's the best, maybe not for you. What's better a FORD or a BWM? They both get you from point A to point B one just has more style. That doesn't mean it's better, it's what YOU like.
Also both eco systems are CLOSED. Google just licenses Android out, you still have to ROOT or JAILBREAK both to add more features.
noservice2001
Aug 3, 11:06 PM
go apple! speed!
solvs
Jul 23, 12:30 AM
I would really like to see Apple have a laptop cheaper than $1,100, and I think there would be a definite market for the, especially for teenagers looking into getting a Mac. I know that's unlikely, but...
I don't know, I'm kinda expecting it. As seen in the past, I'm sure they'll drop to ~$1000. Maybe even cheaper once they get some of their R&D back and chip prices start to fall. Eventually I see a sub $800 laptop even. Maybe.
I don't know, I'm kinda expecting it. As seen in the past, I'm sure they'll drop to ~$1000. Maybe even cheaper once they get some of their R&D back and chip prices start to fall. Eventually I see a sub $800 laptop even. Maybe.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
cdallen
Mar 30, 11:23 AM
That seems quite rude. Wikipedia happens to have a wealth of base level knowledge. I understand that one should not cite it when doing in depth research but when looking for general knowledge it is a great source.
Many of my professors have realized this and told us that if we need a different explanation of something to look it up on Wikipedia because it tends to use more common language than out text books. The do not allow citing Wikipedia no matter how well the article is sourced.
Just like any book you look at using for research you must weigh the quality before choosing to use it.
That being said, any college level class in history that covers the Cold War will talk about Alfred Sauvy and his contribution to how we talk about the world during that time period.
Thank you
Many of my professors have realized this and told us that if we need a different explanation of something to look it up on Wikipedia because it tends to use more common language than out text books. The do not allow citing Wikipedia no matter how well the article is sourced.
Just like any book you look at using for research you must weigh the quality before choosing to use it.
That being said, any college level class in history that covers the Cold War will talk about Alfred Sauvy and his contribution to how we talk about the world during that time period.
Thank you
komodrone
Apr 26, 02:39 PM
"...in total penetration"
THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID.
yeah I signed up for an account just to post this.
THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID.
yeah I signed up for an account just to post this.
iCrizzo
Mar 27, 10:07 AM
iOS 5 in the fall is a good thing, at least we know we will be getting some major changes, plus I don't mind waiting for a finished product!
*LTD*
Apr 24, 10:38 AM
Ps: Happy Easter everyone:)
Same to you. Happy Easter. :)
Same to you. Happy Easter. :)
Wolfpup
Jan 12, 10:56 AM
It's not ignorant at all.
Yes, a handful do, and they can be easily avoided with a reasonable dose of common sense.
That's true, but it's true of Windows too. If you're sensible, you probably won't get infected. But given these things have no real overhead, and there is a real risk, it's just sensible to use it.
There is no problem running on an admin account, if you're even moderately aware of what you're doing.
It still prompts if something's trying to use your admin/root privileges, right?
The market share myth is ridiculous and has no basis in fact.
Of course it does. A quick Google finds multiple Mac hackers saying that actually OS X is easier to hack. Market value of doing so or effort required to hit a much smaller target are the reasons cited for generally not bothering.
You already know Apple's software has exploits too, if you've ever run any Apple software and not disabled updates.
This is just the reality of the modern world-our computers are connected. Our software is insanely complex. Put the two together, and you end up with all sorts of issues being discovered.
Yes, a handful do, and they can be easily avoided with a reasonable dose of common sense.
That's true, but it's true of Windows too. If you're sensible, you probably won't get infected. But given these things have no real overhead, and there is a real risk, it's just sensible to use it.
There is no problem running on an admin account, if you're even moderately aware of what you're doing.
It still prompts if something's trying to use your admin/root privileges, right?
The market share myth is ridiculous and has no basis in fact.
Of course it does. A quick Google finds multiple Mac hackers saying that actually OS X is easier to hack. Market value of doing so or effort required to hit a much smaller target are the reasons cited for generally not bothering.
You already know Apple's software has exploits too, if you've ever run any Apple software and not disabled updates.
This is just the reality of the modern world-our computers are connected. Our software is insanely complex. Put the two together, and you end up with all sorts of issues being discovered.
Loge
Aug 7, 04:16 PM
SO in the Paris expo is where we'll most likely see updated MBP? :confused:
They don't need a special event for what will most likely just be an updated processor.
They don't need a special event for what will most likely just be an updated processor.
bigbossbmb
Jul 21, 02:05 PM
great news, but i think a few will vote it negative because they like to whine...
i may need to bump up my timeline for upgrading my dying 12"
i may need to bump up my timeline for upgrading my dying 12"
Number 41
Apr 20, 07:27 AM
This update is not good enough, apple. Do more.
8 megapixel camera with 1080P recording.
64GB option
Dual core processor
Those updates are not good enough for a device that gets an update only once a year.
Here's another one:
Stop making phones out of effing glass!
5 people I know have had shattered glass (on either the front or the back) of their iPhone 4s less than year into ownership. It's a bloody phone -- it's not a museum piece or collectible. It's going to get used, it's going to get dropped or fall off a table occasionally, and it needs to be at least minimally able to survive a 2 year contract.
8 megapixel camera with 1080P recording.
64GB option
Dual core processor
Those updates are not good enough for a device that gets an update only once a year.
Here's another one:
Stop making phones out of effing glass!
5 people I know have had shattered glass (on either the front or the back) of their iPhone 4s less than year into ownership. It's a bloody phone -- it's not a museum piece or collectible. It's going to get used, it's going to get dropped or fall off a table occasionally, and it needs to be at least minimally able to survive a 2 year contract.
Riemann Zeta
May 4, 04:43 PM
Users will be able to upgrade instantly without the need for physical media by purchasing Lion through the Mac App Store.
I still don't think that this is a good idea. If the download version of Lion were simply a Disc Image file, then that would be fine (I could just burn my own or put it on a stick), but if it is on the App Store, then the entire OS has to be packaged as a .app file. As such, it will not be possible to do a "fresh" reformatted installation of Lion without cracking the .app bundle and burning the install data to a bootable disc.
I still don't think that this is a good idea. If the download version of Lion were simply a Disc Image file, then that would be fine (I could just burn my own or put it on a stick), but if it is on the App Store, then the entire OS has to be packaged as a .app file. As such, it will not be possible to do a "fresh" reformatted installation of Lion without cracking the .app bundle and burning the install data to a bootable disc.
snberk103
May 5, 03:30 PM
.... Most other countries enacted policy through a quiet parliamentary action that was later carried out by agencies or at a time when most people weren't active in politics. ...
In the US there are a lot of veto points in the legislative process, making any significant change hard to do. ... why should they care about a measurement system when the one they are using right now is working for them?
...
Any realistic transition for the US would take decades.
This, I believe, captures the situation really well. Inertia, coupled with a fairly de-centralized government (at least as far as this issue is concerned). And a population that is fairly resistant to change, in many areas.
Another example is the move to a $1 coin. How many times and for how long has the US been trying to introduce this coin? Every study done shows it will save taxpayers money. Still no-go. In Canada we had no choice. The $1 coin was introduced, then the banks were told to hand out only the coins, and to start sending back to Ottawa any $1 bills that their customers were depositing. Within a few years we were a $1 bill free country. Then they removed the $2 bills. These bills are still legal, there just isn't any of them circulating. And if a bank gets one, they don't put it back into circulation. Done.
In the US there are a lot of veto points in the legislative process, making any significant change hard to do. ... why should they care about a measurement system when the one they are using right now is working for them?
...
Any realistic transition for the US would take decades.
This, I believe, captures the situation really well. Inertia, coupled with a fairly de-centralized government (at least as far as this issue is concerned). And a population that is fairly resistant to change, in many areas.
Another example is the move to a $1 coin. How many times and for how long has the US been trying to introduce this coin? Every study done shows it will save taxpayers money. Still no-go. In Canada we had no choice. The $1 coin was introduced, then the banks were told to hand out only the coins, and to start sending back to Ottawa any $1 bills that their customers were depositing. Within a few years we were a $1 bill free country. Then they removed the $2 bills. These bills are still legal, there just isn't any of them circulating. And if a bank gets one, they don't put it back into circulation. Done.
toddybody
Apr 7, 11:50 AM
If the demand for touch panels increases then the manufacturers of touch panels will rejoice and expand their business thus increasing the supply. The real problem here is that RIM probably wants terms on touch panel production that are not all-too-inspiring to the manufacturers to warrant expansion. For example, Apple is confident that they will sell X units of iPads in Y units in 2012, and so on. So Apple prepays for what they need.
RIM is not as confident with their Playbook. They probably need contingencies in any long-term orders they place to ensure they can get out of buying touch panels they won't need. If these were 9.7-inch panels then the manufacturer could care less. Anything RIM walks away from, they can turn around and sell to Apple (very smart of HP). However, who is going to buy all those 7-inch panels if RIM's Playbook gets off to a false start? Samsung? Nope -- they make their own panels from what I have heard.
Supply and Demand.... When there is real demand for more touch panels from consumers than those being supplied to Apple for iPad then the manufacturers will expand their production and take advantage of the opportunity to increase profits. The real problem here is that RIM's attempt at media hype is not equivalent to real customer demand. The only tablet with a large amount of customer demand right now is the iPad. That is part of why I tend to believe that the "media tablet" category is a figment of the imagination for market analysts. Market analysts assign a level of demand to the "media tablet" category and make projections, but the difference between the "iPad" category and the rest of the "non-iPad media tablets" is staggering. The iPad category is flourishing, the "non-iPad media tablet" category is a fledgling state at best (if not failing).
If not for Apple's success with the iPad how many manufacturers would have already thrown in the towel with "media tablets" and once again written it off as "the technology for tablets is just not there yet for mass consumption". Tablets failed in various forms for over a decade. iPad is the first and only mass market success in this area. If not for Apple, there would be no such thing as "Honeycomb" or HP Touch Pad or Playbook -- these guys are hoping they can figure out what Apple did right and find some way to ride the same wave the iPad is on -- while technical specifications are there, they have not yet figured out the "magic" of iPad -- ease of use, awesome software market, and the emotional response Apple manages to evoke with their user experience. Just a few examples of emotional response.... There is something delightful about pinching a stack of photos to spread them out across the screen or the way Apple's tiled app icons and folders gets adults to collect apps the same way their kids collect trading cards -- these are very emotional things that Apple seems to understand.
Next time you should try formulating a more organized post:p
Well said sir, well said:) Stay well!
RIM is not as confident with their Playbook. They probably need contingencies in any long-term orders they place to ensure they can get out of buying touch panels they won't need. If these were 9.7-inch panels then the manufacturer could care less. Anything RIM walks away from, they can turn around and sell to Apple (very smart of HP). However, who is going to buy all those 7-inch panels if RIM's Playbook gets off to a false start? Samsung? Nope -- they make their own panels from what I have heard.
Supply and Demand.... When there is real demand for more touch panels from consumers than those being supplied to Apple for iPad then the manufacturers will expand their production and take advantage of the opportunity to increase profits. The real problem here is that RIM's attempt at media hype is not equivalent to real customer demand. The only tablet with a large amount of customer demand right now is the iPad. That is part of why I tend to believe that the "media tablet" category is a figment of the imagination for market analysts. Market analysts assign a level of demand to the "media tablet" category and make projections, but the difference between the "iPad" category and the rest of the "non-iPad media tablets" is staggering. The iPad category is flourishing, the "non-iPad media tablet" category is a fledgling state at best (if not failing).
If not for Apple's success with the iPad how many manufacturers would have already thrown in the towel with "media tablets" and once again written it off as "the technology for tablets is just not there yet for mass consumption". Tablets failed in various forms for over a decade. iPad is the first and only mass market success in this area. If not for Apple, there would be no such thing as "Honeycomb" or HP Touch Pad or Playbook -- these guys are hoping they can figure out what Apple did right and find some way to ride the same wave the iPad is on -- while technical specifications are there, they have not yet figured out the "magic" of iPad -- ease of use, awesome software market, and the emotional response Apple manages to evoke with their user experience. Just a few examples of emotional response.... There is something delightful about pinching a stack of photos to spread them out across the screen or the way Apple's tiled app icons and folders gets adults to collect apps the same way their kids collect trading cards -- these are very emotional things that Apple seems to understand.
Next time you should try formulating a more organized post:p
Well said sir, well said:) Stay well!
Multimedia
Sep 16, 07:36 PM
Just wanted to add, for everyone reading a lot into shipping dates etc., I ordered mine on Sep 11 and got the notice of delays, then notice it was shpped out today (was planning on cancelling after this news).
Now, it will probably be around the 25th before I get, and I won't open it, but considering I have upgrades (so customization = no return) how hard do you guys think it would be for me to exchange it for an updated one?You're going to have to be aggressive about returning it. If I were you I would try to refuse accepting delivery and call your credit card company and tell them you don't want it so they will force Apple to accept your refusal to receive it.
Now, it will probably be around the 25th before I get, and I won't open it, but considering I have upgrades (so customization = no return) how hard do you guys think it would be for me to exchange it for an updated one?You're going to have to be aggressive about returning it. If I were you I would try to refuse accepting delivery and call your credit card company and tell them you don't want it so they will force Apple to accept your refusal to receive it.
ECUpirate44
Apr 9, 07:15 PM
Is this MacRumors or GoogleRumors?
Do you really think the answer is 2? lol.
Do you really think the answer is 2? lol.
patrickkidd
May 6, 05:00 AM
I would like to hear what sorts of reason Apple would use to make such a decision, if believable at all. If the architecture is headed in the right direction, then it would be nice to know why. At the end of the day, the ppc to intel switch had a relatively small impact on the rest of us.
marvel2
Jan 13, 04:50 PM
Not yet... I get a little beep and they are paired within a few seconds.
I get that beep too, but after I MANUALLY pair the phone to the dock. I'm going to try to erase the TomTom Kit from the iPhone's BT paired devices and start from scratch.
I get that beep too, but after I MANUALLY pair the phone to the dock. I'm going to try to erase the TomTom Kit from the iPhone's BT paired devices and start from scratch.
linuxcooldude
Apr 21, 02:53 PM
Making the width & height those dimensions, might make the length a lot longer. I could see space requirement problems & how would placement be effected without it being rack mounted?
bboucher790
Apr 25, 10:29 AM
You're tracking us wrong.