jjvdhoef
May 9, 05:00 AM
While I agree, MobileMe is still in my eyes the best of the bunch. That's how they get away with charging $99/year. However, if it became free, they could really talk up how great owning a Mac is because of MobileMe.
I don't know what the service was like this past year, but while I subscribed to the service it was very very very unreliable. I now use google services to replicate most of the functionality for free.
I don't know what the service was like this past year, but while I subscribed to the service it was very very very unreliable. I now use google services to replicate most of the functionality for free.
iJohnHenry
Apr 18, 07:03 PM
It's kind of a prerequisite for a collapse that 99% of the population is unprepared.
Shuuuush, don't make a wave, unless you want to be swallowing pee.
Shuuuush, don't make a wave, unless you want to be swallowing pee.
bigrell486
Jul 21, 06:49 PM
Maybe I'm out in right field with this suggestion, but how about a further separation between the black Macbook and the white, other than color?
Macbooks (white) - Yonah and integrated graphics (960?)
Macbook (black) - Merom and the new integrated graphics (965???)
That would certainly justify the black's higher cost and would give it more of a punch to be that PB 12" replacement.
This makes perfect sense as Apple has already dub the Black Macbook the "Top of the Line" yet there isn't really a difference between it and the Midrange so by adding The new processor and graphics chip Apple would essentially create the Top of the Line MacBook
Macbooks (white) - Yonah and integrated graphics (960?)
Macbook (black) - Merom and the new integrated graphics (965???)
That would certainly justify the black's higher cost and would give it more of a punch to be that PB 12" replacement.
This makes perfect sense as Apple has already dub the Black Macbook the "Top of the Line" yet there isn't really a difference between it and the Midrange so by adding The new processor and graphics chip Apple would essentially create the Top of the Line MacBook
oracle_ab
Mar 29, 01:56 PM
Wirelessly posted (iPod touch 16GB: Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
There is nothing wrong with companies using resources abroad. It's called specialization. Why produce something for more money and less efficiently when it can be done better and cheaper elsewhere?
Because it's rapidly becoming the case that EVERYTHING can be produced more cheaply in places like China and India -- even things that were previously thought to be "safe" industries (medical X-Rays are read in India / China, legal documents are authored overseas and sent back to the US to be signed) because they required and educated or advanced workforce.
So, I turn the question back to you -- how will you afford to buy an iPod when you are asked to take a substantial (50% or more) pay cut because an individual in India or China can do YOUR job more cheaply.
Globalization is a race to the bottom, and nobody seems to understand that while the 3rd world rises up, the 1st world inevitably must slide down.
So, so true.
There is nothing wrong with companies using resources abroad. It's called specialization. Why produce something for more money and less efficiently when it can be done better and cheaper elsewhere?
Because it's rapidly becoming the case that EVERYTHING can be produced more cheaply in places like China and India -- even things that were previously thought to be "safe" industries (medical X-Rays are read in India / China, legal documents are authored overseas and sent back to the US to be signed) because they required and educated or advanced workforce.
So, I turn the question back to you -- how will you afford to buy an iPod when you are asked to take a substantial (50% or more) pay cut because an individual in India or China can do YOUR job more cheaply.
Globalization is a race to the bottom, and nobody seems to understand that while the 3rd world rises up, the 1st world inevitably must slide down.
So, so true.
Auax
Apr 21, 09:22 PM
i prefer a smaller one..
Hildron101010
Mar 30, 08:10 PM
Still downloading (10 more hours to go)...
Those who experienced non-quitting iCal in DP1, can you quit it in DP2?
Also, can the Launchpad icon be dragged out of the dock?
Please, say 'yes' to the above 2 questions. :o
iCal keeps opening up on me until I log out and log in again. And no, you can't drag Launchpad out of the Dock, but you can edit a file to remove it. I know I saw it in some other thread.
Those who experienced non-quitting iCal in DP1, can you quit it in DP2?
Also, can the Launchpad icon be dragged out of the dock?
Please, say 'yes' to the above 2 questions. :o
iCal keeps opening up on me until I log out and log in again. And no, you can't drag Launchpad out of the Dock, but you can edit a file to remove it. I know I saw it in some other thread.
mikeapple
Mar 29, 10:22 AM
Wherever I have good internet connection, I have my Local storage ... I can buy music over the air and listen to it on my iPhone... and get it on my iPod Touch.... Don't see why it needs to get more spacy.
Alot of people will enjoy this but personally, I wanna OWN my storage, not subscribe to it... plus listening to music off a drive saves more battery then having your 3G/4G or WiFi pulling to get your music.
Oh and when you having ****** coverage, (back of a grocery store) what happens then to your cloud playlist??
Alot of people will enjoy this but personally, I wanna OWN my storage, not subscribe to it... plus listening to music off a drive saves more battery then having your 3G/4G or WiFi pulling to get your music.
Oh and when you having ****** coverage, (back of a grocery store) what happens then to your cloud playlist??
Piggie
Apr 24, 05:57 AM
That issue could have been largely solved if they had just faced a standard high end GPU with the intake facing towards the back and the exhaust on the side. But Apple is too vain to put a vent on the rear of the iMac to accomodate the intake of a high quality GPU, let alone a slim exhaust vent on the side.
If they had simply used a standard GPU like that it would have opened up quality gaming on the Mac and made it simple to upgrade to newer cards so that people didn't have to chuck the entire computer every time they wanted a new video card.
I'm sure you are right.
Given a bit of good design work on Apples part, when I say good design I mean, technically good as opposed to artistically good.
And in conjunction with Nvidea/ATI (personally I still like Nvidea as they seem more on the ball with Tessalation and Cuda programming for offloading CPU work onto the GPU)
A "Spread out" design, given the large rear metal surface are of an iMac and a few very neat vents to pull in cool air using a slow well designed fan, from the side or bottom and exhausting the warm air on the other side/top could be well within technical possibilities. And would address the weak spot Apple have had for a decade or two.
But, as has been said, Apple seem to fear this market as they seem to think they can't compete, and if you know you can't compete it's best not to enter the race. They want to go for poorer quality graphics, or we can use the term that sounds better than that.
The casual gamer.
Quite why this Apple created concept to cover their weak point should be happy with less quality/detail is unsure to me.
It's like saying people what watch films all the time and enjoy them should have the best picture quality we can deliver.
However, those who just watch the occasional movie should be happier with a lower quality image.
Kind of a strange concept when you think about it. and really we should all accept it's just a created excuse to excuse away a weak area as I said.
But, as you quite rightly said. Apple are too vein to spoil, in their mind the cosmetic look of an iMac by adding in cooling slits to allow for higher end graphics cards.
A shame really as if they had taken graphics a lot more seriously 15 or 20 years ago, they could be kings of this sector now.
If they had simply used a standard GPU like that it would have opened up quality gaming on the Mac and made it simple to upgrade to newer cards so that people didn't have to chuck the entire computer every time they wanted a new video card.
I'm sure you are right.
Given a bit of good design work on Apples part, when I say good design I mean, technically good as opposed to artistically good.
And in conjunction with Nvidea/ATI (personally I still like Nvidea as they seem more on the ball with Tessalation and Cuda programming for offloading CPU work onto the GPU)
A "Spread out" design, given the large rear metal surface are of an iMac and a few very neat vents to pull in cool air using a slow well designed fan, from the side or bottom and exhausting the warm air on the other side/top could be well within technical possibilities. And would address the weak spot Apple have had for a decade or two.
But, as has been said, Apple seem to fear this market as they seem to think they can't compete, and if you know you can't compete it's best not to enter the race. They want to go for poorer quality graphics, or we can use the term that sounds better than that.
The casual gamer.
Quite why this Apple created concept to cover their weak point should be happy with less quality/detail is unsure to me.
It's like saying people what watch films all the time and enjoy them should have the best picture quality we can deliver.
However, those who just watch the occasional movie should be happier with a lower quality image.
Kind of a strange concept when you think about it. and really we should all accept it's just a created excuse to excuse away a weak area as I said.
But, as you quite rightly said. Apple are too vein to spoil, in their mind the cosmetic look of an iMac by adding in cooling slits to allow for higher end graphics cards.
A shame really as if they had taken graphics a lot more seriously 15 or 20 years ago, they could be kings of this sector now.
wclyffe
Jan 5, 01:15 PM
BUT i'm curious whether the satnav apps are waiting on the mount's fix or taking first availalble? ... i would hope they'd wait on mount since ultimately it should have more precision since it's called 'enhanced' GPS, but how can you tell for sure?
one thing i've tried is to remove the iPhone from the mount after navigating and see if it disrupts the GPS signal w/in the satnav app ... i would expect there to be a switch over to internal GPS and see a small disruption ... but i'm not getting a disrupted signal ... can't be sure one way or the other
Here's what I've noticed in just one day of use. I'm using Navigon and I did download the TomTom Free App to stop the message from appearing each time. With my 3Gs docked in the car kit, I get the my directions locked in about 5 seconds from when I hit the "Start Navigation" button. I also tried an experiment in my garage, where my phone was unable to get the GPS signal, but docked I had a route in motion in under 5 seconds. Still experimenting.....
one thing i've tried is to remove the iPhone from the mount after navigating and see if it disrupts the GPS signal w/in the satnav app ... i would expect there to be a switch over to internal GPS and see a small disruption ... but i'm not getting a disrupted signal ... can't be sure one way or the other
Here's what I've noticed in just one day of use. I'm using Navigon and I did download the TomTom Free App to stop the message from appearing each time. With my 3Gs docked in the car kit, I get the my directions locked in about 5 seconds from when I hit the "Start Navigation" button. I also tried an experiment in my garage, where my phone was unable to get the GPS signal, but docked I had a route in motion in under 5 seconds. Still experimenting.....
ciTiger
Apr 21, 02:58 PM
I was wondering what took them so long to redesign this monstrous beast MacPro lol
It's very powerful and expensive but it was too big... Considering all other Apple Products
It's very powerful and expensive but it was too big... Considering all other Apple Products
oneighturbo
Sep 16, 08:21 PM
well i just placed my order for a 15" MBP 2.0 base model w/ an iPod 60GB
i chatted with a rep and pointed out that i have 14 days to return. i have 30 days to submit the iPod rebate (which requires a upc cut from MBP box)
so my status shows ship date of the 19th and arrival of the 26th!
so kinda in a pickle with dates but the 60GB will only cost me $120 in the end.
BTW, Im a first time mac buyer even though ive used em for years at work!
http://static.flickr.com/81/244990126_78cbf5958d.jpg
i chatted with a rep and pointed out that i have 14 days to return. i have 30 days to submit the iPod rebate (which requires a upc cut from MBP box)
so my status shows ship date of the 19th and arrival of the 26th!
so kinda in a pickle with dates but the 60GB will only cost me $120 in the end.
BTW, Im a first time mac buyer even though ive used em for years at work!
http://static.flickr.com/81/244990126_78cbf5958d.jpg
Tailpike1153
Apr 21, 02:36 PM
I want to believe! (X-files reference). The death of the xServe made me a little sad. Glad to see that Apple is trying to work out alternatives. I realize that MacPro isn't a "proper" server but it does have more expansion capablities than the xServe. Perhaps the MacPro Serve 2011/2012 will give us faith in Apple.
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
suwandy
Sep 16, 12:07 AM
just remember everyone...
all the rumor sits speculated the 23" imac (really 24") would be revealed at the "Showtime" event. apple fooled them all and released it a week early!
let's hope the same thing happens for our mbp's. here's to next tuesday! :D
One from me too! :D
Although, I kinda thought, the longer they took to release the MBP, means more time they spent on improving any design flaws, internal flaws, any other flaws, or even adding more goodies, so here's to more than just C2D update!
all the rumor sits speculated the 23" imac (really 24") would be revealed at the "Showtime" event. apple fooled them all and released it a week early!
let's hope the same thing happens for our mbp's. here's to next tuesday! :D
One from me too! :D
Although, I kinda thought, the longer they took to release the MBP, means more time they spent on improving any design flaws, internal flaws, any other flaws, or even adding more goodies, so here's to more than just C2D update!
ncvrumors
Mar 26, 09:56 PM
Taking the cloud fight to Google.
al2o3cr
Mar 29, 09:46 AM
What I'm more curious about is: will Amazon offer the Import/Export service:
http://aws.amazon.com/importexport/
for these accounts? I suspect an awful lot of us stuck behind cable modems with craptastical upload speeds would appreciate that...
http://aws.amazon.com/importexport/
for these accounts? I suspect an awful lot of us stuck behind cable modems with craptastical upload speeds would appreciate that...
regandarcy
Mar 27, 06:52 AM
I'm all for cloud computing as an added feature....but not as a replacement for traditional storage of media and data.
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
wovel
Apr 25, 10:55 AM
So Steve is saying there is no database of locations? Thats just an outright lie.
Steve did not actually say anything. Someone said he did, MR decided it must be fact. The ease with which these headers can be faked or even fake mails can be be put ion gmail boxes was shown conclusively last year.
These stories should have a much more pronounced disclaimer.
Steve did not actually say anything. Someone said he did, MR decided it must be fact. The ease with which these headers can be faked or even fake mails can be be put ion gmail boxes was shown conclusively last year.
These stories should have a much more pronounced disclaimer.
myca
Apr 5, 03:00 PM
even google disagrees with you - they wish in the meantime to have forced more control over the carriers (as they already admitted in the public) :D
I think this was always gonna happen, as the mess that was Java applications on multiple handsets could easily happen to Android as a platform if Google don't take the bull by the horns and exert some control on their platform.
I used to QA Java Verified games and applications for hundreds of handsets back in the day, and since apple introduced the iphone there has been a massive shift, a lot of it good.
I think this was always gonna happen, as the mess that was Java applications on multiple handsets could easily happen to Android as a platform if Google don't take the bull by the horns and exert some control on their platform.
I used to QA Java Verified games and applications for hundreds of handsets back in the day, and since apple introduced the iphone there has been a massive shift, a lot of it good.
rinconj
Aug 7, 07:37 PM
Is this whole heat sinked ram issue for real?
I just ordered the top o line, Macpro. but with base ram as usual onoly to see the FB- blah blah heat sinked, get nothing else or your computer will become the wind tunnel of hell, Is this true.
Should I get a 2gig base and try to work up from there?
Hellllpppp!
OMG estimated shipping date Sept 12th, they gotta be kidding!
Their estimated shipping date is on the safe side that it's how long it'll take if it has to be shipped from Mars. I ordered two BT mighty mice the day it came out and the shipping date was said to be some time late Auguest, but it arrived two days later ( late July).
I just ordered the top o line, Macpro. but with base ram as usual onoly to see the FB- blah blah heat sinked, get nothing else or your computer will become the wind tunnel of hell, Is this true.
Should I get a 2gig base and try to work up from there?
Hellllpppp!
OMG estimated shipping date Sept 12th, they gotta be kidding!
Their estimated shipping date is on the safe side that it's how long it'll take if it has to be shipped from Mars. I ordered two BT mighty mice the day it came out and the shipping date was said to be some time late Auguest, but it arrived two days later ( late July).
inlovewithi
Apr 26, 02:43 PM
"15.5" Vaio: 2.4Ghz Core i5, 4gb of Ram, Radeon 5470 512mb $860 Aug/2010. A mac with similar specs, and a weaker GPU would have cost me around a $1,000 extra, so I've been Apple free since Aug 2010.
And yet you can't stay away.
Sad.
I like to come here every once in a while, checkout the logic behind some of the comments. More interest in the psychological aspect of the comments.
And yet you can't stay away.
Sad.
I like to come here every once in a while, checkout the logic behind some of the comments. More interest in the psychological aspect of the comments.
LightSpeed1
Apr 7, 12:53 PM
At this point I think a good question is what could RIM had done differently?
dernhelm
Nov 26, 05:51 PM
Do they have more or less credibility if they spell Mac like MAC?
danielwsmithee
Aug 11, 09:31 AM
I think the black MacBook is sort of the Pro version of the MacBook. I expect the MBP and Black MacBook to receive top of the line Merom processors. The white MacBook will stick with the older yonah and receive a price drop to $999 at the bottom end.