SoraLimit
Sep 20, 07:58 PM
I have no idea haha.
I was also looking at some 3g Leather Cases (those are my favorite style) is there any reason they wouldn't work with my 4g? For example, this one looks good:
http://www.amazon.com/DLO-HipCase-Leather-Folio-touch/dp/B000WOIFO2
but would my 4g fit in there?
The new iPod touch is more thinner and narrow compared to the 3rd gen. It's just gonna wobble around the cases if you did that.
I was also looking at some 3g Leather Cases (those are my favorite style) is there any reason they wouldn't work with my 4g? For example, this one looks good:
http://www.amazon.com/DLO-HipCase-Leather-Folio-touch/dp/B000WOIFO2
but would my 4g fit in there?
The new iPod touch is more thinner and narrow compared to the 3rd gen. It's just gonna wobble around the cases if you did that.
KevanDual2.5
Sep 7, 03:12 AM
What do you mean by "G5"??? PowerPC is long gone from Macs.
As other people have recognised..... the reference to G5 is in relation to the design not the chipset inside.
As other people have recognised..... the reference to G5 is in relation to the design not the chipset inside.
milo
Jul 19, 04:34 PM
Wow, already up to 75% intel machines. So much for the stupid notion that nobody wants intel because there are still big apps that aren't universal.
Troll
Apr 21, 04:41 PM
Why would Apple release an iMac refresh a couple of months before a new OS debuts? Also, this would be the FASTEST REFRESH IN APPLE HISTORY at 9 months.
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
kerryb
Apr 26, 01:01 PM
Wheres FullOfWin when you need him?
justin bieber shirtless
hot justin bieber pictures
Justin Bieber shirtless -
justinbieber shirtless
Justin Bieber nude photos and
justin bieber hot pics 2011.
justin bieber shirtless
hot justin bieber 2011
Year justin bieber, justin
Justin Bieber 2011 Cool Hot
2011, justin bieber hot
Justin Bieber Shirtless In
hot justin bieber 2011
justin bieber pictures 2011
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 04:35 PM
True, but its a wait for the overzealot AMD CPU fan base. AMD is very well behind Intel right now in CPUs. Their 6-core offerings barely match the processing power of a i7-870; which is a 4-core, 1156 socket! They can't even match the 1366 socket yet... not to mention the monster of a CPU that is the i7-980X.
Shhh... don't tell him that. He insists that it will only be a "small performance edge". �AMD
Shhh... don't tell him that. He insists that it will only be a "small performance edge". �AMD
Lepton
Jul 18, 04:52 PM
Apple wants to sell movies for $9.99, the studios say no, because they are greedy. Let's rent them for (I'll guess) $1.99 per view! Or (I'll guess) unlimited movies for $19.99 per month! That way, we get big bucks!
Foolish foolish, foolish. The movies will have DRM on them. The DRM will be cracked, because ALL DRMs are cracked. So the studios end up with, instead of $10, a measly $2, because people will rent them for one view, crack the DRM, and now own the movie permanently.
The viewer gets the movie permanently anyway, instead of getting $10, they get $2 because they are greedy, and dumb.
Or worse, a use pays $20 for a month, downloads every ding dang movie in the store, and gets them all. Even worse, the cracked movies will be put all over the Net by frustrated viewers.
Let Apple do it RIGHT! People will pay $10, get the movie and be legal and nice, happy viewers don't crack DRM, don't put cracked films all over the Net, and the studios make out big. Just like with music. But nooooo, greed loses every time.
By the way I predict movies will be 16:10 (sic) widescreen and not HD, stream in like Front Row trailers, streamable in iTunes AND in Front Row, the streams will be downloadable as you watch so they will be loadable and viewable on current and new widescreen video iPods, and will be compressed to about 1GB/100 minutes.
Foolish foolish, foolish. The movies will have DRM on them. The DRM will be cracked, because ALL DRMs are cracked. So the studios end up with, instead of $10, a measly $2, because people will rent them for one view, crack the DRM, and now own the movie permanently.
The viewer gets the movie permanently anyway, instead of getting $10, they get $2 because they are greedy, and dumb.
Or worse, a use pays $20 for a month, downloads every ding dang movie in the store, and gets them all. Even worse, the cracked movies will be put all over the Net by frustrated viewers.
Let Apple do it RIGHT! People will pay $10, get the movie and be legal and nice, happy viewers don't crack DRM, don't put cracked films all over the Net, and the studios make out big. Just like with music. But nooooo, greed loses every time.
By the way I predict movies will be 16:10 (sic) widescreen and not HD, stream in like Front Row trailers, streamable in iTunes AND in Front Row, the streams will be downloadable as you watch so they will be loadable and viewable on current and new widescreen video iPods, and will be compressed to about 1GB/100 minutes.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 2, 06:25 PM
the last few generations of the jetta have been absolute rubbish ... i hoping this new generation is actually better
I started a thread about the new Passat and Jetta a little while back. Basically, the new Jetta is bigger, costs less, and uses cheaper materials. People expecting Golf-like levels of refinement and build quality will be disappointed.
I started a thread about the new Passat and Jetta a little while back. Basically, the new Jetta is bigger, costs less, and uses cheaper materials. People expecting Golf-like levels of refinement and build quality will be disappointed.
danielwsmithee
Nov 27, 02:57 PM
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.While I agree with your thought process behind your post that Apple is targeting a different audience. That target audience is dwindling very quickly as Apple's prices increase in comparison to the rest of the market.
Bromac
Sep 27, 11:05 AM
I donot know what i can say
Get the 4. It's awsome!!!!!Everybody gets a cover for there iphone anyways. You will not be disappointed.
Get the 4. It's awsome!!!!!Everybody gets a cover for there iphone anyways. You will not be disappointed.
Primejimbo
Mar 22, 03:55 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
just because you don't want it, other people do. I have the 80GB and it's getting close to full. I have less than 10GB left and I know people who have way more.
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
just because you don't want it, other people do. I have the 80GB and it's getting close to full. I have less than 10GB left and I know people who have way more.
Apple 26.2
Apr 21, 08:07 PM
:apple: apologists unite!
PCMacUser
Aug 7, 05:11 AM
We also make more money, I remember a while ago doing a comparison between a waiter on Aussie award wages and US minimum wage in the purchase of an iBook. The US waiter would have to work ~2x as many hours as the aussie waiter to afford an iBook at our respective online Apple Stores.
Aussie waiters must earn a fortune. My sister in law worked as a waitress in the USA and earned over US$1000 per weekend in wages and tips. So what's it like in Oz?
Aussie waiters must earn a fortune. My sister in law worked as a waitress in the USA and earned over US$1000 per weekend in wages and tips. So what's it like in Oz?
CalBoy
Apr 26, 03:17 PM
I doubt any legal battle between titans is a simple case, even if it appears so to us laypersons.
Certainly there are going to be minutiae that most of us won't ever learn about (and even fewer will understand), but in this case the trademark dispute is going to invariably depend on whether or not "app" is specific enough to trademark or whether it is generic to the point that trademarking it would deprive consumers and companies of a simple ands valuable labeling device.
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
Generic in a legal sense means that the term describes the product or service. For example, "computer" broadly describes any device with a chip, some storage, and an ability to perform calculations or other functions for the user. A person could not trademark "Computer Store" because it would leave other competitors with no way of describing the service they offer.
Amazon is an online retailer; hence "online retailer" cannot be trademarked but "Amazon" can be.
In much the same way "app store" describes what is being sold and how, and any competitor would want to make use of the same basic naming structure in order to clearly inform consumers about what they could expect to find.
The general population never heard the term "App" until Apple released the iPhone.
Nor did the general population ever shop for Apps online until Apple built the App Store.
The abbreviation "App" used in conjunction with "store" to denote an online marketplace in which to buy applications is a unique combination that is not known in generic parlance.
Apple will win this.
This is just not true. App has long been in use since before the 1990s.
Apple is also not the only company to sell software online; many companies had been doing direct downloads for years before iOS came out.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Apple does not actually hold the trademark yet. That is still being decided. They filed their case against Amazon prematurely, hoping to either make Amazon change names or get a leg-up in the trademark hearings (or both).
Certainly there are going to be minutiae that most of us won't ever learn about (and even fewer will understand), but in this case the trademark dispute is going to invariably depend on whether or not "app" is specific enough to trademark or whether it is generic to the point that trademarking it would deprive consumers and companies of a simple ands valuable labeling device.
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
Generic in a legal sense means that the term describes the product or service. For example, "computer" broadly describes any device with a chip, some storage, and an ability to perform calculations or other functions for the user. A person could not trademark "Computer Store" because it would leave other competitors with no way of describing the service they offer.
Amazon is an online retailer; hence "online retailer" cannot be trademarked but "Amazon" can be.
In much the same way "app store" describes what is being sold and how, and any competitor would want to make use of the same basic naming structure in order to clearly inform consumers about what they could expect to find.
The general population never heard the term "App" until Apple released the iPhone.
Nor did the general population ever shop for Apps online until Apple built the App Store.
The abbreviation "App" used in conjunction with "store" to denote an online marketplace in which to buy applications is a unique combination that is not known in generic parlance.
Apple will win this.
This is just not true. App has long been in use since before the 1990s.
Apple is also not the only company to sell software online; many companies had been doing direct downloads for years before iOS came out.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Apple does not actually hold the trademark yet. That is still being decided. They filed their case against Amazon prematurely, hoping to either make Amazon change names or get a leg-up in the trademark hearings (or both).
spencers
Nov 23, 04:54 PM
Two of these
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/7010/3607031821d81ef5335b.jpg (http://img80.imageshack.us/i/3607031821d81ef5335b.jpg/)
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/7010/3607031821d81ef5335b.jpg (http://img80.imageshack.us/i/3607031821d81ef5335b.jpg/)
Apple OC
Mar 21, 07:21 PM
The gist of the statements currently coming from UN-mandated coalition members seems to be that once that "all necessary measures" have been taken to protect Libyans under attack by Gaddafi loyalists, the coalition military will simply seek to maintain that protection. Any political progess from that point on will have to be negotiated between Gaddafi, the Arab League, and the UN.
It will be important to get the Arab League onboard, but just now they are pretty distracted with internal instability and rarely agree on anything anyways. They neither want to keep Gaddafi around nor show him the door.
I agree ... interesting progress this UN decision has become, the Arab partners seem to now be on the fence.
Getting Gaddafi to step down seems like a logical solution ... however that may not happen if he tries to all of a sudden play ball a bit.
It will be important to get the Arab League onboard, but just now they are pretty distracted with internal instability and rarely agree on anything anyways. They neither want to keep Gaddafi around nor show him the door.
I agree ... interesting progress this UN decision has become, the Arab partners seem to now be on the fence.
Getting Gaddafi to step down seems like a logical solution ... however that may not happen if he tries to all of a sudden play ball a bit.
NameUndecided
Apr 3, 12:42 AM
The reason Lion's only 3.7 GB right now is because it's an upgrade only. You can't install Lion on a clean partition right now, only upgrade from Snow Leopard.
Apple likely did this to reduce download times.
??? My 25gb partition was clean and blank when I installed Lion DP 1 and I think that's the case for most others as well. I'm not sure where you heard that, if I'm understanding you correctly.
Apple likely did this to reduce download times.
??? My 25gb partition was clean and blank when I installed Lion DP 1 and I think that's the case for most others as well. I'm not sure where you heard that, if I'm understanding you correctly.
wordoflife
Apr 2, 07:42 PM
Good, but not "fun"
Peterkro
Mar 21, 02:25 PM
There is an unfortunate propaganda war going on making it hard to verify what is happening Shabab is still a good source though as is:
http://feb17.info/
(pretty much the same people)
http://feb17.info/
(pretty much the same people)
Kilamite
Apr 21, 11:20 AM
Read the letter. I'd like an open response from Apple which specifically answers those questions.
RebootD
Apr 12, 10:08 PM
Wow, looks pretty awesome. Nothing about improved typography though? Booooo.
Or will there be a 'studio' anymore? Will motion and livetype just be part of the new FCX?
Or will there be a 'studio' anymore? Will motion and livetype just be part of the new FCX?
balamw
Sep 6, 06:27 PM
Personally, I wouldn't want to DL a large movie file without the option of being able to burn it to DVD so I can have that tangible hard copy that makes me feel safe and warm. Then I wouldn't have a problem deleting it off of my hard drive.
What's stopping you from doing that now?
I know I have all of my iTMS video backed up to data DVDs...
I know I won't be spending $10-$15 for anything less than DVD quality though, so I hope there's either a rental model or at least 480p.
B
What's stopping you from doing that now?
I know I have all of my iTMS video backed up to data DVDs...
I know I won't be spending $10-$15 for anything less than DVD quality though, so I hope there's either a rental model or at least 480p.
B
Goldfinger
Aug 31, 03:35 PM
Any chance of a new chip set with a newer GMA ?
QuarterSwede
Apr 9, 11:51 PM
I've never owned an automatic. I'm addicted to driving a sports car with a manual gearbox.
After owning several I simply cannot imagine anything else. I enjoy driving too much to drive an automatic sedan.
You probably aren't carting around kids.
After owning several I simply cannot imagine anything else. I enjoy driving too much to drive an automatic sedan.
You probably aren't carting around kids.