Erasmus
Aug 26, 07:04 PM
I cannot believe that the iMac will continue to have a slower processor than the Macbook Pro. For years, the iMac has been about twice as fast as the leading Powerbook. I see no reason why Apple will not choose to put a "real man's" processor in what I would think is there most popular product (dismissing iPod). iMac deserves to retake the crown from Macbok Pro for speed in all areas, with CHEAPER components, ie. Conroe over Merom. And a decent GPU of course. In both.
I think it would be possible that Apple will rrefresh both Macbook Pro and iMac very soon, why not Tuesday? It would be nice to keep these two very comparable machines (at least at the moment) on par with each other.
After all, there is no shortage on Conroe, is there, and why else would they wait to release new iMacs? (unless iMacs get Merom too, in which case I'll be taking a quick trip to America, to find out just how much kidneys can be sold for on the black market, and how long a certain old man can survive without his.)
Conroe iMacs AND Merom MBP's on TUESDAY!
I think it would be possible that Apple will rrefresh both Macbook Pro and iMac very soon, why not Tuesday? It would be nice to keep these two very comparable machines (at least at the moment) on par with each other.
After all, there is no shortage on Conroe, is there, and why else would they wait to release new iMacs? (unless iMacs get Merom too, in which case I'll be taking a quick trip to America, to find out just how much kidneys can be sold for on the black market, and how long a certain old man can survive without his.)
Conroe iMacs AND Merom MBP's on TUESDAY!
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 02:11 PM
Of course, had the case been deemed totally unfounded by Apple Legal and their bunch of advisors, it wouldn't have been brought to court at all.
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
There is probably some merit to some of the claims, so are probably more ambitious and some are probably completely sure to get thrown out. The thing is, the more claims they throw in there the better they have a footing for eventual settlement negotiations.
Just like you never open with your lowest price, you never open with only the claims you are 100% sure are going to win. ;)
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
There is probably some merit to some of the claims, so are probably more ambitious and some are probably completely sure to get thrown out. The thing is, the more claims they throw in there the better they have a footing for eventual settlement negotiations.
Just like you never open with your lowest price, you never open with only the claims you are 100% sure are going to win. ;)
mcrain
Mar 22, 10:09 AM
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable...
I was stewing about this, and went to the Google News page, more "liberal" sites like the Huffington Post or MSNBC, my local paper, FoxNews and in every case, there were stories that were either critical or were about the criticism or the reasons for the criticism of the Libya action. (Stories about Senator XYZ saying coalition has issues vs. a story about the issues with the coaltion). So, it's pretty obvious that the mainstream media are covering this story, and reporting both the white house story and providing analysis and criticism.
I'm confused by what you think is so hypocritical or who you think is being such.
Are you talking about hipocracy from "the left in the media" or the left?" Do you expect every story to be critical of President Obama and Libya? Do you think every story that came out during the GWB administration was critical of Afghanistan or Iraq? Especially in the first days? Do you think every story from certain media outlets is liberal? I mean, is a story automatically liberal because it comes from NPR, or say, MSNBC or Huffington Post? Someone critiqued your using Fox News as a source, but what you quoted was mainly just facts. I think Fox News often inserts more of their spin into stories than their competitors (and as a result, their news reporting often appears tainted or is assumed tainted), and they are always supportive of the GOP, but that doesn't mean that I think the facts they report are any less fact. Is critique of the President from MSNBC any less critique because its coming from MSNBC? Are you suspicious of their criticism? Do you think they are using kid gloves? Would you expect a hypothetical neutral news site (if it exists) to be more critical? Would it be as critical and partisan as Fox News?
On the other hand, are you talking about hipocracy by those on the left, in the media? I mean, you quoted the President and what he said. If so, it really hasn't got anything to do with the media, right? Also, doesn't it seem like President Obama got pushed into this conflict? There were allies and some organizations clamoring for involvement, unlike prior to Iraq. The President was making statements that indicated reluctance to get involved. The military was saying it would not be simple, would involve real attacks, and it may be too late. But, there was pushing by our allies, human rights groups, etc... Plus, aren't we on the hook to have our allies backs? I mean, isn't the US on the hook to pay back a lot of favors to the Iraq/Afghanistan coalitions?
Unlike Iraq where the President was actively trying to sell the public on a conflict he, and a small group of insiders, wanted. Using evidence that was weak at best, and we now know was false. This salesmanship initially received pretty positive reporting, which only turned really sour as the evidence of betrayal and lies started coming out.
I was stewing about this, and went to the Google News page, more "liberal" sites like the Huffington Post or MSNBC, my local paper, FoxNews and in every case, there were stories that were either critical or were about the criticism or the reasons for the criticism of the Libya action. (Stories about Senator XYZ saying coalition has issues vs. a story about the issues with the coaltion). So, it's pretty obvious that the mainstream media are covering this story, and reporting both the white house story and providing analysis and criticism.
I'm confused by what you think is so hypocritical or who you think is being such.
Are you talking about hipocracy from "the left in the media" or the left?" Do you expect every story to be critical of President Obama and Libya? Do you think every story that came out during the GWB administration was critical of Afghanistan or Iraq? Especially in the first days? Do you think every story from certain media outlets is liberal? I mean, is a story automatically liberal because it comes from NPR, or say, MSNBC or Huffington Post? Someone critiqued your using Fox News as a source, but what you quoted was mainly just facts. I think Fox News often inserts more of their spin into stories than their competitors (and as a result, their news reporting often appears tainted or is assumed tainted), and they are always supportive of the GOP, but that doesn't mean that I think the facts they report are any less fact. Is critique of the President from MSNBC any less critique because its coming from MSNBC? Are you suspicious of their criticism? Do you think they are using kid gloves? Would you expect a hypothetical neutral news site (if it exists) to be more critical? Would it be as critical and partisan as Fox News?
On the other hand, are you talking about hipocracy by those on the left, in the media? I mean, you quoted the President and what he said. If so, it really hasn't got anything to do with the media, right? Also, doesn't it seem like President Obama got pushed into this conflict? There were allies and some organizations clamoring for involvement, unlike prior to Iraq. The President was making statements that indicated reluctance to get involved. The military was saying it would not be simple, would involve real attacks, and it may be too late. But, there was pushing by our allies, human rights groups, etc... Plus, aren't we on the hook to have our allies backs? I mean, isn't the US on the hook to pay back a lot of favors to the Iraq/Afghanistan coalitions?
Unlike Iraq where the President was actively trying to sell the public on a conflict he, and a small group of insiders, wanted. Using evidence that was weak at best, and we now know was false. This salesmanship initially received pretty positive reporting, which only turned really sour as the evidence of betrayal and lies started coming out.
littleman23408
Dec 1, 02:25 PM
after trying out the nascar challenges: :confused:... honestly they should have rather spent their money on getting more recent street cars ... thanks for having 10+ premium nascar cars :rolleyes:
I wish they would have done without the nascar, but it's not to bad playing around with those kinds of races. Those cars are heavy and you sure can feel it when you race them!
I wish they would have done without the nascar, but it's not to bad playing around with those kinds of races. Those cars are heavy and you sure can feel it when you race them!
skunk
Apr 27, 04:51 PM
The bigger deal here is the tendency of some fathers to name their kids the EXACT same name they have and add a "2nd". I've always thought that practice couldn't be stupidier. :PIt's just like kings, innit?
iMikeT
Aug 5, 07:36 PM
I can't wait!
citizenzen
Mar 22, 01:52 PM
The big difference between Libya and Iraq is that in Iraq there wasn't a large insurgence controlling a decent proportion of the country before the troops went in.
Good point.
Good point.
ikir
Apr 7, 03:05 AM
Better to have Core2Duo with 320M than an i5 with GMA HD 3000. At least for now until drivers get better and especially software houses support.
3D and gaming performance on new GMA is not so good but especially support is bad, many games don't work at all. Open CL too seems to don't work.
See the graph
http://mac.ikirsector.it/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=84
Lion should get full OpenGL 3.0 support even for GMA... i hope.
Naturally MBA is not a gaming or 3D production machine, but if you want to do some gaming, casual gaming, GMA can have serious limits.
3D and gaming performance on new GMA is not so good but especially support is bad, many games don't work at all. Open CL too seems to don't work.
See the graph
http://mac.ikirsector.it/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=84
Lion should get full OpenGL 3.0 support even for GMA... i hope.
Naturally MBA is not a gaming or 3D production machine, but if you want to do some gaming, casual gaming, GMA can have serious limits.
fatfish
Aug 7, 09:06 PM
When I first saw this feature I thought great. I do regular back ups, but some of my AW docs keep corrupting (probably something to do with keep duplicating the same old document and modifying rather than starting anew). Time Machine will help me no end. I was also thrilled that windows had nothing like this........ until I read through these posts.
Then it seemed very similar to what was coming in Vista and I felt a bit dissapointed that Apple had made such a point about M$ copying them, but seemed to do the same themselves with Time Machine.
However on closer examination this is not the case and my confidence in Apple's innovative skills is restored.
Firstly, there has always been back up and restore apps, so if you want to take this copying thing to a ridiculous level, of course you can do. Copying in my book is when an app does and looks the same (just like the screenshots in the presentation, safari RSS/IE7 RSS, ical/M$ calender etc). It appears to me Time Machine does much more than anything before it and has it's own unique UI to boot.
Secondly, I would imagine work on Time machine started long before a beta of Vista was released, even if the two utilities were more or less identical it would be coincidence not copying.
Thirdly, it seems quite clear that Vista's restore (whatever it's called) will not do what Time machine will do. Ultimately you may well be able to restore any deleted or modified file in Vista, but it doesn't appear to occur with the same ease or functionality.
If I create a file, modify it and move it several times, rename it, convert it, modify it some more, move it several times and finally delete it, I rather suspect it would be an absolute nightmare to recover in Vista, whereas it seems that Time Machine would have little problem.
I don't see how it is possible in Vista to perform the recovery with either the same simplicity or pizzaz as Time Machine. Perhaps if M$ had not abandoned their intended file system for Vista it might have been possible, but as it is I doubt it.
Finally it does not appear that Vista has the option to restore within a database application (i.e. iphoto, mail, address book), no doubt if you understand how a particular database works, the possibility exists to restore a particular photo, but let's not pretend it will be easy or anywhere near the experience of time machine.
And finally, finally, although I agree the UI may appear a little childish, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes it so easy to use.
Then it seemed very similar to what was coming in Vista and I felt a bit dissapointed that Apple had made such a point about M$ copying them, but seemed to do the same themselves with Time Machine.
However on closer examination this is not the case and my confidence in Apple's innovative skills is restored.
Firstly, there has always been back up and restore apps, so if you want to take this copying thing to a ridiculous level, of course you can do. Copying in my book is when an app does and looks the same (just like the screenshots in the presentation, safari RSS/IE7 RSS, ical/M$ calender etc). It appears to me Time Machine does much more than anything before it and has it's own unique UI to boot.
Secondly, I would imagine work on Time machine started long before a beta of Vista was released, even if the two utilities were more or less identical it would be coincidence not copying.
Thirdly, it seems quite clear that Vista's restore (whatever it's called) will not do what Time machine will do. Ultimately you may well be able to restore any deleted or modified file in Vista, but it doesn't appear to occur with the same ease or functionality.
If I create a file, modify it and move it several times, rename it, convert it, modify it some more, move it several times and finally delete it, I rather suspect it would be an absolute nightmare to recover in Vista, whereas it seems that Time Machine would have little problem.
I don't see how it is possible in Vista to perform the recovery with either the same simplicity or pizzaz as Time Machine. Perhaps if M$ had not abandoned their intended file system for Vista it might have been possible, but as it is I doubt it.
Finally it does not appear that Vista has the option to restore within a database application (i.e. iphoto, mail, address book), no doubt if you understand how a particular database works, the possibility exists to restore a particular photo, but let's not pretend it will be easy or anywhere near the experience of time machine.
And finally, finally, although I agree the UI may appear a little childish, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes it so easy to use.
.jpg "Fast and Furious 5 Cars")
hulugu
Apr 27, 11:19 PM
Can you name ONE person here who suggested its a forgery?
Right, you typically dig through government documents looking for goofy layers (or object) and you're just asking questions about this one document which happens to prove that Obama was born in the United States.
What I find remarkable is you were one of the ones arguing that all Obama has to do is show the long-form document and now that the White House has, you're still arguing about the document. It's a fair question to wonder why there are layers in a document, but you can't honestly say that such a question doesn't lead down a path that would logically come to the conclusion that a document was a forgery.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
It seems like it changes depending on the settings and edition of Creative Suite you have.
I'm quite sure that my rare posts in this forum have little to do with what you and your army think of this forum...besides, my milkshake brings all the boys to the yard.
Yeah it does. ;)
It'd be fascinating to see how much people cared about 'layers' if the documents in question related to Bush's National Guard deployment or something similar. ;) Haha, no bias here boys!
The difference between me and you is that I'd want an explanation in either account. ;)
Those hypotheticals make for easy arguments. You do have a bias against Obama and you should just admit it. When a document comes around that runs counter to your worldview make sure you ask the same kinds of questions.
Right, you typically dig through government documents looking for goofy layers (or object) and you're just asking questions about this one document which happens to prove that Obama was born in the United States.
What I find remarkable is you were one of the ones arguing that all Obama has to do is show the long-form document and now that the White House has, you're still arguing about the document. It's a fair question to wonder why there are layers in a document, but you can't honestly say that such a question doesn't lead down a path that would logically come to the conclusion that a document was a forgery.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
It seems like it changes depending on the settings and edition of Creative Suite you have.
I'm quite sure that my rare posts in this forum have little to do with what you and your army think of this forum...besides, my milkshake brings all the boys to the yard.
Yeah it does. ;)
It'd be fascinating to see how much people cared about 'layers' if the documents in question related to Bush's National Guard deployment or something similar. ;) Haha, no bias here boys!
The difference between me and you is that I'd want an explanation in either account. ;)
Those hypotheticals make for easy arguments. You do have a bias against Obama and you should just admit it. When a document comes around that runs counter to your worldview make sure you ask the same kinds of questions.
Rt&Dzine
Feb 28, 04:49 PM
Excellent post.
Yes, sex in merely civil marriage is fornication
You can pretend that particular fornication sessions are sacred because some guy wearing a white collar said so.
Yes, sex in merely civil marriage is fornication
You can pretend that particular fornication sessions are sacred because some guy wearing a white collar said so.
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:39 AM
if any of you are concerned about being tracked - why on earth would you buy any product that has a GPS in it (all computers cash info) and why on earth would you buy a cell phone - the towers know almost exactly when (which apple doesn't know) and where you are? The reaction to this news is stupid.
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
Bill McEnaney
Feb 28, 12:52 PM
What is a "gay lifestyle" exactly? We get up, take a shower, brush our teeth, go to work and come home to our families just like anyone else.
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
GFLPraxis
Jul 20, 12:01 PM
Back to reality: Apple wil use Xeon 51xx (5150 and 5160) in the MacPro, and Core 2 Duo (Merom) in the iMac and MBP to be announced at the WWDC. The top iMac config will get a boost to 2.33GHz. In addition, Apple will use the price-drops for the Yonah to upgrade the Core Solo mini to Core Duo.
I disagree. I think Apple will use Core 2 Duo (Conroe) in the iMac, and Merom in the MBP. The iMac could hold a G5, why not Conroe?
On top of that, you'll notice that a 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $70 less than the 1.83 GHz Yonah that's in the iMac now, $70 less than a 2 GHz Merom, and $200 less than a 2.16 GHz Merom, increasing Apple's profit margins on the iMac considerably or allowing a price drop- plus they can advertise it as a desktop processor.
In fact, even if Conroe was too hot (which I highly doubt, since the iMac had a G5), a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz still saves $70 over a 2 GHz Merom.
I disagree. I think Apple will use Core 2 Duo (Conroe) in the iMac, and Merom in the MBP. The iMac could hold a G5, why not Conroe?
On top of that, you'll notice that a 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $70 less than the 1.83 GHz Yonah that's in the iMac now, $70 less than a 2 GHz Merom, and $200 less than a 2.16 GHz Merom, increasing Apple's profit margins on the iMac considerably or allowing a price drop- plus they can advertise it as a desktop processor.
In fact, even if Conroe was too hot (which I highly doubt, since the iMac had a G5), a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz still saves $70 over a 2 GHz Merom.
EagerDragon
Sep 19, 04:47 AM
Hope they do the upgrade soon. However I plan to buy in summer 2007 when they release Leopard and Santa Rosa.
Macinposh
Aug 17, 02:55 PM
I have a new 3.0 Intel- just letting you know they are not as close as Rob's test under real world performance. Adobe camera raw really screamed on my G5 and is noticibly slower and a bit buggy on my new Mac Pro. Start up is alot slower, etc, etc. He only tested MP aware processes which isn't the whole picture.
Have you used cs2s or canon�s raw converters? How do they work?
What is the general feeling of yours how the new machine works in photog business?
2 x 2 drive stripe raids.
So you have 4hdds in total,with 2 of each in raid 0 or what?
Do you have the os on one pair and scratch on the other pair?
Ordering the new rig in couple of weeks,so i am buggin you now.
Have you used cs2s or canon�s raw converters? How do they work?
What is the general feeling of yours how the new machine works in photog business?
2 x 2 drive stripe raids.
So you have 4hdds in total,with 2 of each in raid 0 or what?
Do you have the os on one pair and scratch on the other pair?
Ordering the new rig in couple of weeks,so i am buggin you now.
wolfie37
Apr 25, 01:50 PM
"a perfect storm", "overreaction", "typical for the us to sue.."
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
... apple deserves to get a beating for this.
they're known for focussing on the user in terms of design and UI of theirdevices... they should also make the step to focus on their users best interest in terms of privacy and freedom, rather than their own greed.
You aren't being tracked by Apple, you aren't being tracked to the meter. You can opt out, just switch off location services.
And by the way even if you do switch off location services your location is still being tracked by the mobile phone companies everytime your phone makes a connection with one of their masts, which happens everytime you move cell. Oh and this happens with every phone, otherwise they wouldn't work.
Stop being a paranoid sheep and start reading the facts of this case not the media hype.
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
... apple deserves to get a beating for this.
they're known for focussing on the user in terms of design and UI of theirdevices... they should also make the step to focus on their users best interest in terms of privacy and freedom, rather than their own greed.
You aren't being tracked by Apple, you aren't being tracked to the meter. You can opt out, just switch off location services.
And by the way even if you do switch off location services your location is still being tracked by the mobile phone companies everytime your phone makes a connection with one of their masts, which happens everytime you move cell. Oh and this happens with every phone, otherwise they wouldn't work.
Stop being a paranoid sheep and start reading the facts of this case not the media hype.
toddybody
Mar 22, 02:57 PM
wait, theres other tablets out there? :rolleyes:
gugy
Aug 16, 11:02 PM
That's great that Adobe apps runs well under Rosetta in the new Mac Pro.
It makes very tempting to buy one.
My only concern comes to any Rev.A of any hardware.
I'll wait and buy the next version of Mac Pro. I think then, even under Rosetta Adobe apps will fly in comparison to the Quad G5. Can't wait for the universal apps though.
It makes very tempting to buy one.
My only concern comes to any Rev.A of any hardware.
I'll wait and buy the next version of Mac Pro. I think then, even under Rosetta Adobe apps will fly in comparison to the Quad G5. Can't wait for the universal apps though.
daneoni
Aug 27, 05:54 PM
I was just checking out the CD vs C2D comparison at Anandtech, pretty interesting stuff.
My question is this, is Santa Rosa strictly the mobile platform? I'm a student holding off for an iMac revision, and am wondering if apple utilizes Conroe in the iMac, will the faster FSB's be supported? Is an updated platform already available for Conroe? (I guess I had more than one question )
Thanks
Santa Rosa is for mobile platforms only. As far as i can tell the Conroe chips already have a rich FSB by default 1066MHz i think. Apple may use conroe and may use merom but conroe is looking to be the slated candidate.
My question is this, is Santa Rosa strictly the mobile platform? I'm a student holding off for an iMac revision, and am wondering if apple utilizes Conroe in the iMac, will the faster FSB's be supported? Is an updated platform already available for Conroe? (I guess I had more than one question )
Thanks
Santa Rosa is for mobile platforms only. As far as i can tell the Conroe chips already have a rich FSB by default 1066MHz i think. Apple may use conroe and may use merom but conroe is looking to be the slated candidate.
milo
Jul 27, 11:55 AM
so cn you put it in a mb too?
mini and iMac can be upgraded, they have a socket.
MB and MPB can not (at least not do it yourself), they are soldered.
mini and iMac can be upgraded, they have a socket.
MB and MPB can not (at least not do it yourself), they are soldered.
TripHop
Jun 14, 06:27 PM
The info i stated is directly from my DM.
We havent been told no white ones. I even asked specifically on the call, and no one had heard that.
Rumor has it, 20k phones. We haven't got an official number, but i've heard 20k mentioned from a few different higher ups.That number has got to be just for your district. No way is that a national number. If I can't get a white one that leaves me out. I want a white 32.
We havent been told no white ones. I even asked specifically on the call, and no one had heard that.
Rumor has it, 20k phones. We haven't got an official number, but i've heard 20k mentioned from a few different higher ups.That number has got to be just for your district. No way is that a national number. If I can't get a white one that leaves me out. I want a white 32.
wiestlingjr
Jun 11, 06:03 PM
Bibbz
I just talked to my local radioshack and they are also taking preorders. He told me he can't guarantee me the 24th. He said he's not sure when they will come in. How accurate is this? I really don't want to preorder if its not going to be there on the 24th.
I just talked to my local radioshack and they are also taking preorders. He told me he can't guarantee me the 24th. He said he's not sure when they will come in. How accurate is this? I really don't want to preorder if its not going to be there on the 24th.
soundbwoy
Apr 27, 10:54 AM
Is it me or are there more idiots about. Damn it people, leave the damn tracking contro alone if I lose my phone, I want to be able to find. I'm so not in the mood to spend $600 again.
No comments:
Post a Comment