guet
Aug 12, 06:28 AM
I've never paid for a phone up til now (as is the case with most UK residents I'd assume) so it would be an impressive feat if Apple can persuade people in this type of marketplace to actually put their hands in their pockets for a phone.
I'd pay a couple of hundred pounds for an iPod, so I'd definitely pay that for an iPod which happened to be a phone, pda, gps combo. Millions of iPod/pda users are the market for this kind of device, so it's not the entire phone market, but a good slice of it.
I'd pay a couple of hundred pounds for an iPod, so I'd definitely pay that for an iPod which happened to be a phone, pda, gps combo. Millions of iPod/pda users are the market for this kind of device, so it's not the entire phone market, but a good slice of it.
bamerican
Apr 25, 03:23 PM
Where did this attorney go to law school...
If you want a free consultation, check him out here (http://www.mayerlawgroup.com/).
And one of the counts in the complaint doesn't even allege a civil claim.
He's in way over his head. Apple's lawyers are going to eat him alive.
This is going to be fun to watch.
If you want a free consultation, check him out here (http://www.mayerlawgroup.com/).
And one of the counts in the complaint doesn't even allege a civil claim.
He's in way over his head. Apple's lawyers are going to eat him alive.
This is going to be fun to watch.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 02:29 PM
I wouldn't call over 50% of the N American market a small, local network.
I am sorry, but it is... 150 million people is a small market compared to the other +6 billion people. Europe alone is more than 700 million people...
I am sorry, but it is... 150 million people is a small market compared to the other +6 billion people. Europe alone is more than 700 million people...
CaoCao
Mar 4, 01:46 PM
This is true because you say it's true?
Nope, you just want to make sure that we can't have access to the same protections for our families that you do. How silly of me to want that.
Not at all. Gay people raise kids just as well as straight people- that's been proven. And we do have families. There is no risk of destroying society. The question is valid. Answer it.
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
CaoCao, could you please elaborate as to how gays could cause the collapse of society? I keep hearing that but I don't understand the sentiment behind it. And please, do not skirt around the answer, I always try to be as clear as day with mine.
The only explanation I can come up with as to why you would see being gay and giving gays the same civil rights as the collapse of society is that it differs so much from your worldview, it causes your world to collapse to the point where you feel nothing but uncomfortable to live in such a society. In other words; if gays are treated equal under every law under the sun, your society would collapse.
I often hear that same-sex marriage devalues marriage and threatens those that are already married. I wonder why and how. I doubt that your straight neighbor's happy marriage affects you at all unless you're so jealous, you want their marriage to be annulled - a happy same-sex couple must be killing you inside. I have said it here and in another thread before, marriage is nothing but a contract between two members of two families and the state to secure their fortune and legacy. Every attorney will tell you the same.
I have to say, it's very exhausting coming up with a defense convincing enough for those that don't seem to follow the world by logic. I'm glad I'm not a lawyer because if law is like that all the time, I'd rather give up on it and live in exile.
Logic is my source. Society needs people, no people means no society. If there were no more babies society would eventually collapse.
Source?
:rolleyes:
Nope, you just want to make sure that we can't have access to the same protections for our families that you do. How silly of me to want that.
Not at all. Gay people raise kids just as well as straight people- that's been proven. And we do have families. There is no risk of destroying society. The question is valid. Answer it.
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
CaoCao, could you please elaborate as to how gays could cause the collapse of society? I keep hearing that but I don't understand the sentiment behind it. And please, do not skirt around the answer, I always try to be as clear as day with mine.
The only explanation I can come up with as to why you would see being gay and giving gays the same civil rights as the collapse of society is that it differs so much from your worldview, it causes your world to collapse to the point where you feel nothing but uncomfortable to live in such a society. In other words; if gays are treated equal under every law under the sun, your society would collapse.
I often hear that same-sex marriage devalues marriage and threatens those that are already married. I wonder why and how. I doubt that your straight neighbor's happy marriage affects you at all unless you're so jealous, you want their marriage to be annulled - a happy same-sex couple must be killing you inside. I have said it here and in another thread before, marriage is nothing but a contract between two members of two families and the state to secure their fortune and legacy. Every attorney will tell you the same.
I have to say, it's very exhausting coming up with a defense convincing enough for those that don't seem to follow the world by logic. I'm glad I'm not a lawyer because if law is like that all the time, I'd rather give up on it and live in exile.
Logic is my source. Society needs people, no people means no society. If there were no more babies society would eventually collapse.
Source?
:rolleyes:
myemosoul
Jun 23, 02:33 PM
I confirmed today that my store will not have any for release day tomorrow, i got the district managers phone number and left a message about wanting my 184 dollar gift card put on my debit card instead due to false advertising that they would be doing Pre-orders instead of reservations which led me to believe that i would get a phone on release day, as a result i am forced to go camp out at the apple store overnight in 91 degree heat in a few hours with my fingers crossed that i get one. All of this could have been avoided if they didn't post on their twitter on June 9th that they were taking part in release day.
FF_productions
Jul 14, 04:14 PM
2003: "In 12 months, we'll be at 3GHz".
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).
Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system. Maybe Intel will bring us 3 ghz next month, a quad 3 ghz Xeon, does that even exist?
My problem with having 4 cores at 2.6 ghz is what will the other Mac Pro's offer? One more month...
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).
Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system. Maybe Intel will bring us 3 ghz next month, a quad 3 ghz Xeon, does that even exist?
My problem with having 4 cores at 2.6 ghz is what will the other Mac Pro's offer? One more month...
diamond.g
Mar 22, 02:53 PM
Rand didn't trip on the Civil Rights Act? Ok, only if you agree with him that entire towns in the South should have the right to discriminate like they used to. The free market will sort it out... just like it did before the civil rights act.
At some point all the discriminated folks would have started their own businesses and everything would have been a-ok right? Isn't that how the free market is supposed to work? :D
At some point all the discriminated folks would have started their own businesses and everything would have been a-ok right? Isn't that how the free market is supposed to work? :D
Bleubird2
Apr 27, 08:51 AM
Sleep walking a lot lately?
Do you have a kid or someone using your phone while you're asleep?
Do you have a kid or someone using your phone while you're asleep?
odedia
Aug 27, 03:19 AM
I dont see much change really, the 1.66GHz merom chip will find its way into the mini (they'll scrap the solo model).
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
the iMac will get a conroe. Nothing can be as dumb as putting a laptop chip in the desktop iMac. If the iMac could hold a G5 in it, it sure can hold a Conroe chip.
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
the iMac will get a conroe. Nothing can be as dumb as putting a laptop chip in the desktop iMac. If the iMac could hold a G5 in it, it sure can hold a Conroe chip.
Mac'nCheese
Apr 28, 04:14 PM
Can we all agree to this:
Yes, some people are racist. They hate Obama and always will.
Some people aren't and still hate him. They always will. That's politics.
Some people love conspiracy theories. This will never die for them. Neither will 9/11 theories, Bush's service record in the National Guard, Bill Clinton killing lots of dudes to hide affairs/scams.
Yes, some people are racist. They hate Obama and always will.
Some people aren't and still hate him. They always will. That's politics.
Some people love conspiracy theories. This will never die for them. Neither will 9/11 theories, Bush's service record in the National Guard, Bill Clinton killing lots of dudes to hide affairs/scams.
artistry
Nov 29, 03:06 AM
I can't see this standing up in the EU - it would be knocked down at first attempt in the European Court I'm sure.
Whatever, if someone with no Universal Music on their iPod wants to I bet they'd be able to cause a stink by asking for the 'tax' back.
I'm surprised no one's sued Universal for libel since the 'all iPod owners are thieves' thing.
Whatever, if someone with no Universal Music on their iPod wants to I bet they'd be able to cause a stink by asking for the 'tax' back.
I'm surprised no one's sued Universal for libel since the 'all iPod owners are thieves' thing.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 02:26 PM
That is totally reasonable and understandable, although I do disagree. I can't with good heart support sending my neighbors son/daughter overseas to fight for another people.
Well, we have allies, don't we? I simply consider the UN an attempt to permanently ally the world's nations to the extent that these sort of situations can be dealt with based on broader consensus. We are far from the ideal, but we must keep working towards it and an imperfect UN is better than no UN at all.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions." NOPE!
I'm not going to defend Biden, he puts his foot in his mouth quite a bit - though he is FAR from the only politician in Washingotn with that problem. Besides, unlike Cheney, he is very much playing second fiddle in the administration (actually he's so far down the pecking order only fiddles when someone lends him one, if I can stretch that saying to the breaking point).
It is worth remembering that the Bush Administration sent that clown Bolton as our representative to the UN - a man who opposes that organization's very existence. Incredibly counterproductive. No, I expect hypocrisy from both Democrats and Republicans.
I think it all boils down to whether you buy into the notion that the UN is a global representative body. If you do, then sending troops to enforce UN resolutions is not just fighting for "other people" but fighting for ouselves. If member nations took the concept of the UN more seriously, UN resolutions alone might be enough to stabilize situations like this without the need for major military intervention.
Well, we have allies, don't we? I simply consider the UN an attempt to permanently ally the world's nations to the extent that these sort of situations can be dealt with based on broader consensus. We are far from the ideal, but we must keep working towards it and an imperfect UN is better than no UN at all.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions." NOPE!
I'm not going to defend Biden, he puts his foot in his mouth quite a bit - though he is FAR from the only politician in Washingotn with that problem. Besides, unlike Cheney, he is very much playing second fiddle in the administration (actually he's so far down the pecking order only fiddles when someone lends him one, if I can stretch that saying to the breaking point).
It is worth remembering that the Bush Administration sent that clown Bolton as our representative to the UN - a man who opposes that organization's very existence. Incredibly counterproductive. No, I expect hypocrisy from both Democrats and Republicans.
I think it all boils down to whether you buy into the notion that the UN is a global representative body. If you do, then sending troops to enforce UN resolutions is not just fighting for "other people" but fighting for ouselves. If member nations took the concept of the UN more seriously, UN resolutions alone might be enough to stabilize situations like this without the need for major military intervention.
Timepass
Jul 14, 04:49 PM
For dual opitical drives I say abotu time. Almost all cheap Pc have 2 opical drives. I like having them because I like to leave disk that I use a lot in the system. A lot easier that have to swap them time when running different programs.
As for the PSU at the top I like that design. The PSU is going to generated the most heat over all and that heat has to go somewhere.
Put it at the bottom it going to suck cooling air way from the graphic card and the CPU to cool it self and add more heat inside the case to make cooling the CPU and graphic card even worse. Or put it at the top where it will help pull cooling air over the CPU and graphic card and pulling heat off of them. Then pushing it al out the back. I like the 2nd one more. The design I would like would be a BTX mount and PSU at the top. That would put the CPU at the bottom, then graphic card and then PSU at the top. That way things that have the worse problem over heating get the coldest air and moves up from there. The hottest object is at the top of the case so the over all temp in the case is lower.
That just my logic of it. Balance wise it not go effect it to much. it not like you are going to move you Tower that offen and it going to be out of the way so the center of gravity being a little higher is not going to be big deal.
As for the PSU at the top I like that design. The PSU is going to generated the most heat over all and that heat has to go somewhere.
Put it at the bottom it going to suck cooling air way from the graphic card and the CPU to cool it self and add more heat inside the case to make cooling the CPU and graphic card even worse. Or put it at the top where it will help pull cooling air over the CPU and graphic card and pulling heat off of them. Then pushing it al out the back. I like the 2nd one more. The design I would like would be a BTX mount and PSU at the top. That would put the CPU at the bottom, then graphic card and then PSU at the top. That way things that have the worse problem over heating get the coldest air and moves up from there. The hottest object is at the top of the case so the over all temp in the case is lower.
That just my logic of it. Balance wise it not go effect it to much. it not like you are going to move you Tower that offen and it going to be out of the way so the center of gravity being a little higher is not going to be big deal.
QCassidy352
Apr 6, 10:27 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I would love to see a 15" laptop with no optical drive, with the specs and price somewhere between the MBA and MBP.
A 15" MBA (no optical) with dedicated graphics is my ideal Mac. It'll happen someday...
I would love to see a 15" laptop with no optical drive, with the specs and price somewhere between the MBA and MBP.
A 15" MBA (no optical) with dedicated graphics is my ideal Mac. It'll happen someday...
FoxHoundADAM
Apr 11, 12:03 PM
Just picked up a Atrix 4G and on my way checked out the iPhone 4 - it looks decidedly antique and bland in front of the competition - Apple waiting until September would mean they rely awful lot on people's stupidity to keep buying it for 8 more months!
That ain't gonna happen - we will see a dual core iPhone 5 by June shipping by July or something (followed by shortages and long waits.)!
I agree on you point about the iPhone starting to look "old' compared to these newer phones. However I don't think Apple cares and will wait until September now.
As for people saying that it's silly because those new phones have terrible battery, well unless the battery dies in the 5 mintures they are playing with the phone in the store I don't think the average consumer really will care. Sure they may complain about it after they get it but hey they won't do anything about it until that 2 year contract is up so it's still a sale for Android and a loss for Apple.
That ain't gonna happen - we will see a dual core iPhone 5 by June shipping by July or something (followed by shortages and long waits.)!
I agree on you point about the iPhone starting to look "old' compared to these newer phones. However I don't think Apple cares and will wait until September now.
As for people saying that it's silly because those new phones have terrible battery, well unless the battery dies in the 5 mintures they are playing with the phone in the store I don't think the average consumer really will care. Sure they may complain about it after they get it but hey they won't do anything about it until that 2 year contract is up so it's still a sale for Android and a loss for Apple.
Hastings101
Apr 6, 03:29 PM
But hey, haven't you heard, Honeycomb is a real tablet OS. (Whatever the heck that means.)
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
No more a real tablet OS than iOS is
The corporate brainwashing continues ;)
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
No more a real tablet OS than iOS is
The corporate brainwashing continues ;)
brewser
Apr 7, 11:50 PM
This notion that Best Buy is the only one hoarding stock is typical of the stereotypical Apple fan. And once again, I've never bought Apple or Mac products at Best Buy because the staff are not knowledgeable in most cases, the same way I never bought a Mac at Circuit City for the short period they carried Macs.
But which stores are well stocked the best with iPads?
See if you can guess. I'll give you a hint, it begins with an A.
Sure you can say, those are Apple's rules, deal with it, but that doesn't make it right.
The truth probably is that some Best Buys are probably near Walmarts and Targets so they don't want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks while Apple hoards stock at its stores. I'm sure none of them want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks and suspect that Best Buy is the not the only offender of conserving stock due to Apple's inability to meet demand.
Not one of these chains wants to be known as the chain that didn't have iPads for 2-3 weeks giving consumers the impression they don't carry it anymore!
The only difference is Best Buy got CAUGHT!
I would bet that this directive came from corporate and applied to a limited number of stores that were faced with the possibility of being out of stock for an extended period of time.
People can conjecture here all they want, but no one really knows the details of Apple's supply promises vs. what it delivered with any of these chains.
You are an idiot to believe any of that. BB wants to save stock for their Sunday ads. That is the drive to bring customers in. They do this with any limited product. It's their nature. They need a certain number that matches their ad. They will tell you they are out of stock but they are waiting for Sunday.
But which stores are well stocked the best with iPads?
See if you can guess. I'll give you a hint, it begins with an A.
Sure you can say, those are Apple's rules, deal with it, but that doesn't make it right.
The truth probably is that some Best Buys are probably near Walmarts and Targets so they don't want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks while Apple hoards stock at its stores. I'm sure none of them want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks and suspect that Best Buy is the not the only offender of conserving stock due to Apple's inability to meet demand.
Not one of these chains wants to be known as the chain that didn't have iPads for 2-3 weeks giving consumers the impression they don't carry it anymore!
The only difference is Best Buy got CAUGHT!
I would bet that this directive came from corporate and applied to a limited number of stores that were faced with the possibility of being out of stock for an extended period of time.
People can conjecture here all they want, but no one really knows the details of Apple's supply promises vs. what it delivered with any of these chains.
You are an idiot to believe any of that. BB wants to save stock for their Sunday ads. That is the drive to bring customers in. They do this with any limited product. It's their nature. They need a certain number that matches their ad. They will tell you they are out of stock but they are waiting for Sunday.
absynth
Apr 11, 01:34 PM
who cares about iphone 5, where's my white iphone4 dammit! :mad:
ugp
Jun 15, 12:49 PM
My RS store would not let me leave information.
They are waiting till 1pm EST.
Meanwhile, people are twittering their stores
are issuing pin numbers to them.
What gives?
Man of man, was Radio Shack the worst outfit
to do this through. Don't totally blame them for
being handed this crap.
Stores were told any ticket generated before 12CST would be voided.
They are waiting till 1pm EST.
Meanwhile, people are twittering their stores
are issuing pin numbers to them.
What gives?
Man of man, was Radio Shack the worst outfit
to do this through. Don't totally blame them for
being handed this crap.
Stores were told any ticket generated before 12CST would be voided.
archurban
Sep 19, 02:08 AM
Mc keller, you're right. there are somebody misunderstand. we're not all geek, OK? I just use mac for my work or entertainment. my macbook will be kept for 2 years. so I don't care until 2008. plus, merom is only 10% better. it's not much different, and gets more hotter. I won't buy it.
EscobarFilms
Mar 26, 02:46 PM
do you guys think that new macs will launch along side with lion? like imac? that would be awsome :D :apple:
4God
Jul 14, 02:32 PM
If true, these definitely would be powerful machines, however for people like myself, the power and resulting price tag will be simply too much to justify. Leave the Xeons for the PowerMacs, but introduce some mini-tower machines with Conroe chips - they would fit nicely between the iMac and PowerMac. For me, the Mac mini isn't enough, the iMac is great, however non-upgradeable. I'd like something upgradeable, where I could replace/upgrade HDDs, optical drives, and most importantly the display - yet a PowerMac is overkill for my needs. It sure would be nice to see, but I doubt Apple will do it... :cool:
Well said, I agree with you. Apple, IMHO, needs an "inbetween" machine for upgradablity. This would shorten the gap between consmumer and prosumer.
Well said, I agree with you. Apple, IMHO, needs an "inbetween" machine for upgradablity. This would shorten the gap between consmumer and prosumer.
bretm
Apr 11, 08:03 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
How about an interim update? All they need really is a software update to bring all the little widgets and candy that clutter up the androids. Their camera is still the best IMHO. And ease of syncing is still the best. And don't forget- it's an iPod. Seriously the android is just more complicated for most things. It doesn't do well (anything) with embedded QT and it's insanely lacking in consistency- which is why it's the love of techie IT types. They love to be in the know. It's PC vs Mac all over again.
How about an interim update? All they need really is a software update to bring all the little widgets and candy that clutter up the androids. Their camera is still the best IMHO. And ease of syncing is still the best. And don't forget- it's an iPod. Seriously the android is just more complicated for most things. It doesn't do well (anything) with embedded QT and it's insanely lacking in consistency- which is why it's the love of techie IT types. They love to be in the know. It's PC vs Mac all over again.
Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:26 PM
if merom produces less heat.. i would think that apple will quickly update both MB and MBP so it won't be releasing anymore problematic notebooksYes your logic is impecible. But Apple does not act on logic. They are in it for the money. :D
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق