spicyapple
Oct 10, 04:29 PM
Please Apple, re-orientate the screen so it's portrait, add extra resolution, add icon browsing and surely you'll have a winner. I don't really want a real video iPod, nor with wireless. (unless it's Bluetooth for wireless headphones!) :)
lOUDsCREAMEr
Nov 16, 05:16 PM
blatantly inaccurate.
Nekbeth
Apr 26, 10:41 PM
Nekbeth, you didn't thank Philip Endecott, who posted the solution to your problem on the Apple forum about three hours before wlh99 posted essentially the same solution here.
I did PhoneyDeveloper, it just that his explanation only stops the timer, if I press StartTimer again, the seconds continue where they left. e.g.
startTimer 59,58, cancel.. startTimer 57,56 and so on.
mmm.. I see where there might be problem (my fault, not Phillips).. I'll come back..
I did PhoneyDeveloper, it just that his explanation only stops the timer, if I press StartTimer again, the seconds continue where they left. e.g.
startTimer 59,58, cancel.. startTimer 57,56 and so on.
mmm.. I see where there might be problem (my fault, not Phillips).. I'll come back..
mmcc
Mar 29, 09:00 AM
I wrote:
I say again, the Mac App Store has depressed the sales volume and gross in my category for everyone. This is not a success in the sense of encouraging a vibrant and growing Mac software market. I felt that before the Mac App Store opened that the Mac software market was reaching a critical mass and that developers found it increasingly attractive.
Part of the previous appeal of the Mac software market to developers was the fact that Apple customers would accept increased costs for Mac software titles just as Apple charges a premium for its hardware because "it is worth it." Developers could coattail onto this and therefore ask higher prices for Mac software as compared to equivalent titles on other OS's.
Once the Mac App Store opened, that premium pricing advantage was wiped out overnight. Apple customers now expect to pay less just as the mobile App Store has reduced app pricing -- and in many cases expecting equivalent prices from the iPhone to the Mac desktop.
Do not underestimate this effect on developer's bottom lines.
I say again, the Mac App Store has depressed the sales volume and gross in my category for everyone. This is not a success in the sense of encouraging a vibrant and growing Mac software market. I felt that before the Mac App Store opened that the Mac software market was reaching a critical mass and that developers found it increasingly attractive.
Part of the previous appeal of the Mac software market to developers was the fact that Apple customers would accept increased costs for Mac software titles just as Apple charges a premium for its hardware because "it is worth it." Developers could coattail onto this and therefore ask higher prices for Mac software as compared to equivalent titles on other OS's.
Once the Mac App Store opened, that premium pricing advantage was wiped out overnight. Apple customers now expect to pay less just as the mobile App Store has reduced app pricing -- and in many cases expecting equivalent prices from the iPhone to the Mac desktop.
Do not underestimate this effect on developer's bottom lines.
hob
Nov 23, 05:02 PM
I hate to be a grumble guts but why is this on page 1??
It's not a rumour and it only applies to Apple in the U.S... and maybe Canada...
Maybe I'm just pissed off I'm in the UK. No thanksgiving!! :p
It's not a rumour and it only applies to Apple in the U.S... and maybe Canada...
Maybe I'm just pissed off I'm in the UK. No thanksgiving!! :p
Analog Kid
Sep 12, 03:03 AM
I'm waiting to be disappointed. I realized that the anonymously submitted schedule of events could very well turn out to be true, in which case I'm not too miffed that I'll be missing live coverage of the event.
Here're my reservations:
- iTunes should be strictly music. iTube or iFilm or iMovies or iVideo or Apple Movie Store should be a separate application; or else name it iMedia and completely rethink the interface. I find that since the addition of video podcasts and TV shows, iTunes is getting really difficult to keep tidy and organized, even with features like smart playlists and a 20" screen. It looks like a big, sloppy mass of text.
- The price should be $11.99 - 9.99 for new movies, $9.99 - 7.99 for older ones, and an iPod version should be thrown in with the full-quality feature. Any more than that and I'll just buy and rip the DVD or, more likely, just download it elsewhere. This pricing structure is not going to happen, I know, and so I'm already less than thrilled.
- The wireless Mac-to-TV bridge has to be really cool and effortlessly simple (and PC compatible too). This proposed "TubePort" USB dongle sounds like the most likely solution for a cross-platform device, but I'm hoping that the AirPort in all its various incarnations (Express, Extreme) will get a revamp and allow for video streaming somehow.
- A true video iPod needs to come soon. As in, before Christmas. And I really don't think we're going to see it today.
We'll see how it goes, of course, but I don't know if the event will live up to the hype. That seems to be Apple's nagging problem lately.
Glad to hear someone else bring up the iTunes interface. I've never understood why the Videos group has a different organizing structure than everything else, or why it's so rigid. I also hate having Podcasts mixed in with my music.
Apple's been trying to integrate the various media pieces it's been developing, but the "branding" guys got control of the decisions. They're trying to leverage the iPod and iTunes too much because they're recognizable. Why do my photos get sync'd to my iPod through iTunes?
I probably won't even throw down $10 for a downloaded movie with those kinds of restrictions. I think the industry is holding out for HD discs to reassert their DRM power, and they're too intent on locking everything down. Not useful and no fun. Digital is beautiful because it's flexible-- take the flexibility away and it's just another bunch of fragile, valuable data on my hard drive. I'll take the disc, and continue spreading my money among all the middlemen...
If Apple does set up the video store this way, it's going to flop. There's no incentive to consumers... No price break, and bandwidth limits the ease of use. If playing the file, or adjusting attributes messes with the meta-data then it's going to choke Time Machine. My biggest concern is that a failing movie store will kill Apple's momentum and the music store and iPod will suffer as well.
Apple could make this all worthwhile by offering foreign films everywhere. I'd buy foreign films for download if they weren't released in the US any other way. Maybe by distributing independent films they could convince the music industry to follow suit.
Why a USB dongle unless they're hoping to open up to the low end Windows folks? USB is the *worst* interface for streaming video-- it's a peripheral interface, not a streaming interface... It hides its inefficiency with bandwidth for now, but once people start using it for hard drives, and iPods, and video streaming and TV hookups and everything else it's going to fall over. A FireWire dongle would do the job much more cleanly.
I covet a new full screen iPod, even though my 5G is only a year or so old. Something about full screen just seems right. If they go that way, I'd hope they boost capacity too-- 60GB isn't enough to hold everything I've got and more video to boot.
I'm a little suspicious of the idea that we'll be seeing a run of new consumer products. Apple doesn't work that way-- they don't have the resources to develop a bunch of new, great stuff in parallel. We haven't seen much lately because they've been focused on new, redesigned iPods. Maybe they'll throw out a video streaming peripheral. Then there'll be another wait and possibly something else.
Here're my reservations:
- iTunes should be strictly music. iTube or iFilm or iMovies or iVideo or Apple Movie Store should be a separate application; or else name it iMedia and completely rethink the interface. I find that since the addition of video podcasts and TV shows, iTunes is getting really difficult to keep tidy and organized, even with features like smart playlists and a 20" screen. It looks like a big, sloppy mass of text.
- The price should be $11.99 - 9.99 for new movies, $9.99 - 7.99 for older ones, and an iPod version should be thrown in with the full-quality feature. Any more than that and I'll just buy and rip the DVD or, more likely, just download it elsewhere. This pricing structure is not going to happen, I know, and so I'm already less than thrilled.
- The wireless Mac-to-TV bridge has to be really cool and effortlessly simple (and PC compatible too). This proposed "TubePort" USB dongle sounds like the most likely solution for a cross-platform device, but I'm hoping that the AirPort in all its various incarnations (Express, Extreme) will get a revamp and allow for video streaming somehow.
- A true video iPod needs to come soon. As in, before Christmas. And I really don't think we're going to see it today.
We'll see how it goes, of course, but I don't know if the event will live up to the hype. That seems to be Apple's nagging problem lately.
Glad to hear someone else bring up the iTunes interface. I've never understood why the Videos group has a different organizing structure than everything else, or why it's so rigid. I also hate having Podcasts mixed in with my music.
Apple's been trying to integrate the various media pieces it's been developing, but the "branding" guys got control of the decisions. They're trying to leverage the iPod and iTunes too much because they're recognizable. Why do my photos get sync'd to my iPod through iTunes?
I probably won't even throw down $10 for a downloaded movie with those kinds of restrictions. I think the industry is holding out for HD discs to reassert their DRM power, and they're too intent on locking everything down. Not useful and no fun. Digital is beautiful because it's flexible-- take the flexibility away and it's just another bunch of fragile, valuable data on my hard drive. I'll take the disc, and continue spreading my money among all the middlemen...
If Apple does set up the video store this way, it's going to flop. There's no incentive to consumers... No price break, and bandwidth limits the ease of use. If playing the file, or adjusting attributes messes with the meta-data then it's going to choke Time Machine. My biggest concern is that a failing movie store will kill Apple's momentum and the music store and iPod will suffer as well.
Apple could make this all worthwhile by offering foreign films everywhere. I'd buy foreign films for download if they weren't released in the US any other way. Maybe by distributing independent films they could convince the music industry to follow suit.
Why a USB dongle unless they're hoping to open up to the low end Windows folks? USB is the *worst* interface for streaming video-- it's a peripheral interface, not a streaming interface... It hides its inefficiency with bandwidth for now, but once people start using it for hard drives, and iPods, and video streaming and TV hookups and everything else it's going to fall over. A FireWire dongle would do the job much more cleanly.
I covet a new full screen iPod, even though my 5G is only a year or so old. Something about full screen just seems right. If they go that way, I'd hope they boost capacity too-- 60GB isn't enough to hold everything I've got and more video to boot.
I'm a little suspicious of the idea that we'll be seeing a run of new consumer products. Apple doesn't work that way-- they don't have the resources to develop a bunch of new, great stuff in parallel. We haven't seen much lately because they've been focused on new, redesigned iPods. Maybe they'll throw out a video streaming peripheral. Then there'll be another wait and possibly something else.
balamw
Oct 2, 06:17 PM
Besides... the more I think about it, the more I don't see why iTunes wouldn't play the compatible Fairplay songs. Apple can't make any major changes to the existing DRM in files to break compatible Fairplay files.... since they would have then have to reencode all of those files sitting on people's hard drives.
The "key" to unlocking the FairPlay DRM is your iTMS account.
One factor that DVD Jon already uncovered once before is that the actual encoding of the DRM to your account is done locally by the iTunes client. This might help in their current effort. Previously the transmitted file was unenencrypted, while now it appears to be given some common form of encryption. Perhaps the easiest way they could make it work would be to see if they can fool iTunes into encrypting the file for them.
Since the files are already decrypted and encrypted locally in faster that real time, it doesn't seem too farfetched that Apple could decide to "upgrade" the DRM on the files locally whenever you access them, or in one swell foop as they did to detect gapless tracks.
Even if iTunes did the encrypting Apple could still break this by releasing a new iTunes client and mandating its use as they have done before. Most probably they would not want to deal with the hassle of dealing with support calls from folks who lost their protected files since they didn't have a backup but didn't buy the files from ITMS in the first place....
I personally don't see the net positive for Apple, but DVD Jon has surprised me in the past.
B
The "key" to unlocking the FairPlay DRM is your iTMS account.
One factor that DVD Jon already uncovered once before is that the actual encoding of the DRM to your account is done locally by the iTunes client. This might help in their current effort. Previously the transmitted file was unenencrypted, while now it appears to be given some common form of encryption. Perhaps the easiest way they could make it work would be to see if they can fool iTunes into encrypting the file for them.
Since the files are already decrypted and encrypted locally in faster that real time, it doesn't seem too farfetched that Apple could decide to "upgrade" the DRM on the files locally whenever you access them, or in one swell foop as they did to detect gapless tracks.
Even if iTunes did the encrypting Apple could still break this by releasing a new iTunes client and mandating its use as they have done before. Most probably they would not want to deal with the hassle of dealing with support calls from folks who lost their protected files since they didn't have a backup but didn't buy the files from ITMS in the first place....
I personally don't see the net positive for Apple, but DVD Jon has surprised me in the past.
B
SPEEDwithJJ
Apr 12, 03:13 PM
Wait......do you guys have a little obsession with cupcakes, or an obsession with little cupcakes?
I just want to be clear, that's all. ;)
Haha. :D That's a good one. I LOL at that! :p
I just want to be clear, that's all. ;)
Haha. :D That's a good one. I LOL at that! :p
Warbrain
Nov 16, 12:47 PM
this is bull, noway....
but amd would be cheaper I bet...
No it wouldn't. You might pay less for chips, but you will need to wait much longer as AMD doesn't anywhere near the capacity to produce processors like Intel does, therefore making Apple pay more in the end. That's part of the reason Apple went with Intel.
but amd would be cheaper I bet...
No it wouldn't. You might pay less for chips, but you will need to wait much longer as AMD doesn't anywhere near the capacity to produce processors like Intel does, therefore making Apple pay more in the end. That's part of the reason Apple went with Intel.
paradox00
May 3, 03:23 PM
Shocking that carriers would take steps to stop people from stealing service from them.
You did not pay for tethering data. That is a separate charge. By circumventing the system you are stealing. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it.
It is not a gray area.. it is black and white. The contracts specifically say the data you pay for does not include tethering. Tethering costs extra.
Contract terms require "consideration" from both parties to be legally binding. Consideration is something you provide to the other party (i.e., money from you, data services from your carrier).
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone. It doesn't matter to the carrier if your Netflix app is using it, or your tethering app is sending the data to your laptop. Nothing changes on their end, they just send the data that you've already paid for to your phone, and your phone handles the rest.
You're right, it is black and white. It's a scam aimed at exploiting consumers like yourself who don't know any better, with an illegal contract term. I hope this goes to court soon, before the carriers in Canada (where I am) try to pull the same BS.
You did not pay for tethering data. That is a separate charge. By circumventing the system you are stealing. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it.
It is not a gray area.. it is black and white. The contracts specifically say the data you pay for does not include tethering. Tethering costs extra.
Contract terms require "consideration" from both parties to be legally binding. Consideration is something you provide to the other party (i.e., money from you, data services from your carrier).
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone. It doesn't matter to the carrier if your Netflix app is using it, or your tethering app is sending the data to your laptop. Nothing changes on their end, they just send the data that you've already paid for to your phone, and your phone handles the rest.
You're right, it is black and white. It's a scam aimed at exploiting consumers like yourself who don't know any better, with an illegal contract term. I hope this goes to court soon, before the carriers in Canada (where I am) try to pull the same BS.
MacSA
Sep 12, 08:11 AM
Think they will close the store this morning to update the laptop line??? or will they do it when they close the store during the live session?
Maybe.. but theres always tomorrow for more hardware announcements :D
Maybe.. but theres always tomorrow for more hardware announcements :D
gnasher729
May 4, 08:14 AM
Those that use the analogy of their home internet connection not restricting use...well...that's just it... your T&C there does not restrict devices and use. Not the same thing. As for you gas analogy, again not the same thing. You have no contract with Exxon on how you use your gas. If Exxon made a contract with you to use the gas only in the car that purchased it..it would be the same. You could then decide to buy it or find another source (carrier).
Since you mention fuel, you can use the same fuel to heat your home or to drive a car with Diesel engine. In Europe, there will be a _huge_ difference in tax. In some European countries, farmers can get tax free or low tax diesel fuel for use in their tractors and other farming machines. You can safe a lot of money by using this low tax fuel to run your car. You will also get into an awful lot of trouble if you get caught doing it.
In my opinion, and that of Websters dictionary, I have an unlimited data plan, therefor I already do pay for it.
Oh if only I had the dough, I would sue AT&T into the ground. A decent lawyer and fair judge would find against AT&T for the use of the word unlimited and their unfair anti-consumer practices that have followed.
AT&T can do whatever it wants, but it NEVER should have used the word unlimited, because theyve opened themselves up for failure in a future lawsuit. Someone will do it.
Whatever plan you have, AT&T will calculate the average cost of users on that plan, add some profit, and that is what they will charge. People on "unlimited without tethering" use less data and cost less money on average than people on "unlimited with tethering", and therefore are charged less. You basically want to get rid of the two different plans, only one plan "unlimited with tethering" would exist. The average data usage would be higher than for those on the plan without tethering, the average cost is higher, so the charge will go higher. In other words, cost goes up for people who don't tether.
I don't give a damn. If I pay for a chunk of data, it isn't up to the provider to dictate how I use my data. If I want to syphon fuel out of my vehicle for use in another, that is my decision not Exxon's.
If you go to an "all you can eat" buffet, you can't take food for your wife and six hungry children.
Since you mention fuel, you can use the same fuel to heat your home or to drive a car with Diesel engine. In Europe, there will be a _huge_ difference in tax. In some European countries, farmers can get tax free or low tax diesel fuel for use in their tractors and other farming machines. You can safe a lot of money by using this low tax fuel to run your car. You will also get into an awful lot of trouble if you get caught doing it.
In my opinion, and that of Websters dictionary, I have an unlimited data plan, therefor I already do pay for it.
Oh if only I had the dough, I would sue AT&T into the ground. A decent lawyer and fair judge would find against AT&T for the use of the word unlimited and their unfair anti-consumer practices that have followed.
AT&T can do whatever it wants, but it NEVER should have used the word unlimited, because theyve opened themselves up for failure in a future lawsuit. Someone will do it.
Whatever plan you have, AT&T will calculate the average cost of users on that plan, add some profit, and that is what they will charge. People on "unlimited without tethering" use less data and cost less money on average than people on "unlimited with tethering", and therefore are charged less. You basically want to get rid of the two different plans, only one plan "unlimited with tethering" would exist. The average data usage would be higher than for those on the plan without tethering, the average cost is higher, so the charge will go higher. In other words, cost goes up for people who don't tether.
I don't give a damn. If I pay for a chunk of data, it isn't up to the provider to dictate how I use my data. If I want to syphon fuel out of my vehicle for use in another, that is my decision not Exxon's.
If you go to an "all you can eat" buffet, you can't take food for your wife and six hungry children.
rdowns
Apr 13, 09:28 AM
I thought box cutters were banned? Can you provide a link to support your statement?
Box cutters were banned in response to 9/11. As always, airline security is reactive. Bush sold us a bill of goods while increasing the size and cost of government.
Box cutters were banned in response to 9/11. As always, airline security is reactive. Bush sold us a bill of goods while increasing the size and cost of government.
absolut_mac
Jan 12, 12:41 AM
Wow, I just watched the keynote and my god this guy is hard to stand....
Don't take CEO's public persona's (or any public figure for that matter) too seriously. It's all about marketing and keeping Wall Street happy.
Don't take CEO's public persona's (or any public figure for that matter) too seriously. It's all about marketing and keeping Wall Street happy.
Macnoviz
Jan 6, 03:41 PM
Could the Arn make sure we don't see advertisements for the new iPhone/iTV/MacWhatever/iStuff thingies when we reach this page?
SiliconAddict
Oct 3, 03:27 PM
All I can say is whatever "top secret" features Leopard has better blow me out of my socks, threw the wall, and across my yard. As it stands. Meh.
iTV will be mine though as long as I can hook up an external HD to it to store video. If not. Pass.
iTV will be mine though as long as I can hook up an external HD to it to store video. If not. Pass.
AppliedVisual
Oct 18, 07:28 PM
With the new codecs Sony can barely justify 50GB discs for movie distribution. How in the world can you justify 300GB discs?
That's easy... The next video format, which is already forming alliances within the industry. Currently known as SuperHD or Super Hi-Vision with 4K and 8K resolutions.
Or... We can put all 6 Star Wars films on a single disc in full 1080P glory.
But seriously, the new codecs aren't that magical and even with VC1 or H.264, it's pretty easy to run into a barrier with a 25 to 30 GB disc size. Sony shouldn't have any troubles with fitting films at full quality on a 50GB disc. Also keep in mind that the layer substrate within BluRay is a lot thinner than DVD/HD-DVD discs and they claim that a disc could potentially hold up to 12 layers... Sony has done lab tests and industry demonstrations with prototype 4-layer discs, but the exposure has been very minimal.
Also Holographic storage is going to be the next form of optical media, almost surely anyway unless something incredible comes out of nowhere. It has a lot of room to grow as a format as well and as capacities increase, we will begin to move from compressed video to uncompressed and/or lossless codecs. So when the 3.6TB holographic storage media hits, we'll be able to put full HD res 1080P24, uncompressed 32bit color transfers of features plus full uncompressed 8 channel audio on a single disc with room to spare.
HVD or something like it would be keen for an Ultra HD format or a 4k format in 10-15yrs but right now it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist for movie playback.
Yep, but I think that day will be here quicker than 10-15 years. While there will be a move to continue to push HD resolutions higher as I mentioned. I think we're going to see an even bigger push to max-out the quality of the image resolution we can deal with now. Current HDTV sets are shipping with the ability to display a full 1080p uncompressed signal. While BluRay and HD-DVD do a fair job of using this ability there's still noticeable compression artifacting and color limitations, black crush, etc.. Just imagine what would be possible with an uncompressed or lossless codec.
That's easy... The next video format, which is already forming alliances within the industry. Currently known as SuperHD or Super Hi-Vision with 4K and 8K resolutions.
Or... We can put all 6 Star Wars films on a single disc in full 1080P glory.
But seriously, the new codecs aren't that magical and even with VC1 or H.264, it's pretty easy to run into a barrier with a 25 to 30 GB disc size. Sony shouldn't have any troubles with fitting films at full quality on a 50GB disc. Also keep in mind that the layer substrate within BluRay is a lot thinner than DVD/HD-DVD discs and they claim that a disc could potentially hold up to 12 layers... Sony has done lab tests and industry demonstrations with prototype 4-layer discs, but the exposure has been very minimal.
Also Holographic storage is going to be the next form of optical media, almost surely anyway unless something incredible comes out of nowhere. It has a lot of room to grow as a format as well and as capacities increase, we will begin to move from compressed video to uncompressed and/or lossless codecs. So when the 3.6TB holographic storage media hits, we'll be able to put full HD res 1080P24, uncompressed 32bit color transfers of features plus full uncompressed 8 channel audio on a single disc with room to spare.
HVD or something like it would be keen for an Ultra HD format or a 4k format in 10-15yrs but right now it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist for movie playback.
Yep, but I think that day will be here quicker than 10-15 years. While there will be a move to continue to push HD resolutions higher as I mentioned. I think we're going to see an even bigger push to max-out the quality of the image resolution we can deal with now. Current HDTV sets are shipping with the ability to display a full 1080p uncompressed signal. While BluRay and HD-DVD do a fair job of using this ability there's still noticeable compression artifacting and color limitations, black crush, etc.. Just imagine what would be possible with an uncompressed or lossless codec.
iJohnHenry
Apr 16, 03:50 PM
Why does it matter that he was gay? I thought that gay people where supposed to be the same as everyone else. Did his being gay give him some sort of super powers to break codes?
No, he was blessed by Mother Nature, and he obviously also had an analytical mind. :p
No, he was blessed by Mother Nature, and he obviously also had an analytical mind. :p
jakaj
Oct 28, 03:19 PM
I don't blame Apple. The OSS community abused what they had and turned to piracy by stealing the GUI. Kudos Apple.
Now that's a stupid thing to say. The OSS community doesnt steal the GUI, the warez community does. And those two really don't overlap much.
It is true, though, that everyone might use the work of the OSS community, even for illegal purposes.
Now that's a stupid thing to say. The OSS community doesnt steal the GUI, the warez community does. And those two really don't overlap much.
It is true, though, that everyone might use the work of the OSS community, even for illegal purposes.
slffl
Jan 9, 01:57 PM
Wow, so much for the spoiler free link. I just checked the page and saw WHAT THEY ANNOUNCED in some kind of news ticker!!!!!!!
Maybe next year.
Maybe next year.
TequilaBoobs
Jan 12, 08:45 AM
Wow, I just watched the keynote and my god this guy is hard to stand. I've watched previous keynotes and he never seemed this bad. The charisma he's displayed in the past has been replaced with smugness. He acted like the iPhone was the second coming of christ and we were so lucky that he existed to bring it upon us.
When really, this is probably the single worst keynote for Mac users that he has ever given. No hardware updates. No 10.5 preview. Not even iLife and iWork '07! Plus, very people I know are going to be interested in spending $600 + $60 a month or more to use this phone while plenty of us would love to spend $300 or $400 or even more on a full-screen video iPod. God, I wish this keynote was all some nightmare and in the real one Apple actually gave us something we wanted.
wow jamr u have big balls, coming to macrumors to call Steve Jobs an SOB. that's like going to a kkk rally and saying david duke is retarded. just be prepared to be flamed!
When really, this is probably the single worst keynote for Mac users that he has ever given. No hardware updates. No 10.5 preview. Not even iLife and iWork '07! Plus, very people I know are going to be interested in spending $600 + $60 a month or more to use this phone while plenty of us would love to spend $300 or $400 or even more on a full-screen video iPod. God, I wish this keynote was all some nightmare and in the real one Apple actually gave us something we wanted.
wow jamr u have big balls, coming to macrumors to call Steve Jobs an SOB. that's like going to a kkk rally and saying david duke is retarded. just be prepared to be flamed!
YoNeX
Sep 12, 12:24 AM
Welcoming of Media Members
mozmac
Oct 19, 11:38 AM
Seriously...Gateway still sells computers? As I walk through campus I see: Dell, Dell, Mac, Dell, HP, Mac, Mac, HP, Dell...wait, what's that? Oh, one Gateway. Yeah, who buys Gateway computers anymore? I appreciate Apple passing them up soon.
tvguru
Sep 12, 08:49 AM
When you come across a bit of information that seems to point to some sort of confirmation to a rumor do you read 9 pages of threads or do you just post it? I scolled through real quick to see if the image had been posted and didn't see it. Lay off.
It wasn't at you personally, it's just that everyone just finished bashing that exact thing when your post showed up. Bad timing really. :)
It wasn't at you personally, it's just that everyone just finished bashing that exact thing when your post showed up. Bad timing really. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment