Erasmus
Aug 27, 01:18 AM
Damn PowerPC fans.
Apple is INTEL now. We Love Intel Because Stevie Tells Us So.
We hate AMD and IBM. Should Apple ever move to another CPU provider, we will seamlessly transition to hating Intel again. This is the Way of the Mac.
What's so good about G5's anyway? They are slow, too hot, and skull juice.
Why do we love Intel? Because Steve says to, and Core 2 Duo is powerful, cool, not permanently drunk, allows us to run Windows and helps Apple increase its market share.
We love ATi because just like Intel, their products are the best at the moment. We still love nVIDIA because their GPUs are in the Mac Pro.
We love Israel because they make our Core 2 Duos and we love China because they make our Macs. We love California because that's where Our Lord Stevie J is (Don't particularly care about the rest of the US, sorry guys).
We love our Big Cats because they run so fast and look so clean and powerful (Hmmm... Mystery of OS codenames revealed?) and of course because they are not Windows, which are susceptible to breaking...
People who live in Windows shouldn't throw Viruses?
Off track...
Anyway, Rawr to all you PowerPC fanboys (And girls)
Intel 4EVER!
Apple is INTEL now. We Love Intel Because Stevie Tells Us So.
We hate AMD and IBM. Should Apple ever move to another CPU provider, we will seamlessly transition to hating Intel again. This is the Way of the Mac.
What's so good about G5's anyway? They are slow, too hot, and skull juice.
Why do we love Intel? Because Steve says to, and Core 2 Duo is powerful, cool, not permanently drunk, allows us to run Windows and helps Apple increase its market share.
We love ATi because just like Intel, their products are the best at the moment. We still love nVIDIA because their GPUs are in the Mac Pro.
We love Israel because they make our Core 2 Duos and we love China because they make our Macs. We love California because that's where Our Lord Stevie J is (Don't particularly care about the rest of the US, sorry guys).
We love our Big Cats because they run so fast and look so clean and powerful (Hmmm... Mystery of OS codenames revealed?) and of course because they are not Windows, which are susceptible to breaking...
People who live in Windows shouldn't throw Viruses?
Off track...
Anyway, Rawr to all you PowerPC fanboys (And girls)
Intel 4EVER!
W. Ademczyk
Aug 27, 09:41 PM
IMO, I believe the new enclosure will basically add easier access to swappable HDD's like the MB. It doesn't seem appropriate for a lower end model computer to have a feature the professional level model should have. That's why you pay the big $. I think the enclosure will remain the same, but we'll see an update that will allow users to change out their hard drives if they choose.
Exactly, allowing the user to swap out components is definately a direction that Apple is taking, which is something that helps them stay competitive in the pc world. The Macbook, as we all know, utilizes a design that makes it easy to swap out ram and HDDs; and the Mac Pro is configured with snazzy slide-out trays so that virtually every piece of hardware can be swapped out easily. This is a feature that the new MBP case design had better incorporate.
In regard to the Ipod incentive, if Intel shipped Merom to manufacturers at the end of July, will announce it's release to the public on the 28th, and Apple's own shipment of Merom toting computers comes in on the 5th, I have a hard time understanding why they would wait 2-3 weeks to put these computers in the hands of the public when Dell, HP, and Lenovo will be updating their websites the second that the announcement is made. As far as I can tell, there were two reasons Apple started giving away free Nanos to college kids. First, they needed to clean out the inventory for the next Ipod line; and second, the back to school rush is the best time to increase the market share since college students probably make up the highest percentage of win to mac switchers. Since Merom reportedly costs Apple the same amount as Yonah, and MBP sales have been a little lackluster, it would make next to no sense for Apple to drop the Ipod rebate. We have to remember that the only reason Macintels were released with Yonah in the first place is that Apple wasn't able to pressure Intel into giving them Merom early(thus explaining the drop from 64bit processing to 32bit and then back up again 7 months later). If Apple wouldn't have released the Intel line when it did, they would have been stuck with a stale product line and, missing out on the back to school rush, wouldn't be enjoying their doubled market share.
I think it's fair to conclude that the 16th was chosen as the date for the Nano rebate not because the Merom will appear after that time, but because most back to school shopping will be done by then. It is in Apple's best interest to try to catch the tail end of the college shopping season with the MBP.
Exactly, allowing the user to swap out components is definately a direction that Apple is taking, which is something that helps them stay competitive in the pc world. The Macbook, as we all know, utilizes a design that makes it easy to swap out ram and HDDs; and the Mac Pro is configured with snazzy slide-out trays so that virtually every piece of hardware can be swapped out easily. This is a feature that the new MBP case design had better incorporate.
In regard to the Ipod incentive, if Intel shipped Merom to manufacturers at the end of July, will announce it's release to the public on the 28th, and Apple's own shipment of Merom toting computers comes in on the 5th, I have a hard time understanding why they would wait 2-3 weeks to put these computers in the hands of the public when Dell, HP, and Lenovo will be updating their websites the second that the announcement is made. As far as I can tell, there were two reasons Apple started giving away free Nanos to college kids. First, they needed to clean out the inventory for the next Ipod line; and second, the back to school rush is the best time to increase the market share since college students probably make up the highest percentage of win to mac switchers. Since Merom reportedly costs Apple the same amount as Yonah, and MBP sales have been a little lackluster, it would make next to no sense for Apple to drop the Ipod rebate. We have to remember that the only reason Macintels were released with Yonah in the first place is that Apple wasn't able to pressure Intel into giving them Merom early(thus explaining the drop from 64bit processing to 32bit and then back up again 7 months later). If Apple wouldn't have released the Intel line when it did, they would have been stuck with a stale product line and, missing out on the back to school rush, wouldn't be enjoying their doubled market share.
I think it's fair to conclude that the 16th was chosen as the date for the Nano rebate not because the Merom will appear after that time, but because most back to school shopping will be done by then. It is in Apple's best interest to try to catch the tail end of the college shopping season with the MBP.
lgutie20
Mar 22, 02:04 PM
The trick with Apple is to innovate in aspects that no one else is considering. Example: "we need smart covers because protecting your tablet is a must and should be easy." Thus far this is an APPLE ONLY thing and it works like a charm.
There are other things they could do.
If Apple really wants to completely stand out (even with the crippled aspect that they don't support Flash) they really need to push for Thunderbolt on iOS devices.
It would sync data faster.
It would charge devices faster.
I know there is a lot of groundwork to be done first. All Apple computers should have the Thunderbolt I/O in order for the iOS devices to even consider Thunderbolt.
Time is not a luxury Apple has right now. They need to move faster than ever.
There are other things they could do.
If Apple really wants to completely stand out (even with the crippled aspect that they don't support Flash) they really need to push for Thunderbolt on iOS devices.
It would sync data faster.
It would charge devices faster.
I know there is a lot of groundwork to be done first. All Apple computers should have the Thunderbolt I/O in order for the iOS devices to even consider Thunderbolt.
Time is not a luxury Apple has right now. They need to move faster than ever.
dscuber9000
Apr 28, 04:24 PM
Did you ask to see W's birth certificate, or any other president's birth certificate? Why not?
Well he's obviously American! Just look at him! ;)
Well he's obviously American! Just look at him! ;)
Roessnakhan
Mar 22, 12:57 PM
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
The iPad isn't exactly a name to write home about either. Then, neither is TouchPad, Xoom, or Galaxy Tab.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
The iPad isn't exactly a name to write home about either. Then, neither is TouchPad, Xoom, or Galaxy Tab.
DStaal
Jul 20, 09:10 AM
Where you are going to see the difference is when you multi-task.
For Example: Burn a Blueray disk, render a FinalCut Pro movie, download your digital camera RAW files into Adobe Lightroom and run a batch, and watch your favorite movie from the iTunes Movie Store all without a single hiccup.
Bingo. Check how many processes are running on your computer right now, and you'll see why more cores can help. Writing a program to use multiple CPUs is complicated, yes, but OS X is already written to spread programs across multiple CPUs automatically.
It will take a while for people to come up with effective uses for that, but given the power we will find it.
For Example: Burn a Blueray disk, render a FinalCut Pro movie, download your digital camera RAW files into Adobe Lightroom and run a batch, and watch your favorite movie from the iTunes Movie Store all without a single hiccup.
Bingo. Check how many processes are running on your computer right now, and you'll see why more cores can help. Writing a program to use multiple CPUs is complicated, yes, but OS X is already written to spread programs across multiple CPUs automatically.
It will take a while for people to come up with effective uses for that, but given the power we will find it.
j_maddison
Jul 20, 08:47 AM
THIS is why IBM was given the boot.
I doubt it had anything to do with the desktop/ server market. They switched because they had no viable alternative for their laptop range.
Jay
I doubt it had anything to do with the desktop/ server market. They switched because they had no viable alternative for their laptop range.
Jay
SuperMatt
Mar 31, 02:26 PM
The biggest advantage always given for Android over iOS is that it's "open source." Well, clearly that's not the case anymore. So, I can't think of any other reason to use Android over iOS, or even Windows 7. It looks like junk, and it's just a cheap ripoff of iOS.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 19, 05:04 PM
One of the three basics that must be proven in order to win a trade dress case, is the likelihood of confusion.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
That is not the case. The user can know they are buying a product that is a rip off of another and it is still wrong.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
That is not the case. The user can know they are buying a product that is a rip off of another and it is still wrong.
afrowq
Apr 8, 11:03 PM
Coming from a full-time, multimedia/journalism/photography/etc professional I have to totally and completely
AGREE!
I've seen a huge decline in Apple's interest in the professional market, and I don't even mean high end pro, we're talking SMB and SOHO type stuff here. The last revision of FCP was just not worth it unless you were buying new or buying to ensure you didn't have any left over bugs.
Avid Media Composer and Premier have gained massive leads on FCP in terms of workflow and speed. Once the younger college students start seeing how fast they can delivery a product with Adobe or Avid, they'll start wondering why the small houses switched to FCP in the first place, and start wanting to learn what the industry is working with . . . Avid, After Effects, ProTools, etc. And the iMovie Pro will be left to indie filmmakers and consumers with deep pockets
** disclaimer ** I have nothing against the indie segment . . . I am in it and love it. But Apple makes it harder with every update to justify staying with a company that has too much on it's plate, and not enough staff to keep up with the rest of the market.
Apple will always claim that "no one's buying it" rather than, "we didn't make it marketable and desirable" when they go to axe some hardware or software title.
Careful, some trolls will insist that your opinion is only relevant to your narrow world view and that you need itemized spreadsheets to prove that you know what you're talking about.
AGREE!
I've seen a huge decline in Apple's interest in the professional market, and I don't even mean high end pro, we're talking SMB and SOHO type stuff here. The last revision of FCP was just not worth it unless you were buying new or buying to ensure you didn't have any left over bugs.
Avid Media Composer and Premier have gained massive leads on FCP in terms of workflow and speed. Once the younger college students start seeing how fast they can delivery a product with Adobe or Avid, they'll start wondering why the small houses switched to FCP in the first place, and start wanting to learn what the industry is working with . . . Avid, After Effects, ProTools, etc. And the iMovie Pro will be left to indie filmmakers and consumers with deep pockets
** disclaimer ** I have nothing against the indie segment . . . I am in it and love it. But Apple makes it harder with every update to justify staying with a company that has too much on it's plate, and not enough staff to keep up with the rest of the market.
Apple will always claim that "no one's buying it" rather than, "we didn't make it marketable and desirable" when they go to axe some hardware or software title.
Careful, some trolls will insist that your opinion is only relevant to your narrow world view and that you need itemized spreadsheets to prove that you know what you're talking about.
Zadillo
Aug 27, 03:59 PM
Finally people who grasp it
It's not that people didn't understand the joke. It's that the joke ceased being funny after the first couple of hundreds of times it was told.
-Zadillo
It's not that people didn't understand the joke. It's that the joke ceased being funny after the first couple of hundreds of times it was told.
-Zadillo
BVeritas
Mar 31, 07:39 PM
As an Apple fanboy, I'm disappointed to post this, but Android will continue to win despite the huge fragmentation problem.
Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.
When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.
Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.
BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.
When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.
Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.
BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
john123
Sep 19, 09:50 AM
but I want to engage with ppl here in a friendly and warm atmosphere.
The tone has not been warm to this point. Read the first few pages of the posts. There was a lot of Apple-blasting on pretty silly grounds. It's not like it's months and months later (a pattern we used to have with Apple all the time). It's a matter of a couple weeks -- MAX. Like I said, you and others can wait if you want. Heck, I have a MB and a MBP and am probably going to sell the MBP soon and wait for a revision myself. But the implication that many posts had, such as that the world was coming to an end, was pretty darn ridiculous.
The tone has not been warm to this point. Read the first few pages of the posts. There was a lot of Apple-blasting on pretty silly grounds. It's not like it's months and months later (a pattern we used to have with Apple all the time). It's a matter of a couple weeks -- MAX. Like I said, you and others can wait if you want. Heck, I have a MB and a MBP and am probably going to sell the MBP soon and wait for a revision myself. But the implication that many posts had, such as that the world was coming to an end, was pretty darn ridiculous.
MacinDoc
Jul 30, 06:23 PM
Vista ships early 2007 and way preceeds the Core 3 launch. :rolleyes:
That is, Bill Gates has stated that there is an 80% chance that Vista will ship in early which, when multiplied by the 80% probability that his estimate is something smelly that comes out of the backside of a bull (and only 20% chance that it is actually true), gives a 16% chance that Vista will REALLY ship in early 2007. ;)
That is, Bill Gates has stated that there is an 80% chance that Vista will ship in early which, when multiplied by the 80% probability that his estimate is something smelly that comes out of the backside of a bull (and only 20% chance that it is actually true), gives a 16% chance that Vista will REALLY ship in early 2007. ;)
DakotaGuy
Aug 11, 02:51 PM
In terms of the global mobile market, it is.
The network coverage in America is just awful too. Until I moved to England, I thought that mobile communications were generally problematic. Now I realize that American cellular service just sucks. Even in NYC.
See now that is something I never understood, how the cell service can be so poor in a place like NYC, yet I was making calls on my CDMA phone in the middle of Wyoming this summer. In fact, there are few places in very unpopulated midwest and west that you can't get a decent signal at least with a CDMA phone. People that come here with GSM are out of luck anywhere except metro areas.
The network coverage in America is just awful too. Until I moved to England, I thought that mobile communications were generally problematic. Now I realize that American cellular service just sucks. Even in NYC.
See now that is something I never understood, how the cell service can be so poor in a place like NYC, yet I was making calls on my CDMA phone in the middle of Wyoming this summer. In fact, there are few places in very unpopulated midwest and west that you can't get a decent signal at least with a CDMA phone. People that come here with GSM are out of luck anywhere except metro areas.
dethmaShine
Mar 26, 09:12 AM
I use my computer as a "real computer" and I like virtually every change I've seen. I wish people wouldn't generalize so broadly and presume that because certain additions aren't something that they use that it has nothing to do with "real work."
Hayley Williams Covers May
hayley williams cosmo cover.
littleman23408
Nov 30, 03:15 PM
Anyone have any tips to complete the top gear special challenge? I can't manage to get around all those bus'
BlizzardBomb
Sep 19, 01:23 AM
1.83 GHz and 2 GHz Core 2 Duos for the MacBook, 2.16 GHz and 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duos for the MacBook Pro. Simple. And an MR X1800 (XT?)/ Go 7800 (GTX?) for the MacBook Pro!
ThomasJL
Mar 26, 09:07 AM
I really want Lion, for the number one reason being TRIM support. I eagerly want to finally start using an SSD (specifically one from Crucial, since they make the fastest ones on the market), but have avoided doing so since the latest version Snow Leopard does not support TRIM.
It's a shame Apple is waiting so long to finally include TRIM support. Windows 7 already includes it.
I think I'll wait until 10.7.3 comes out before upgrading, though. If there are bugs in the TRIM implementation, I fear it may corrupt data.
It's a shame Apple is waiting so long to finally include TRIM support. Windows 7 already includes it.
I think I'll wait until 10.7.3 comes out before upgrading, though. If there are bugs in the TRIM implementation, I fear it may corrupt data.
Anonymous Freak
Jul 15, 02:22 PM
You mean like how the MacBook Pro was 2.0 GHz at the top end on release?
I have a feeling if 2.66 is the top-end 'stock' model, it will be upgradeable to 3.0 GHz as a user-configurable option, much the way the MacBook Pro was at 2.0 GHz upgradeable to 2.16 GHz.
With SPEC benchmarks showing The 3.0 GHz Woodcrest as the absolute fastest processor on the market for both floating point and integer (it has a 50% lead over the second-place integer chip!) it's a good bet Apple will offer it, at least as an option.
I'm actually truly excited about a processor launch. The last time was the G5 intro. (Before that, it was the original PowerPC introduction.)
I have a feeling if 2.66 is the top-end 'stock' model, it will be upgradeable to 3.0 GHz as a user-configurable option, much the way the MacBook Pro was at 2.0 GHz upgradeable to 2.16 GHz.
With SPEC benchmarks showing The 3.0 GHz Woodcrest as the absolute fastest processor on the market for both floating point and integer (it has a 50% lead over the second-place integer chip!) it's a good bet Apple will offer it, at least as an option.
I'm actually truly excited about a processor launch. The last time was the G5 intro. (Before that, it was the original PowerPC introduction.)
snebes
Apr 19, 04:33 PM
Why is it so hard for people to read English. Nowhere does it indicate those are numbers for the first quarter. In fact it is pretty clear it does not actually include the month of March..
Apples Q1 2011 ended around January this year. I don't have exact dates on hand, but their fiscal year starts in September.
Apples Q1 2011 ended around January this year. I don't have exact dates on hand, but their fiscal year starts in September.
dethmaShine
Apr 25, 01:37 PM
Wait.
1. Android stores the info as well.
2. Unlike Apple, Android sends it back to Google.
And Apple gets sued. :rolleyes:
1. Android stores the info as well.
2. Unlike Apple, Android sends it back to Google.
And Apple gets sued. :rolleyes:
aquanutz
Aug 16, 10:47 PM
all if have to say is: I want one (along with everyone else on this forum.) :D
No comments:
Post a Comment