paradox00
May 3, 04:14 PM
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
I'd agree with you that there may be consideration with unlimited data plans as you might be using your phone outside the scope of what they initially envisioned when they offered you unlimited data, but those are largely a thing of the past now.
With regards to tiered pricing, what you're suggesting is that you're not entitled to the data you paid for should you choose to use some of it for tethering. If you paid for 2 GB a month, you can damn well get 2 GB a month. 2 GB a month was the consideration they offered you. It's none of your concern if the carrier sold it to you with the assumption that you'd only use 500 MB a month. They can't charge you more because your tethering makes you more likely to approach the 2 GB cap they offered you. You aren't legally obligated to pay twice for that same 2 GB of consideration if you want to use a tethering app.
Any concerns carriers have with bandwidth use can be addressed through their data plans, which they have full control of. They are not within their rights to start dictating what apps can or can't access data on your phone. Even if tethering apps generate a lot of data use, charging specifically for tethering is just a stopgap for a larger problem with their data plan pricing structure. Tethering apps are just one type of many high bandwidth apps. Are they going to start charging for all of them? Do you think that's reasonable?
Today your wireless ISP charges extra for tethering, tomorrow it will charge extra to access Netflix, and perhaps later on, your local ISP will want in on the action and start charge per device connected to your router. This segmented path of internet service is not a path I want to go down. The moment data becomes more than just data, and becomes data by application or use, is the day that consumers lose.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
I'd agree with you that there may be consideration with unlimited data plans as you might be using your phone outside the scope of what they initially envisioned when they offered you unlimited data, but those are largely a thing of the past now.
With regards to tiered pricing, what you're suggesting is that you're not entitled to the data you paid for should you choose to use some of it for tethering. If you paid for 2 GB a month, you can damn well get 2 GB a month. 2 GB a month was the consideration they offered you. It's none of your concern if the carrier sold it to you with the assumption that you'd only use 500 MB a month. They can't charge you more because your tethering makes you more likely to approach the 2 GB cap they offered you. You aren't legally obligated to pay twice for that same 2 GB of consideration if you want to use a tethering app.
Any concerns carriers have with bandwidth use can be addressed through their data plans, which they have full control of. They are not within their rights to start dictating what apps can or can't access data on your phone. Even if tethering apps generate a lot of data use, charging specifically for tethering is just a stopgap for a larger problem with their data plan pricing structure. Tethering apps are just one type of many high bandwidth apps. Are they going to start charging for all of them? Do you think that's reasonable?
Today your wireless ISP charges extra for tethering, tomorrow it will charge extra to access Netflix, and perhaps later on, your local ISP will want in on the action and start charge per device connected to your router. This segmented path of internet service is not a path I want to go down. The moment data becomes more than just data, and becomes data by application or use, is the day that consumers lose.
iOrlando
Apr 25, 10:26 AM
I think this is a great feature, and long overdue. It is very difficult to actually read through these comment threads once they hit 100 posts or so.
Few things:
1) I suggest have absolute tallies for the up and down votes. If one post got 300 votes on it, but the up votes offset the down votes, it would end up showing as 0 vs. a relatively obscure post that simply gets 4 up ratings would show up as 4. I want to see the comments that garnered a lot of attention/votes.
2) I also suggest coloring up arrows as green and down arrows as red. Much easier on the eye.
3) For those arguing about abuse with this feature, this site is geared for pro-Apple people, so any sense of impartiality or neutrality within the comments is non-existence. If people come to this site wanting pro-Apple stuff, they shouldn't be faced with trolls and other Apple haters.
Few things:
1) I suggest have absolute tallies for the up and down votes. If one post got 300 votes on it, but the up votes offset the down votes, it would end up showing as 0 vs. a relatively obscure post that simply gets 4 up ratings would show up as 4. I want to see the comments that garnered a lot of attention/votes.
2) I also suggest coloring up arrows as green and down arrows as red. Much easier on the eye.
3) For those arguing about abuse with this feature, this site is geared for pro-Apple people, so any sense of impartiality or neutrality within the comments is non-existence. If people come to this site wanting pro-Apple stuff, they shouldn't be faced with trolls and other Apple haters.
nagromme
Aug 7, 03:57 PM
There were updates. (http://guides.macrumors.com/Apple_Cinema_Displays) Better brightness and contrast ratio on the 20" and 23".
Someone said those brightness updates happened weeks ago. True?
Nice either way!
I too am holding out for a true next generation... maybe with new larger sizes, iSight, or new connectivity. But if I needed a display now, it's not as easy to choose a Dell anymore :)
Someone said those brightness updates happened weeks ago. True?
Nice either way!
I too am holding out for a true next generation... maybe with new larger sizes, iSight, or new connectivity. But if I needed a display now, it's not as easy to choose a Dell anymore :)
CaoCao
Apr 15, 07:27 PM
From the article ...
After passage in the Democratic-controlled Assembly and singing by Gov. Jerry Brown, both of which seem likely, California would become the first state to make curricula include notable gay Americans along with the contributions of women and various ethnic groups.
Shaun Travers, a San Diego activist, told San Diego 6: "It's very important that we represent all of California and that includes the LGBT community. Our people and our history."
But opponents said the move would add non-essential material to already-short instruction time.
Hmmm ... they don't seem to share that same concern when it comes to teaching Creationism in science class. :rolleyes:
Honestly, there isn't enough time, we are rushing through WWII to know it before the CST. I also don't remember people pushing creationism in California
After passage in the Democratic-controlled Assembly and singing by Gov. Jerry Brown, both of which seem likely, California would become the first state to make curricula include notable gay Americans along with the contributions of women and various ethnic groups.
Shaun Travers, a San Diego activist, told San Diego 6: "It's very important that we represent all of California and that includes the LGBT community. Our people and our history."
But opponents said the move would add non-essential material to already-short instruction time.
Hmmm ... they don't seem to share that same concern when it comes to teaching Creationism in science class. :rolleyes:
Honestly, there isn't enough time, we are rushing through WWII to know it before the CST. I also don't remember people pushing creationism in California
donbluto
Aug 2, 05:41 AM
I don't feel threatened or harmed, this is not a crusade for me. I would much rather have the consumer council go after Microsoft, don't get me wrong. The point is that the ongoing case against Apple is viewed as a benchmark test for this law, and if the consumer council wins it is expected that they will grab several other international companies by the nuts. Go figure.
Where I think you go wrong is the effects (or lack thereof) you think this will have on iTMS worldwide. There is in fact a potential domino effect here, even though we hardly even count in the big picture. And we don't, I realize that. But what if countries that count a wee bit more than we do follow up on this if Apple lose?
Where I think you go wrong is the effects (or lack thereof) you think this will have on iTMS worldwide. There is in fact a potential domino effect here, even though we hardly even count in the big picture. And we don't, I realize that. But what if countries that count a wee bit more than we do follow up on this if Apple lose?
rtdgoldfish
Apr 3, 09:40 PM
The pawn records and the name on the lease should have pointed them onward, since he is likely to keep pawning crap at his new place.
But your stuff is probably his toy until he gets tired of it, or has already been sold.
Or the son of the lady who is there did it, and had already sold the box to a friend.
Especially odd if she admits to have lived there since January 1st.
Two scumbags in a row at the same house isn't too far out of the question if the homeowner rents to the same pool of people.
It kinda sucks because I thought I knew most of the people in the neighborhood. The few houses that I don't know are the "sumbags".
And I am guessing that someone new has my 360, it has been online way more frequently than before however they still haven't played a game.
But your stuff is probably his toy until he gets tired of it, or has already been sold.
Or the son of the lady who is there did it, and had already sold the box to a friend.
Especially odd if she admits to have lived there since January 1st.
Two scumbags in a row at the same house isn't too far out of the question if the homeowner rents to the same pool of people.
It kinda sucks because I thought I knew most of the people in the neighborhood. The few houses that I don't know are the "sumbags".
And I am guessing that someone new has my 360, it has been online way more frequently than before however they still haven't played a game.
nwcs
May 2, 11:24 AM
Did you read my post?
My point is - that if the switch to turn off Data Roaming was the one that failed, people wouldn't be divided. I think pretty much everyone would point the finger at Apple for it's failure to QA the "off switch"
The Location Services on/off switch did not work. Period. And yet people want to make this about people not reading the EULA.
Maybe you missed when I wrote "IF" in that sentence?
ETA: you changed your post. The point is the same. Read above. The OS had "bugs". They are being fixed. That's important. Apple "promised" via the EULA that the location services could be turned off. It doesn't matter whether the data collected is useful or not. What matters is if they offer a way to turn it off, it should turn off. It didn't.
The analogy is correct. Some might consider their personal data of value - just like money is.
I changed my post because when I read it again I realized I misunderstood what you were saying. I thought I had edited it before anyone read it. My apologies for that. Still, I stand by my edit. I don't think the two situations are comparable.
My point is - that if the switch to turn off Data Roaming was the one that failed, people wouldn't be divided. I think pretty much everyone would point the finger at Apple for it's failure to QA the "off switch"
The Location Services on/off switch did not work. Period. And yet people want to make this about people not reading the EULA.
Maybe you missed when I wrote "IF" in that sentence?
ETA: you changed your post. The point is the same. Read above. The OS had "bugs". They are being fixed. That's important. Apple "promised" via the EULA that the location services could be turned off. It doesn't matter whether the data collected is useful or not. What matters is if they offer a way to turn it off, it should turn off. It didn't.
The analogy is correct. Some might consider their personal data of value - just like money is.
I changed my post because when I read it again I realized I misunderstood what you were saying. I thought I had edited it before anyone read it. My apologies for that. Still, I stand by my edit. I don't think the two situations are comparable.
paradox00
May 3, 04:14 PM
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
I'd agree with you that there may be consideration with unlimited data plans as you might be using your phone outside the scope of what they initially envisioned when they offered you unlimited data, but those are largely a thing of the past now.
With regards to tiered pricing, what you're suggesting is that you're not entitled to the data you paid for should you choose to use some of it for tethering. If you paid for 2 GB a month, you can damn well get 2 GB a month. 2 GB a month was the consideration they offered you. It's none of your concern if the carrier sold it to you with the assumption that you'd only use 500 MB a month. They can't charge you more because your tethering makes you more likely to approach the 2 GB cap they offered you. You aren't legally obligated to pay twice for that same 2 GB of consideration if you want to use a tethering app.
Any concerns carriers have with bandwidth use can be addressed through their data plans, which they have full control of. They are not within their rights to start dictating what apps can or can't access data on your phone. Even if tethering apps generate a lot of data use, charging specifically for tethering is just a stopgap for a larger problem with their data plan pricing structure. Tethering apps are just one type of many high bandwidth apps. Are they going to start charging for all of them? Do you think that's reasonable?
Today your wireless ISP charges extra for tethering, tomorrow it will charge extra to access Netflix, and perhaps later on, your local ISP will want in on the action and start charge per device connected to your router. This segmented path of internet service is not a path I want to go down. The moment data becomes more than just data, and becomes data by application or use, is the day that consumers lose.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
I'd agree with you that there may be consideration with unlimited data plans as you might be using your phone outside the scope of what they initially envisioned when they offered you unlimited data, but those are largely a thing of the past now.
With regards to tiered pricing, what you're suggesting is that you're not entitled to the data you paid for should you choose to use some of it for tethering. If you paid for 2 GB a month, you can damn well get 2 GB a month. 2 GB a month was the consideration they offered you. It's none of your concern if the carrier sold it to you with the assumption that you'd only use 500 MB a month. They can't charge you more because your tethering makes you more likely to approach the 2 GB cap they offered you. You aren't legally obligated to pay twice for that same 2 GB of consideration if you want to use a tethering app.
Any concerns carriers have with bandwidth use can be addressed through their data plans, which they have full control of. They are not within their rights to start dictating what apps can or can't access data on your phone. Even if tethering apps generate a lot of data use, charging specifically for tethering is just a stopgap for a larger problem with their data plan pricing structure. Tethering apps are just one type of many high bandwidth apps. Are they going to start charging for all of them? Do you think that's reasonable?
Today your wireless ISP charges extra for tethering, tomorrow it will charge extra to access Netflix, and perhaps later on, your local ISP will want in on the action and start charge per device connected to your router. This segmented path of internet service is not a path I want to go down. The moment data becomes more than just data, and becomes data by application or use, is the day that consumers lose.
onicon
Jan 10, 06:39 PM
like emikshe quoted, woz and steve as well were screwing around a lot in their young days. they even made money from selling devices to phone for free. where are the voices crying for boycott of apple because the founding fathers were evil hackers, keeping poor at&t from making their living?
if you want to prevent people from screwing with you presentations on tvs, just disable the ir port (via the rs232 console/diagnostic software or by slapping a sticker over the ir port). securing you devices takes at most 2min per device. so let the companies learn from this and don't bash gizmodo like mad.
who would have complained if it was microsofts demo pcs that got hacked because of some security vounerability?
if you want to prevent people from screwing with you presentations on tvs, just disable the ir port (via the rs232 console/diagnostic software or by slapping a sticker over the ir port). securing you devices takes at most 2min per device. so let the companies learn from this and don't bash gizmodo like mad.
who would have complained if it was microsofts demo pcs that got hacked because of some security vounerability?
mdntcallr
Oct 3, 02:26 PM
lets hope for a great keynote:
1- new Mac without display, performance would be better than imac, and not as much $$ as mac pro. basically a mid sized tower good enough for mid level use on graphics, games and much more. something upgradable by the end user.
2- media center to complement the Itv
3- new OS X 10.5 (this is a big deal)
4- adobe news of release
5- new HDTV initiative macs with Blu-Ray available as option. to work with current HD video editing software.
Would like before then:
1- would love a new Macbook Pro. with blu-ray drive, better hard drive( upto 160 gb or maybe 200 gb by then) with core 2 duo.
2- also, love by then the new quad CPU mac pro. maybe only on highest end model.
3- apple to have discovered a way for less expensive ram to be used in the Mac Pro. it's DAMN expensive compared to the rest of whats out there
1- new Mac without display, performance would be better than imac, and not as much $$ as mac pro. basically a mid sized tower good enough for mid level use on graphics, games and much more. something upgradable by the end user.
2- media center to complement the Itv
3- new OS X 10.5 (this is a big deal)
4- adobe news of release
5- new HDTV initiative macs with Blu-Ray available as option. to work with current HD video editing software.
Would like before then:
1- would love a new Macbook Pro. with blu-ray drive, better hard drive( upto 160 gb or maybe 200 gb by then) with core 2 duo.
2- also, love by then the new quad CPU mac pro. maybe only on highest end model.
3- apple to have discovered a way for less expensive ram to be used in the Mac Pro. it's DAMN expensive compared to the rest of whats out there
LastLine
Apr 26, 01:39 AM
I think my problem for this screen isn't that I can't see such a screen size being used on the iphone, I just can't see it happening now.
I think my main reasoning behind this comes as a developer - a new screen would likely require a different resolution ratio (a change from the 320x480/640x960 we work with now) and to be truthful given the fragmentation issues Apple's always so keen to point out in the Android market...well lets say unless the new resolution also coincides somehow with iPad changes down the way I can't imagine it happening.
I think my main reasoning behind this comes as a developer - a new screen would likely require a different resolution ratio (a change from the 320x480/640x960 we work with now) and to be truthful given the fragmentation issues Apple's always so keen to point out in the Android market...well lets say unless the new resolution also coincides somehow with iPad changes down the way I can't imagine it happening.
relativist
Apr 9, 05:25 PM
I checked next weeks circular on slickdeals.net and no mention of iPad2. I'm starting to think it would be better to buy it anywhere else. From what I remember it took about 2-3 months at most after the iPad 1 was announced that it became readily available.
iVeBeenDrinkin'
Apr 7, 01:15 AM
About damn time too...
http://i54.tinypic.com/5n30z.jpg
Looking forward to shooting with this new gear...
Nice kit
http://i54.tinypic.com/5n30z.jpg
Looking forward to shooting with this new gear...
Nice kit
quigleybc
Oct 3, 03:36 PM
That unit will be the center of a human's universe, Steve's dream of his lifetime. Phone/broadband, iPod, PDA, remote, OSX lite, everything except wiping your butt.
Ok then I don't want it, no butt wipe no buy buy. :p
Ok then I don't want it, no butt wipe no buy buy. :p
slackpacker
Apr 29, 04:06 PM
This is good the slider metaphor was very annoying and slow to use.
Nermal
Oct 3, 01:47 PM
The problem is that I don't see how it can be iTunes compatible without Apple's involvement. (See above post on Real Harmony). iTunes will only query ITMS for validating a DRMed file, not DoubleTwist or Amazon. Without iTunes things get a lot less compelling.
I guess it depends how much of FairPlay they end up replicating. If they replicate the server too, then it'll probably be simple to tell iTunes to look at the third-party server (just capture the data going to Apple's IP address and send it off to DoubleTwist).
I guess it depends how much of FairPlay they end up replicating. If they replicate the server too, then it'll probably be simple to tell iTunes to look at the third-party server (just capture the data going to Apple's IP address and send it off to DoubleTwist).
Mac.World
Apr 17, 03:16 AM
And please explain, with evidence, how people learning about the struggles of gay people throughout history psychologically damages anyone. Your assertions get more ridiculous with every post.
More to the point, where do you draw the line? Should every school curiculum include the struggles of Jews, Blacks, Native Americans, Chinese, Muslims, Hispanics, Christians, Women, etc... gonna be kinda tough to fit all that in. Or does your plan draw the line somewhere? I mean are gay people more important than Native Americans? In terms of history, whom do you believe got screwed over more and whose struggles should be taught in school?
If you were to walk onto the street and ask 100 people which group of people were persecuted the most out of blacks, Native Americans, Jews, women or gays, I'm pretty sure the majority of people would place gays last, out of those groups. Now a liberal state like New York, Hawaii or California may add gay history to their school programs, but don't expect to see it in the majority of the US States. It's simply not important to single out a persons sexuality to highlight their importance in history. Was Oppenheimer's religion put before his contributions to the bomb? I mean is there a little star next to his name with an annotation listing his religion?
Maybe its just me. But I simply don't care if someone was black, blue, brown, Jewish, the Egyptian god Ra, whatever... its the persons contributions, not their ethnicity, sexual pref or religious affiliation that define(d) them. Treat people equally, not with preference.
More to the point, where do you draw the line? Should every school curiculum include the struggles of Jews, Blacks, Native Americans, Chinese, Muslims, Hispanics, Christians, Women, etc... gonna be kinda tough to fit all that in. Or does your plan draw the line somewhere? I mean are gay people more important than Native Americans? In terms of history, whom do you believe got screwed over more and whose struggles should be taught in school?
If you were to walk onto the street and ask 100 people which group of people were persecuted the most out of blacks, Native Americans, Jews, women or gays, I'm pretty sure the majority of people would place gays last, out of those groups. Now a liberal state like New York, Hawaii or California may add gay history to their school programs, but don't expect to see it in the majority of the US States. It's simply not important to single out a persons sexuality to highlight their importance in history. Was Oppenheimer's religion put before his contributions to the bomb? I mean is there a little star next to his name with an annotation listing his religion?
Maybe its just me. But I simply don't care if someone was black, blue, brown, Jewish, the Egyptian god Ra, whatever... its the persons contributions, not their ethnicity, sexual pref or religious affiliation that define(d) them. Treat people equally, not with preference.
.jpg "Kate+moss+johnny+depp+")
roadbloc
Apr 17, 05:11 AM
How does Gnome 3.0 on Linux compare to the new UI in OSX Lion?
I've been playing around with Gnome 3.0, and it seems like the designers have a similar philosophy about desktop navigation.
Gnome 3.0 Preview (This is not my video):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joBXc3IGRBw
I'm sorry, but that is very Mac OS X-esske.
I've been playing around with Gnome 3.0, and it seems like the designers have a similar philosophy about desktop navigation.
Gnome 3.0 Preview (This is not my video):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joBXc3IGRBw
I'm sorry, but that is very Mac OS X-esske.
Mac-Addict
Oct 11, 10:15 AM
Well, the difference there is that Microsoft used Engadget and others as part of their marketing campaign - "leaking" product information and photos to them to try and drum up interest. They did the same thing before with their "leaks" of Origami to try and build up hype. Of course, Zune seems to have gained more traction than UMPC (perhaps because the Zune is basically using a model that has been proven successful by the iPod).
Apple on the other hand just doesn't seem to leak product information ahead of time any more, and they also don't seem to need to do that kind of thing to generate hype and excitement for their products.
-Zadillo
But apple doesn't need to drum up any excitement for the products, leaking just makes people think.. wow.. thats really nice (10 seconds later) yeah seen it, boring! So apple doesnt leak much makes everyone think hmm i wonder what apple has in store for us next.. could it be a ipod the size of my house or whatever. The way apple deal with there products is the way they create these communities.
Apple on the other hand just doesn't seem to leak product information ahead of time any more, and they also don't seem to need to do that kind of thing to generate hype and excitement for their products.
-Zadillo
But apple doesn't need to drum up any excitement for the products, leaking just makes people think.. wow.. thats really nice (10 seconds later) yeah seen it, boring! So apple doesnt leak much makes everyone think hmm i wonder what apple has in store for us next.. could it be a ipod the size of my house or whatever. The way apple deal with there products is the way they create these communities.
theBB
Jan 14, 08:48 PM
Now, Gizmodo just posted another editorial. They are not just refusing to apologize, they are actually proud. Supposedly this is a an act of civil disobedience, a sign of their independence. Not only are they being immature jerks, but exhibit this self righteous attitude. It is just a prank, (actually it is not even a creative one) so it is not that big of a deal, but their new editorial makes them seem even more immature. I wonder if somebody is going to play pranks on them to show some independence of his own.
lena
Nov 24, 03:35 PM
For those of us ordering online, if you go through fatwallet.com, you can get a 2% cash rebate - every penny counts!
GooMan
Mar 28, 03:22 PM
Welcome to 1984.
Let me preface this by saying my household has alot of Apple products. I'm not an Apple hater.
Let me preface this by saying my household has alot of Apple products. I'm not an Apple hater.
Adamo
Oct 4, 08:06 AM
I imagine they should be banned from MacWorld, but I also think it's the funniest thing I've seen today and absolutely hilarious. :)
BC2009
Apr 25, 11:53 AM
I prefer the look of this to the mockup that Josh Topolsky did on thisismynext.com -- probably because I like the look of the iPhone 4. I am ready for this device to ship since I gave my iPhone 3gs a nasty drop on concrete garage floor about a month ago -- the screen is fine, but the GPS no longer works. It's gonna be hard waiting until September.
Still, I doubt the validity of the photos until some information is provided as to how these were obtained.
I am a bit bummed at recent reports that QualComm's 4G/GSM/EVDO-RevA combo chip won't be ready until 2012 -- I was kinda hoping for LTE in the next iPhone -- and there is no way Apple will do an iPhone that would run through its battery in 3.5 hours (not that I would want such a device anyway).
Still, I doubt the validity of the photos until some information is provided as to how these were obtained.
I am a bit bummed at recent reports that QualComm's 4G/GSM/EVDO-RevA combo chip won't be ready until 2012 -- I was kinda hoping for LTE in the next iPhone -- and there is no way Apple will do an iPhone that would run through its battery in 3.5 hours (not that I would want such a device anyway).
No comments:
Post a Comment