GLS
Mar 22, 04:22 PM
You know, on second thought....there never will be an iPad "killer".
Show me a single tablet, from any manufacturer...that will out-sell the iPad.
You can't.
Which of the announced competitors will sell over 15 million in a year? To be the iPad killer...something will have to sell at least 15 million...and that was before iPad2 was released.
Even if you take into account something that has not been announced yet...you can't find an iPad killer. There are too many competitors to the throne...how can the public differentiate between the competitors, some of which are the same thing hardware and software wise....and pick one that will be the "killer".
There has not been an iPhone killer released ever....there has not been an iPod killer released ever...and there will not be an iPad killer released...ever.
And yes, the Android fanboi cult will chime in and tout the latest and greatest...which will be superseded in two weeks by something else from HTC or Motorola or whoever...if any of these are the killer..why are their sales so much lower than a comparative iDevice?
And don't toss me total number of Android sales or activations....show me a single model from any manufacturer that has sold greater than any comparable Apple portable device (iPad, iPhone, iPod)....there isn't one.
(awaiting the "sales don't matter" comments...and "specs are where its at" dribble.....)
Show me a single tablet, from any manufacturer...that will out-sell the iPad.
You can't.
Which of the announced competitors will sell over 15 million in a year? To be the iPad killer...something will have to sell at least 15 million...and that was before iPad2 was released.
Even if you take into account something that has not been announced yet...you can't find an iPad killer. There are too many competitors to the throne...how can the public differentiate between the competitors, some of which are the same thing hardware and software wise....and pick one that will be the "killer".
There has not been an iPhone killer released ever....there has not been an iPod killer released ever...and there will not be an iPad killer released...ever.
And yes, the Android fanboi cult will chime in and tout the latest and greatest...which will be superseded in two weeks by something else from HTC or Motorola or whoever...if any of these are the killer..why are their sales so much lower than a comparative iDevice?
And don't toss me total number of Android sales or activations....show me a single model from any manufacturer that has sold greater than any comparable Apple portable device (iPad, iPhone, iPod)....there isn't one.
(awaiting the "sales don't matter" comments...and "specs are where its at" dribble.....)
MacAddict1978
Mar 26, 02:18 PM
It must be conspiracy right. Right.
It couldn't just be an honest mistake as a result of a stretched development team.
No. It must be the same guys who shot Kennedy messing up all our tech. It's probably something to do with the Chinese.
With all the cash Apple sit's their butts on, there is NO EXCUSE for their development teams, or any team to be stretched thin. Back in the day when Apple was still the little engine that could and trying to avoid that second foot falling in the grave, ok. Yes, they needed to stretch themselves, innovate with little expense, but not today.
Some will argue Apple is slow with development because they want to get it right. Though history in the past 5 years shows us consistency with hardware issues in just about every thing they have released, and software bugs to match on the other end. We've seen delays in OS releases the past few times, and still buggy when they do come out. Leopard was released with an installer that failed and forced tons of people mass headaches, even the tech savvy. The bloody installer was buggy! I expect the darn thing to at least install before glitches tick me off.
Hire some damned people already. The money you spend denying things are buggy or denying the existence of hardware issues (that magically a month or 2 later you fix even though you denied it was a problem in the first place) could easily expand your teams.
And while I don't subscribe to the original posters conspiracy theory, I think he's half right. THey just don't care. iPhone 3G users anyway? They bricked everyone's phones with a bad update, and then acted like everyone was crazy, then admitted it was slow (no, unusable) gave a shoddy fix that made it usable but so bad you had to either hack your phone to put an old version of IOS on it, or you were running to upgrade. Wait, maybe I do buy into his theory. It's one thing to not support old technologies, it's another to leave them crippled and not look back.
It couldn't just be an honest mistake as a result of a stretched development team.
No. It must be the same guys who shot Kennedy messing up all our tech. It's probably something to do with the Chinese.
With all the cash Apple sit's their butts on, there is NO EXCUSE for their development teams, or any team to be stretched thin. Back in the day when Apple was still the little engine that could and trying to avoid that second foot falling in the grave, ok. Yes, they needed to stretch themselves, innovate with little expense, but not today.
Some will argue Apple is slow with development because they want to get it right. Though history in the past 5 years shows us consistency with hardware issues in just about every thing they have released, and software bugs to match on the other end. We've seen delays in OS releases the past few times, and still buggy when they do come out. Leopard was released with an installer that failed and forced tons of people mass headaches, even the tech savvy. The bloody installer was buggy! I expect the darn thing to at least install before glitches tick me off.
Hire some damned people already. The money you spend denying things are buggy or denying the existence of hardware issues (that magically a month or 2 later you fix even though you denied it was a problem in the first place) could easily expand your teams.
And while I don't subscribe to the original posters conspiracy theory, I think he's half right. THey just don't care. iPhone 3G users anyway? They bricked everyone's phones with a bad update, and then acted like everyone was crazy, then admitted it was slow (no, unusable) gave a shoddy fix that made it usable but so bad you had to either hack your phone to put an old version of IOS on it, or you were running to upgrade. Wait, maybe I do buy into his theory. It's one thing to not support old technologies, it's another to leave them crippled and not look back.
braddouglass
Apr 6, 01:07 PM
Awesome, can't wait.
Picking up the 11" soon as they are out.
RICH B!tch! hahaha
I'm referring to his iMac and MBP and Iphone and Ipad and soon to be MBA
Picking up the 11" soon as they are out.
RICH B!tch! hahaha
I'm referring to his iMac and MBP and Iphone and Ipad and soon to be MBA
0815
Apr 6, 04:19 PM
Isn't it amazing that so many of these XOOM owners also, coincidentally, "own" an iPad/iPad 2, or their spouse/mom/dog/significant other does?
Either there's a lot of exaggerating (astroturfing) going on, or someone's spouse/mom/dog/significant other has a lot more sense. ;)
Why, I own an iPad and a XOOM and a Galaxy Tab and that HP Windows 7 Slate thingy and a Nook and a prototype PlayBook and I can tell you from personal experience that the iPad is like 100x better than all of those! :rolleyes:
A friend of mine has actually three of each you mentioned in every available configuration (for himself, his wife and his son) - and all of them think the iPads are the best ones ... and he is the only one you should listen to since he truly was able to compare them with different 'user types'.
Either there's a lot of exaggerating (astroturfing) going on, or someone's spouse/mom/dog/significant other has a lot more sense. ;)
Why, I own an iPad and a XOOM and a Galaxy Tab and that HP Windows 7 Slate thingy and a Nook and a prototype PlayBook and I can tell you from personal experience that the iPad is like 100x better than all of those! :rolleyes:
A friend of mine has actually three of each you mentioned in every available configuration (for himself, his wife and his son) - and all of them think the iPads are the best ones ... and he is the only one you should listen to since he truly was able to compare them with different 'user types'.
macaddiict
Apr 25, 01:37 PM
I haven't read this lawsuit, so I don't know if they're claiming things that aren't true... but I really do not like the fact that the iPhone has a breadcrumbs database of my travels for the last 3 years!
This type of thing should not happen without users' knowledge... and it was. Or else this file would not be news!
This type of thing should not happen without users' knowledge... and it was. Or else this file would not be news!
epitaphic
Aug 21, 01:21 PM
Owners of quad G5s have been up in arms about this, as it is being suggested this is a deliberate crippling to avoid admitting that the quad G5 is potentially faster for musicians
I think the deal is that when the G5 Quad came out, there was nothing to compare it to. Sure it was going to be faster than a dual but no app to this day can fully utilize it. With the release of the Mac Pro, all of a sudden there is another quad for comparison. With apple's traditional "we moved to a new machine and we'll go through hell to show you how it's much faster than what you've got" they're having to optimize the code to show it. Now why would you go and optimize the code for the old machine? All it'll do is show that the new one isn't that much faster for that particular app.
You know how there's politics in everything? There's also marketing in everything :)
I think the deal is that when the G5 Quad came out, there was nothing to compare it to. Sure it was going to be faster than a dual but no app to this day can fully utilize it. With the release of the Mac Pro, all of a sudden there is another quad for comparison. With apple's traditional "we moved to a new machine and we'll go through hell to show you how it's much faster than what you've got" they're having to optimize the code to show it. Now why would you go and optimize the code for the old machine? All it'll do is show that the new one isn't that much faster for that particular app.
You know how there's politics in everything? There's also marketing in everything :)
bigmc6000
Jul 27, 09:59 AM
"...Core 2 Duo chips need less electricity, drawing just 65 watts compared to the Pentium 4’s 95 watts and Pentium D’s 130 watts"
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
And about the WWDC, I think it is possible for Merom laptops, Core 2 iMacs, Leopard Preview, Mac Pro's and possibly Movie service. However, I think the movie thing could be replaced by a larger capacity nano but that's about it. Only 1, at most, iTunes/iPod announcement with all the Mac stuff that should be addressed.
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
And about the WWDC, I think it is possible for Merom laptops, Core 2 iMacs, Leopard Preview, Mac Pro's and possibly Movie service. However, I think the movie thing could be replaced by a larger capacity nano but that's about it. Only 1, at most, iTunes/iPod announcement with all the Mac stuff that should be addressed.
Gasu E.
Jul 14, 02:43 PM
Did you see my above post? Great minds think a like... ;)
Logically speaking, weak minds would also think "a like".
Logically speaking, weak minds would also think "a like".
RedTomato
Sep 13, 10:11 AM
Personally, I still see data transfer, namely from storage media, as a huge bottleneck in performance. Unless you are doing something really CPU intensive (vid editing, rendering, others) Most of the average "wait-time" is the damn hard drive.
Arrays of cheap RAM on a PCIe card?
The RAM companies don't seem interested in making wodges of slow cheap hi-cap ram, only in bumping up the speed and upping the capacity. For the last 10 years, a stick of decent RAM has always been about �100/ $100 no matter what the capacity / flavour of the moment is.
Even slow RAM is still orders of magnitude faster than a HD, hence my point. There's various historical and technical factors as to why we have the current situation.
I've also looked at RAID implementations (I run a RAID5) but each RAID level has its own problems.
I've recently seen that single-user RAID3 might be one way forward for the desktop, but don't really know enough about it yet.
Arrays of cheap RAM on a PCIe card?
The RAM companies don't seem interested in making wodges of slow cheap hi-cap ram, only in bumping up the speed and upping the capacity. For the last 10 years, a stick of decent RAM has always been about �100/ $100 no matter what the capacity / flavour of the moment is.
Even slow RAM is still orders of magnitude faster than a HD, hence my point. There's various historical and technical factors as to why we have the current situation.
I've also looked at RAID implementations (I run a RAID5) but each RAID level has its own problems.
I've recently seen that single-user RAID3 might be one way forward for the desktop, but don't really know enough about it yet.
MattInOz
Apr 6, 11:30 PM
Although the only thing that will ultimately matter is what Apple releases on Tuesday, if you want to get an inkling as to why FCP development has been at loggerheads since do yourself a favour and read a couple articles from Philip Hodgett's blog on FCP, QTkit, Cocoa, and it's unfortunate collision with OSX's 64 bit platform development.
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/category/technology/apple-pro-apps/
Which has been in development longer FCP overhaul or iPhone?
AV foundation was overkill for iOS from the outset so that would suggest is was always intended for FCP.
His articles have a funny assumption that the OS team has the most secrecy.
Surely the more valuable projects Like FCP have greater access to information and the greater control over when the broader company gets to see their work. Sure they would have been trumped to iPhone team who would seem to have free reign. The CoreOS team would seem like they are the most open their job is to turn the private API's developed by the product teams into to a public developer platform. A lot of their work is even open source.
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/category/technology/apple-pro-apps/
Which has been in development longer FCP overhaul or iPhone?
AV foundation was overkill for iOS from the outset so that would suggest is was always intended for FCP.
His articles have a funny assumption that the OS team has the most secrecy.
Surely the more valuable projects Like FCP have greater access to information and the greater control over when the broader company gets to see their work. Sure they would have been trumped to iPhone team who would seem to have free reign. The CoreOS team would seem like they are the most open their job is to turn the private API's developed by the product teams into to a public developer platform. A lot of their work is even open source.
DaveTheGrey
Jul 20, 01:52 PM
with 8 cores, the aps will show up two secs BEFORE you'll have clicked on the icon. :D
mlmathews
Apr 11, 11:25 AM
My 3Gs contract ends in June and Apple will be pushing it's luck for me to go half a year without me being tempted to jump platforms instead of waiting for the iPhone 5.
~Shard~
Jul 14, 02:37 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
Slim02
Apr 25, 04:47 PM
Normally I would argue that the customer doesn't have a right to a lot of things. But in this case - if you bought a device and it is tracking you (I'm not saying it is or it isn't) - the customer does have a right to know.
This (sort of) reminds me of how now your are legally allowed to get a free credit report once a year to determine whether or not it's correct. Companies used to make a fortune charging for something that people, inherently had the right to know.
If people learn to read they would know.... Thank to wprowe
http://www.apple.com/privacy/
Look at the section on Location-based Services. You agree that Apple can track your specific location including GPS data.
Quote:
Location-Based Services
To provide location-based services on Apple products, Apple and our partners and licensees may collect, use, and share precise location data, including the real-time geographic location of your Apple computer or device. This location data is collected anonymously in a form that does not personally identify you and is used by Apple and our partners and licensees to provide and improve location-based products and services. For example, we may share geographic location with application providers when you opt in to their location services.
Some location-based services offered by Apple, such as the MobileMe “Find My iPhone” feature, require your personal information for the feature to work.
This (sort of) reminds me of how now your are legally allowed to get a free credit report once a year to determine whether or not it's correct. Companies used to make a fortune charging for something that people, inherently had the right to know.
If people learn to read they would know.... Thank to wprowe
http://www.apple.com/privacy/
Look at the section on Location-based Services. You agree that Apple can track your specific location including GPS data.
Quote:
Location-Based Services
To provide location-based services on Apple products, Apple and our partners and licensees may collect, use, and share precise location data, including the real-time geographic location of your Apple computer or device. This location data is collected anonymously in a form that does not personally identify you and is used by Apple and our partners and licensees to provide and improve location-based products and services. For example, we may share geographic location with application providers when you opt in to their location services.
Some location-based services offered by Apple, such as the MobileMe “Find My iPhone” feature, require your personal information for the feature to work.
Ubik1981
Apr 6, 12:26 PM
I am shocked that anyone finds this as a positive.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
I find this completely backwards from Apple's current position on both CPU and graphics, and I don't think anyone would end up with a faster or better 13" MBA than the current generation. Apple would certainly have to bring back the backlit keyboard and introduce Thunderbolt to sucker anyone into buying such inferior junk! I would recommend people buy the current generation on clearance rather than lose performance everywhere like this. If this is the chip Apple uses in the 13" MBA, prepare for a big drop in capabilities!
I am still in shock anyone finds this a positive? Have you all read the clock speed? The facts about the chip and IGP in ultra low voltage variants?
I think most ppl here do not seem to realize the number 1 problem of MBA: overheating. I am the proud owner of a Rev. C MBA, which I would not exchange for anything else (especially the new models). The only problem I can complain abt is frequent overheating, which makes apps and the OS slow down consistently or (very rarely) even freeze.
I believe that the processor downgrading, as well as the elimination of backlit keys, are mostly in order to avoid such problem (as well as improve battery life). Otherwise, they would not make sense.
MBA is not MB Pro. If u want less weight/space, u must be willing to compromise.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
I find this completely backwards from Apple's current position on both CPU and graphics, and I don't think anyone would end up with a faster or better 13" MBA than the current generation. Apple would certainly have to bring back the backlit keyboard and introduce Thunderbolt to sucker anyone into buying such inferior junk! I would recommend people buy the current generation on clearance rather than lose performance everywhere like this. If this is the chip Apple uses in the 13" MBA, prepare for a big drop in capabilities!
I am still in shock anyone finds this a positive? Have you all read the clock speed? The facts about the chip and IGP in ultra low voltage variants?
I think most ppl here do not seem to realize the number 1 problem of MBA: overheating. I am the proud owner of a Rev. C MBA, which I would not exchange for anything else (especially the new models). The only problem I can complain abt is frequent overheating, which makes apps and the OS slow down consistently or (very rarely) even freeze.
I believe that the processor downgrading, as well as the elimination of backlit keys, are mostly in order to avoid such problem (as well as improve battery life). Otherwise, they would not make sense.
MBA is not MB Pro. If u want less weight/space, u must be willing to compromise.
Zadillo
Aug 27, 04:06 PM
The consequence is a laptop with a power cord attach to them feeding the insatiable appetite of the thermo nuclear reactor we call the CPU. For the love of reason and common sense, why can't Apple make a laptop with a day worth of battery powered. How about OLED display and multicore chip running at much lower frequency. Enough with the Ghz BS; what is the different between a 2.16Ghz and a 2.33 Ghz processors again?
Cinch
For the same reason that pretty much no-one else makes a laptop like what you described either. The only thing I've seen that even gets close to the sort of battery life you are talking about are some of the Japanese ultraportables that can get 6-11 hours of battery life, using 10-12" screens and very slow and power efficient ULV Core Solo or ULV Pentium M chips. These laptops also tend to cost in the $2000-3000 range.
I would venture to say that even if you slapped one of those ULV processors in a larger notebook with a larger battery, you still wouldn't be able to balance things out to get 24 hours of battery life.
And one has to wonder if people would put up with the performance hit.
OLED display technology at least probably isn't ready to be used for something like a laptop screen.
So, for the "love of reason and common sense", can we stop expecting Apple to create a product that isn't even technically feasible right now?
I think if you want 24 hours of battery life, you're probably better off carrying 6 or 7 spare batteries (and the $600-700 cost of doing so and added weight is still probably less than what it would take to get some laptop that actually had a reliable 24 hour battery life.)
-Zadillo
Cinch
For the same reason that pretty much no-one else makes a laptop like what you described either. The only thing I've seen that even gets close to the sort of battery life you are talking about are some of the Japanese ultraportables that can get 6-11 hours of battery life, using 10-12" screens and very slow and power efficient ULV Core Solo or ULV Pentium M chips. These laptops also tend to cost in the $2000-3000 range.
I would venture to say that even if you slapped one of those ULV processors in a larger notebook with a larger battery, you still wouldn't be able to balance things out to get 24 hours of battery life.
And one has to wonder if people would put up with the performance hit.
OLED display technology at least probably isn't ready to be used for something like a laptop screen.
So, for the "love of reason and common sense", can we stop expecting Apple to create a product that isn't even technically feasible right now?
I think if you want 24 hours of battery life, you're probably better off carrying 6 or 7 spare batteries (and the $600-700 cost of doing so and added weight is still probably less than what it would take to get some laptop that actually had a reliable 24 hour battery life.)
-Zadillo
jicon
Aug 17, 01:02 AM
Lots of stuff on Anandtech about the poor memory performance on the Intel chipset.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Might be an interesting machine when/if the motherboard chipset/ memory performance issue is looked in to.
I think part 3 of their review will be telling, paring the machine up to XP machines in a variety of tests.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Might be an interesting machine when/if the motherboard chipset/ memory performance issue is looked in to.
I think part 3 of their review will be telling, paring the machine up to XP machines in a variety of tests.
facts
Apr 27, 08:52 AM
The response from Apple is weak, the words chosen carefully to leave all options open for the future. The announced actions seem to be the right ones.
Being a convinced apple user i would like to see apple to go ahead and lead the crowd, set the standards for user protection, privacy protection and data protection.
Android and Windows are not valid options, since they are far worse when it comes to protection in my opinion.
As the computers get more senses, more needs to be done to provide dependable, transparent, verified protection.
Being a convinced apple user i would like to see apple to go ahead and lead the crowd, set the standards for user protection, privacy protection and data protection.
Android and Windows are not valid options, since they are far worse when it comes to protection in my opinion.
As the computers get more senses, more needs to be done to provide dependable, transparent, verified protection.
�algiris
Mar 31, 02:32 PM
Good. I hope they take one of the last strengths of the iPad ecosystem away from it.
One of the last? Oh boy ...
One of the last? Oh boy ...
Ubik1981
Apr 6, 12:26 PM
I am shocked that anyone finds this as a positive.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
I find this completely backwards from Apple's current position on both CPU and graphics, and I don't think anyone would end up with a faster or better 13" MBA than the current generation. Apple would certainly have to bring back the backlit keyboard and introduce Thunderbolt to sucker anyone into buying such inferior junk! I would recommend people buy the current generation on clearance rather than lose performance everywhere like this. If this is the chip Apple uses in the 13" MBA, prepare for a big drop in capabilities!
I am still in shock anyone finds this a positive? Have you all read the clock speed? The facts about the chip and IGP in ultra low voltage variants?
I think most ppl here do not seem to realize the number 1 problem of MBA: overheating. I am the proud owner of a Rev. C MBA, which I would not exchange for anything else (especially the new models). The only problem I can complain abt is frequent overheating, which makes apps and the OS slow down consistently or (very rarely) even freeze.
I believe that the processor downgrading, as well as the elimination of backlit keys, are mostly in order to avoid such problem (as well as improve battery life). Otherwise, they would not make sense.
MBA is not MB Pro. If u want less weight/space, u must be willing to compromise.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
I find this completely backwards from Apple's current position on both CPU and graphics, and I don't think anyone would end up with a faster or better 13" MBA than the current generation. Apple would certainly have to bring back the backlit keyboard and introduce Thunderbolt to sucker anyone into buying such inferior junk! I would recommend people buy the current generation on clearance rather than lose performance everywhere like this. If this is the chip Apple uses in the 13" MBA, prepare for a big drop in capabilities!
I am still in shock anyone finds this a positive? Have you all read the clock speed? The facts about the chip and IGP in ultra low voltage variants?
I think most ppl here do not seem to realize the number 1 problem of MBA: overheating. I am the proud owner of a Rev. C MBA, which I would not exchange for anything else (especially the new models). The only problem I can complain abt is frequent overheating, which makes apps and the OS slow down consistently or (very rarely) even freeze.
I believe that the processor downgrading, as well as the elimination of backlit keys, are mostly in order to avoid such problem (as well as improve battery life). Otherwise, they would not make sense.
MBA is not MB Pro. If u want less weight/space, u must be willing to compromise.
iStudentUK
Mar 26, 06:16 AM
Can't wait. Hope it's awesome
Got to wait for the results from the beta testers who buy 10.7 on release. Learn the lessons of 10.6, I waited until 10.6.2 was out!
Wish my MB had a multitouch track pad though! :(
Got to wait for the results from the beta testers who buy 10.7 on release. Learn the lessons of 10.6, I waited until 10.6.2 was out!
Wish my MB had a multitouch track pad though! :(
skunk
Mar 4, 05:15 PM
Woof. Those guys are hot. :cool:Misattributed.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 20, 08:32 AM
Samsung has no honor.
It seems their problem is that they had access to Apple's design and so were able to copy more closely than is usually the case with Apple competitors.
It seems their problem is that they had access to Apple's design and so were able to copy more closely than is usually the case with Apple competitors.
aimbdd
Apr 7, 11:06 PM
Just like nikon pulled their d7000 from best buy? :P
Accept they were pulled for selling them early.
Not that i minded getting it 3 days early :D
Accept they were pulled for selling them early.
Not that i minded getting it 3 days early :D
No comments:
Post a Comment