HuggyLowDown
Apr 13, 08:04 PM
Yes! Finally! I've been waiting for the white iPhone 4 since launch. I'm with Verizon and I'm eligible to upgrade to the iPhone on April 22nd. Just in time. I was going to go ahead with the black, but now I'm going with white.
Tommyg117
Aug 15, 02:28 PM
thank goodness for the ichat upgrades.
blackburn
Apr 14, 08:36 AM
iHackintosh:D
28monkeys
Mar 29, 09:36 AM
will be more surprise if it's not full.
mtkagan
Mar 16, 08:40 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
4th in line at South Coast Plaza. Anyone in the front of the line at another location want to make a deal - if my store gets them in you can buy my second, and vise versa?
^^ what he said!
4th in line at South Coast Plaza. Anyone in the front of the line at another location want to make a deal - if my store gets them in you can buy my second, and vise versa?
^^ what he said!
D4F
Apr 28, 04:56 PM
It's ok that Macs are overpriced big time, no problem that they come with not so up to date hardware yet people bitch that they are 'screwed' cause they will need a new... bumper case....
Hahaha. I just can't stop laughing.
Hahaha. I just can't stop laughing.
KnightWRX
Dec 30, 10:43 PM
Under normal circumstances, you're more or less right.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
Bonsai1214
Jan 29, 11:04 AM
The uDAC-2 has both a DAC and an amp.
ah, didn't see it was uDAC-2. my fault.
ah, didn't see it was uDAC-2. my fault.
Chimera
Oct 18, 04:28 PM
Having looked at the numbers in more detail it is interesting that compared to the year ago quarter desktop sales are relatively static and pretty much all the growth in mac shipments is in the portable lines. Good to see Apple add 1bn to revenue anyhow.
FX4568
Apr 19, 04:27 PM
I had to finally register to comment on the hypocrisy in this and many other threads like it. Because some people want frame rates for gaming on an MBA, then your needs for GPU performance are valid, and others who don't game but could use CPU performance have invalid needs? Rubbish.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
Well, I shall say first of all, welcome to the MacRumors forum :) I believe CPU is important to the computer as the GPU is. As current computers are, CPU have set a milestone where most users are not even able to use 100% of the capabilities hidden in such a powerful processor.
Now, you were complaining I used 100/100 in the CPU analogy? fine, I will change it. CPU will be 90/100 and GPU is 80/100 as the 30% increase in cpu and 30% decrease in gpu, we will see a difference of 117/100 and 56/100. Am I arguing that there will be nothing to be gained from a bump in processor speed? Definitely not! Who doesnt love the little extra power when we need it? Who doesnt want the latest in tech? What im saying is that the downgrading of the GPU outweights the upgrading of the CPU in terms of OVERALL performance.
Futhermore HT and Turbo dont work 100% of the times.
For you and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump will be indeed welcomed. But as of me and the I believe majority of MBA owners and will be owners, the difference of processor speed is negligible to a certain extent, but the performance lack of GPU will be noticed the moment we start using the Macbook Air.
+1, besides, the 13" MBP + 128GB SSD provide far better value-for-money than any present 13" MBA.
The cheaper solution, the 11", tells another story but even then anything past the base model comes so close to the price of a 13" MBP+SSD that it's impractical to get a 11" from a performance point of view, especially when it's equipped with the slow 1.4 C2D. The 1.4 i5 will provide far better performance (certainly far more than 40% of speed boost). We will still be able to watch FullHD movies despite the less capable IGP. Games. Don't tell me you want to play WoW on a 11" monitor.
FX4568 said "We have enough to accomplish our tasks, and any more would be an overkill in the things we need our computer to process.". Overkill means the increased processor speed will not be of any use, or, in other words, useless.
You are comparing a cheaper price point by bringing a 128 SSD into the game. You must understand that even though many people have to choose between the 13 MBA and 13 MBP, both of them are made for a different purpose. You can play WoW on a 11" monitor. Why do you chain your MBA to tasks that you only think it will be able to accomplish.
Okay, sorry about my lack of further explanation, but I dont want this to sound personal, but what you are doing is taking my statement to a whole different level. I would like to infer that your intelligence would be above the mark where I dont have to expand on every single statement that I say. When I say that the C2D is enough to accomplish tasks, I am saying that it is good enough for the higher than average person. Handbrakers of course will face a time difference on the processor speed, but as many of us know, not everyone uses Handbrake, and if we do, it is not something we do daily. Processor speed is always welcome, but at the sacrifice of GPU from 320m to the Intel GPU is the difference between the ability to play Crysis on 19.3 FPS at Medium settings and not be able to playing it at all while the performance increase in CPU is the difference between 10-30 minutes in Handbrake.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
Well, I shall say first of all, welcome to the MacRumors forum :) I believe CPU is important to the computer as the GPU is. As current computers are, CPU have set a milestone where most users are not even able to use 100% of the capabilities hidden in such a powerful processor.
Now, you were complaining I used 100/100 in the CPU analogy? fine, I will change it. CPU will be 90/100 and GPU is 80/100 as the 30% increase in cpu and 30% decrease in gpu, we will see a difference of 117/100 and 56/100. Am I arguing that there will be nothing to be gained from a bump in processor speed? Definitely not! Who doesnt love the little extra power when we need it? Who doesnt want the latest in tech? What im saying is that the downgrading of the GPU outweights the upgrading of the CPU in terms of OVERALL performance.
Futhermore HT and Turbo dont work 100% of the times.
For you and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump will be indeed welcomed. But as of me and the I believe majority of MBA owners and will be owners, the difference of processor speed is negligible to a certain extent, but the performance lack of GPU will be noticed the moment we start using the Macbook Air.
+1, besides, the 13" MBP + 128GB SSD provide far better value-for-money than any present 13" MBA.
The cheaper solution, the 11", tells another story but even then anything past the base model comes so close to the price of a 13" MBP+SSD that it's impractical to get a 11" from a performance point of view, especially when it's equipped with the slow 1.4 C2D. The 1.4 i5 will provide far better performance (certainly far more than 40% of speed boost). We will still be able to watch FullHD movies despite the less capable IGP. Games. Don't tell me you want to play WoW on a 11" monitor.
FX4568 said "We have enough to accomplish our tasks, and any more would be an overkill in the things we need our computer to process.". Overkill means the increased processor speed will not be of any use, or, in other words, useless.
You are comparing a cheaper price point by bringing a 128 SSD into the game. You must understand that even though many people have to choose between the 13 MBA and 13 MBP, both of them are made for a different purpose. You can play WoW on a 11" monitor. Why do you chain your MBA to tasks that you only think it will be able to accomplish.
Okay, sorry about my lack of further explanation, but I dont want this to sound personal, but what you are doing is taking my statement to a whole different level. I would like to infer that your intelligence would be above the mark where I dont have to expand on every single statement that I say. When I say that the C2D is enough to accomplish tasks, I am saying that it is good enough for the higher than average person. Handbrakers of course will face a time difference on the processor speed, but as many of us know, not everyone uses Handbrake, and if we do, it is not something we do daily. Processor speed is always welcome, but at the sacrifice of GPU from 320m to the Intel GPU is the difference between the ability to play Crysis on 19.3 FPS at Medium settings and not be able to playing it at all while the performance increase in CPU is the difference between 10-30 minutes in Handbrake.
Surely
Sep 14, 11:36 AM
^^^^^^^ Pffft..... noob. I gots me a gold card. :D
Steve121178
Apr 12, 10:13 AM
Enjoy the version of Android that comes on that thing out of the box. With all the HTC bloatware and Android fragmentation you'll be lucky to ever see a software update. :rolleyes:
HTC phones get updates & always have done. What is this HTC bloatware you are talking about? If you mean HTC Sense I'll laugh at you a lot. It's a brilliant add-on to Android. In fact, I couldn't imagine Android without it.
HTC phones get updates & always have done. What is this HTC bloatware you are talking about? If you mean HTC Sense I'll laugh at you a lot. It's a brilliant add-on to Android. In fact, I couldn't imagine Android without it.
NathanCH
Apr 4, 01:23 PM
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/616276/DSC_2488_s.jpg
50mm, ISO100, F5.6, 1/1600
50mm, ISO100, F5.6, 1/1600
Lennholm
Apr 22, 05:25 PM
You went up in arms about the itunes logo, but when a mockup is truly horrible, you praise it? This is about the worst mockup i've ever seen.
Apple, please never ever put that awful backing on the iphone. ever.
You hip generation might like holes in your jeans and scratches on your phone, but I just think it's stupid. :p
Maybe they're afraid of yet again having to face the embarassment of having first bashed a design and said it looks like a cheap chinese knock-off and then doing a 180 degree turn when it turns out it's Apples own design, it's a precautionary measure.
(For the record, I never liked the 3G/3GS design, I was pleasantly surprised when I saw the leaked iP4 images and loved it when it turned out to be the actual thing, and if this ugly abomination turns out to be an actual Apple product I loose all respect for Apple)
Apple, please never ever put that awful backing on the iphone. ever.
You hip generation might like holes in your jeans and scratches on your phone, but I just think it's stupid. :p
Maybe they're afraid of yet again having to face the embarassment of having first bashed a design and said it looks like a cheap chinese knock-off and then doing a 180 degree turn when it turns out it's Apples own design, it's a precautionary measure.
(For the record, I never liked the 3G/3GS design, I was pleasantly surprised when I saw the leaked iP4 images and loved it when it turned out to be the actual thing, and if this ugly abomination turns out to be an actual Apple product I loose all respect for Apple)
charlituna
Apr 12, 03:03 PM
I believe this b/c Darlymple and Gruber belies this.
Trouble with all these statements is that they are forgetting that Apple can return WWDC to the software guys
AND then do a media event as soon as the day after and still release in June/July.
The lack of new component shipments could be simply due to the fact that Apple is using components that also appear in existing products and Apple doesn't spell out what the components are being used for when they order them. So what someone might think is just more chips to fill the ipad 2 demand could be only part that and part for a new phone (for example)
Trouble with all these statements is that they are forgetting that Apple can return WWDC to the software guys
AND then do a media event as soon as the day after and still release in June/July.
The lack of new component shipments could be simply due to the fact that Apple is using components that also appear in existing products and Apple doesn't spell out what the components are being used for when they order them. So what someone might think is just more chips to fill the ipad 2 demand could be only part that and part for a new phone (for example)
Muncher
Jan 25, 06:41 PM
Good time to buy. $$ :D
jlyanks85
Dec 4, 11:18 PM
pppfffttt... man up and get some real firepower:D I bought myself an ORIGINAL Desert Eagle 50 cal last year ...best money I ever spent.
http://pistolspace.com/images/deserteagle2.jpg
Yes it costs a fortune to shoot and my wrist can only handle about 6 rounds and I am done for the day. However it only takes 1 from this thing to stop anything shy of a pissed off bull elephant:D
Where do you live? I always thought it was illegal to own a small firearm like that I know that's what I've been told anyway. Unless you absolutely were require to have one, like a cop/fbi.
Now I don't care, just curious how so many people on this board own guns like this and automatic weapons.
http://pistolspace.com/images/deserteagle2.jpg
Yes it costs a fortune to shoot and my wrist can only handle about 6 rounds and I am done for the day. However it only takes 1 from this thing to stop anything shy of a pissed off bull elephant:D
Where do you live? I always thought it was illegal to own a small firearm like that I know that's what I've been told anyway. Unless you absolutely were require to have one, like a cop/fbi.
Now I don't care, just curious how so many people on this board own guns like this and automatic weapons.
Puulihuna
Apr 10, 11:40 AM
Does this picture depict the combination of old and new, restored and ruins or is it just a touristy picture with too much in it? You be my judges.
View from Casco Viejo to the skyscrapers in Panama City.
View from Casco Viejo to the skyscrapers in Panama City.
TwoSocEmBoppers
Mar 16, 07:46 AM
Woo first...In line at Brea. 6 people here total.
.Andy
May 2, 03:48 AM
Since when was burial at sea a Muslim tradition? :confused:
A decade to find him and all in a matter of hours had killed him, run DNA tests to confirm his identity, and jettisoned his body into the ocean. A 180 degrees in work ethic.....
A decade to find him and all in a matter of hours had killed him, run DNA tests to confirm his identity, and jettisoned his body into the ocean. A 180 degrees in work ethic.....
TrollToddington
Apr 21, 01:49 PM
I mean, if you want to differentiate your higher end products from the lower end ones, you ADD features to the higher end one. You DON'T remove features that were once standard for years on the lower end machine.
I've seen this in Yamaha keyboards - once upon a time all keyboards had MIDI IN/OUT/THROU, later (ca 2004 onwards) Yamaha removed this pretty basic feature from their low and mid-end keyboards so that they could not be used as controllers. The customers had to end up buying pretty expensive equipment in order to use MIDI connections.
I've seen this in Yamaha keyboards - once upon a time all keyboards had MIDI IN/OUT/THROU, later (ca 2004 onwards) Yamaha removed this pretty basic feature from their low and mid-end keyboards so that they could not be used as controllers. The customers had to end up buying pretty expensive equipment in order to use MIDI connections.
jeevesofRKdia
Apr 3, 04:46 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5028/5584180139_98845d2cb4_b.jpg
It'sa me on-a Flickr! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeevesofrkdia/5584180139/)
1/400
f/11
250mm (55-250 IS)
This photo is from my recent trip to India. I had asked about some gear and stuff before leaving (this is my first (D)SLR and my first foray into more serious photography). C&C on everything I post is welcome, as I would like to grow as a photographer!
Also, don't peek at my photostream, as I'd like to post some of those in the upcoming days here. :D
I posted this in the March thread... Way to go, me. We're obviously 3 days into April now. XD
It'sa me on-a Flickr! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeevesofrkdia/5584180139/)
1/400
f/11
250mm (55-250 IS)
This photo is from my recent trip to India. I had asked about some gear and stuff before leaving (this is my first (D)SLR and my first foray into more serious photography). C&C on everything I post is welcome, as I would like to grow as a photographer!
Also, don't peek at my photostream, as I'd like to post some of those in the upcoming days here. :D
I posted this in the March thread... Way to go, me. We're obviously 3 days into April now. XD
admanimal
May 3, 08:20 AM
Do Apple stores tend to carry maxed out spec versions of the iMac like I know they sometimes do with other models? Specifically ones with SSDs...
IndyJones
Apr 26, 03:26 AM
Maybe what we really need is a display that can rotate 90� and still look good. Then I could stick a pair of 9:16's side by side.
Hey now, I think you are onto something....That sounds like a new feature that MAC would offer, similar to how the iPod/iPad flip sideways....Excellent insight!!!
Hey now, I think you are onto something....That sounds like a new feature that MAC would offer, similar to how the iPod/iPad flip sideways....Excellent insight!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment