BenRoethig
Aug 29, 04:49 PM
Exactly!!!
I media center like this would sell like crazy... small, simple and elegant. Just imagine how many switchers you would get at the same time.
I don't know about switchers, but it should be a success in the home entertainment center/ media PC market.
I media center like this would sell like crazy... small, simple and elegant. Just imagine how many switchers you would get at the same time.
I don't know about switchers, but it should be a success in the home entertainment center/ media PC market.
Stella
Jun 22, 01:13 PM
Sounds OK - run the apps on your apple mobile as your desktop.
As long as iOS didn't replace OSX.... many people would be pissed if desktop apps were controlled by Apple.
As long as iOS didn't replace OSX.... many people would be pissed if desktop apps were controlled by Apple.
kntgsp
Sep 14, 11:13 AM
Interesting. Instead of jailbreaking, know what I do? I copy my files onto my iOS devices as a backup. No problem. I have several GB of data on both my iPod touch and my iPad.
I have yet to find a single Windows or Linux computer at work that will allow me to simply drag and drop some files onto the device as if it were a mounted drive like any other USB stick or Android/Symbian phone.
It's why the girlfriend has the iPhone4 and I am using Android at the moment (which I am growing to detest for lack of decent VNC options)
I have yet to find a single Windows or Linux computer at work that will allow me to simply drag and drop some files onto the device as if it were a mounted drive like any other USB stick or Android/Symbian phone.
It's why the girlfriend has the iPhone4 and I am using Android at the moment (which I am growing to detest for lack of decent VNC options)
-aggie-
Sep 14, 09:21 AM
Consumer Reports says "we still think the same thing" for the third time and that's first page news? Sounds more like they're fishing for free publicity.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
This is exactly what I thought when I read the OP. They stated they couldn't recommend the iPhone 4, even if it had bumpers, and now without bumpers they can't recommend it, because it won't have bumpers.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
This is exactly what I thought when I read the OP. They stated they couldn't recommend the iPhone 4, even if it had bumpers, and now without bumpers they can't recommend it, because it won't have bumpers.
Earendil
Nov 27, 02:50 PM
Maybe Apple just needs to lower its monitor prices to sane levels as opposed to the ridiculous prices that they currently stand at. Justify them all you want, if Apple really wants to push its monitors, those prices need to come down. They might have flew 3 years ago, but enough is enough.
I just got a 22-inch LCD for $370 (US), and it's not a piece. Quite frankly, I can't really tell the difference. Plus it has better adjustments and I/O. It doesn't have the Apple look, and it only has 1050 horizontal lines of res but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me.
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
I just got a 22-inch LCD for $370 (US), and it's not a piece. Quite frankly, I can't really tell the difference. Plus it has better adjustments and I/O. It doesn't have the Apple look, and it only has 1050 horizontal lines of res but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me.
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
mrgreen4242
Nov 28, 10:43 AM
OK, this is out of hand... all of you who are complaining about Dell being half the price of the Apple LCDs read the topic that's been linked like 5 times, it's pretty interesting and informative.
Now, all of you who are complaining about those people complain shut up and listen (or read) for a minute. They aren't complaining that Apple is charging to much for what they are offering, it's that they aren't offering any alternative for non-pro users. There are people who want, and would pay a bit more than Dell prices, for a similar piece of hardware with Apple's quality and design, but they aren't willing to pay 50%+ more for a professional grade piece of hardware.
A 17" consumer line of displays would solve the problem without negatively effecting the pro line of hardware. If it sold well (and I'm betting it would, especially if it was the same panel as the 17" iMac with a USB2 hub, iSight, and built in speakers in an iPod styled casing for ~$249) a 19" with the same features but a higher res (although all the 19" widescreens I've seen have had the same res as 17" WS ... someone must make a 19" panel with res between 1440x900 and 1680x1050) for ~$349 or so it'd really fill out Apple product line to meet the needs of all consumers, "prosumers", and real pros.
Now, all of you who are complaining about those people complain shut up and listen (or read) for a minute. They aren't complaining that Apple is charging to much for what they are offering, it's that they aren't offering any alternative for non-pro users. There are people who want, and would pay a bit more than Dell prices, for a similar piece of hardware with Apple's quality and design, but they aren't willing to pay 50%+ more for a professional grade piece of hardware.
A 17" consumer line of displays would solve the problem without negatively effecting the pro line of hardware. If it sold well (and I'm betting it would, especially if it was the same panel as the 17" iMac with a USB2 hub, iSight, and built in speakers in an iPod styled casing for ~$249) a 19" with the same features but a higher res (although all the 19" widescreens I've seen have had the same res as 17" WS ... someone must make a 19" panel with res between 1440x900 and 1680x1050) for ~$349 or so it'd really fill out Apple product line to meet the needs of all consumers, "prosumers", and real pros.
RMo
May 3, 03:01 AM
No, Microsoft have not got it right. There should be no need for a specific tool to uninstall applications. applications should be self-contained and be deletable with the press of a button�
Many applications work this way on Mac, some developers still put related files into various other locations though unfortunately...
You're missing the point that Windows uninstallers usually, at least, give you the option of cleaning up user data (e.g., things in your profile, usually C:\Users\username\AppData or C:\Documents and Settings\username\Application Data, roughly the equivalent of the ~\Library (and Application Support) folder on OS X.
Yes, this is easily done yourself--if you know where to look. Most users don't. But, on the other hand, this usually doesn't cause any problems, and in most cases it won't take up too much space just to leave it there.
Finally, this would also be easier for applications that do things like install a pref pane (e.g., Growl, Perian--although it actually puts an uninstaller in the pref pane itself). These are few and far between and better have a good reason for doing so, but they are still around.
On the other hand, having a single .App bundle is a great way to encourage the (good, in my opinion) practice of self-contained apps. I thought MS was learning towards this around the dawn of the .NET era, but this seems to have been lost...
Many applications work this way on Mac, some developers still put related files into various other locations though unfortunately...
You're missing the point that Windows uninstallers usually, at least, give you the option of cleaning up user data (e.g., things in your profile, usually C:\Users\username\AppData or C:\Documents and Settings\username\Application Data, roughly the equivalent of the ~\Library (and Application Support) folder on OS X.
Yes, this is easily done yourself--if you know where to look. Most users don't. But, on the other hand, this usually doesn't cause any problems, and in most cases it won't take up too much space just to leave it there.
Finally, this would also be easier for applications that do things like install a pref pane (e.g., Growl, Perian--although it actually puts an uninstaller in the pref pane itself). These are few and far between and better have a good reason for doing so, but they are still around.
On the other hand, having a single .App bundle is a great way to encourage the (good, in my opinion) practice of self-contained apps. I thought MS was learning towards this around the dawn of the .NET era, but this seems to have been lost...
vincenz
Nov 28, 04:22 PM
Thats awesome.....They attempted to give me a ticket for doing about 100mph in a residential zone a few years ago...was actually doing it too.. When they tried to speak to me I pretended to not know english( handed him a PA license) I kept speaking to him in pig latin and pretending I didn't understand...meanwhile he was ready haul us off to the Klink...LOL He eventually got so pissed off he got in his cruiser and left. What I didn't know was they filed a complaint with the rental car agency and we where banned from renting from them again...oooohhhh whoptie do da:D:D:D The things a bottle of good tequila will make you do.
Are you familiar with Darwinism?
Are you familiar with Darwinism?
Rodimus Prime
Mar 22, 12:24 PM
Apple is paying the price for the crap it did early on and still is doing with no clear rules on what is approved and disapproved.
Inconsistently rejecting apps.
Apple should never of gotten in the screening business and now they are trying to back out.
Inconsistently rejecting apps.
Apple should never of gotten in the screening business and now they are trying to back out.
TheBobcat
Nov 28, 02:07 PM
MS did sell the Xbox at a loss. They were still losing money at $299 a pop and had to lower to $199 to keep up with Sony's unexpected price drop the spring after it came out. I seem to remember that the per-unit cost to make an Xbox was somewhere around 420-450 per unit.
However, MS did some things very well with the Xbox that caused it to succeed. First, they bought a lot of game developers to create games for it. They struck gold with Halo, and that alone caused a lot of people to buy it.
The second was the built-in hard drive, which allowed for expanded functionality in games as well as an end to costly memory cards being required.
The third, and biggest, was a true innovation in online play. Xbox Live was the first system to standardize online names, messages, and supported technologies across a whole set of games. MS was the only player that took online seriously, and they capitalized, big time. Nintendo still really doesn't care, and Sony has effectively copied MS's innovations for PS3. MS didn't invent online play, but they brought it to the masses in a way that was easy and fun. Slice it any way you want it, MS really innovated and executed Xbox Live.
Xbox relatively succeeded for those reasons. However, all of those things are virtual non-factors to the Zune. Zune (as of now) has no exclusive content, it has no revolutionary built-in feature, and has no real huge innovation to the way music is listened to, or a better execution thereof. All it really has is a stretched iPod-res screen, and very limited Wifi connectivity between Zunes.
However, MS did some things very well with the Xbox that caused it to succeed. First, they bought a lot of game developers to create games for it. They struck gold with Halo, and that alone caused a lot of people to buy it.
The second was the built-in hard drive, which allowed for expanded functionality in games as well as an end to costly memory cards being required.
The third, and biggest, was a true innovation in online play. Xbox Live was the first system to standardize online names, messages, and supported technologies across a whole set of games. MS was the only player that took online seriously, and they capitalized, big time. Nintendo still really doesn't care, and Sony has effectively copied MS's innovations for PS3. MS didn't invent online play, but they brought it to the masses in a way that was easy and fun. Slice it any way you want it, MS really innovated and executed Xbox Live.
Xbox relatively succeeded for those reasons. However, all of those things are virtual non-factors to the Zune. Zune (as of now) has no exclusive content, it has no revolutionary built-in feature, and has no real huge innovation to the way music is listened to, or a better execution thereof. All it really has is a stretched iPod-res screen, and very limited Wifi connectivity between Zunes.
JGowan
Sep 6, 09:04 PM
Netflix is made for movies! I love Apple but they'll never do for movies what Netflix has! In the past 5 weeks, I've had 21 movies delivered to my door. I'm on the 3-at-a-time plan (unlimited for $17.99/mo). Also, I can buy tons of used DVDs for $5.99 that are 100% guaranteed!
I think a dollar a song is one thing because you can pick and choose from an album so the trade-off for quality is justified. However, $9.99 is a lot to ask for something that is very low quality, only looks really good an a 2" screen and takes a long time to download. Right now, we don't even know if you can back the file up or burn to a DVD. I think Apple will do ok, but I don't see it being the same bonanza that that music was/is.
I think a dollar a song is one thing because you can pick and choose from an album so the trade-off for quality is justified. However, $9.99 is a lot to ask for something that is very low quality, only looks really good an a 2" screen and takes a long time to download. Right now, we don't even know if you can back the file up or burn to a DVD. I think Apple will do ok, but I don't see it being the same bonanza that that music was/is.
Some_Big_Spoon
Sep 1, 01:23 PM
I'm game. My Last generation iMac G5 is a dog compared to my MacBook on most things (adobe aside).
23" would make me order that day. Hopefully they can ship same day as well.
23" would make me order that day. Hopefully they can ship same day as well.
miniConvert
Aug 7, 05:11 AM
Last time we played we beat you 3-0 in England im pretty sure.
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
Well, that's certainly a 'spirited' post! O_o
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
Well, that's certainly a 'spirited' post! O_o
Multimedia
Aug 25, 09:59 AM
If they bring out a core2duo mac mini it will be faster than my 18month old power mac.Duh. Welcome to the completed transition. I need to run a few tests to confirm this once they are out, but I think any Core 2 Mac may be faster than the Dual 2GHz G5 PowerMac from October of 2005.cant see it happening, they might go for a faster core duo in the mac mini and macbook then core 2 duo in iMac and Macbook proThen you are in denial. Core Duo is already history. And Apple doesn't like to be selling historical artifacts any longer than they must - especially when the new state-of-the-art processors don't cost them any more. :rolleyes:I don't think we are going to see Core Duos in Apples for much longer, though it is possible that the base Mini will offer a Core Duo, and the better model a Core 2 Duo.
Still, I think it much more likely that with this revision, both Minis will sport Core 2 Duos, probably Meroms to keep them quiet and lower-powered, and will feature the 965 graphics chipset which frankly is a very nice and inexpenisve graphics solution.
What I am really hoping is that there will be an add-on base module in a similar form factor to turn any Mini into a full-blown HD/Audio media centre. Now that could really be exciting. While Tivos and Sky+ boxes are welcome in my home, we are just aching for someone to really rethink the entire home media experience. I'd love to see Apple take a shot at that.I think the addition of the new EyeTV hybrid USB2 Digital-Analog Broadcast Tuner (http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna) may be a significant part of the ticket you are looking for with a new 1.66GHz Core 2 Duo mini. Ships early September for only $150. They have combined two large bulky Firewire tuners from older products they previously sold only separately for a combined price of $500 into a tiny not-much-bigger-than-a-flash-ram-stick USB2 product that will sell for only $150. It's a miracle!
Still, I think it much more likely that with this revision, both Minis will sport Core 2 Duos, probably Meroms to keep them quiet and lower-powered, and will feature the 965 graphics chipset which frankly is a very nice and inexpenisve graphics solution.
What I am really hoping is that there will be an add-on base module in a similar form factor to turn any Mini into a full-blown HD/Audio media centre. Now that could really be exciting. While Tivos and Sky+ boxes are welcome in my home, we are just aching for someone to really rethink the entire home media experience. I'd love to see Apple take a shot at that.I think the addition of the new EyeTV hybrid USB2 Digital-Analog Broadcast Tuner (http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna) may be a significant part of the ticket you are looking for with a new 1.66GHz Core 2 Duo mini. Ships early September for only $150. They have combined two large bulky Firewire tuners from older products they previously sold only separately for a combined price of $500 into a tiny not-much-bigger-than-a-flash-ram-stick USB2 product that will sell for only $150. It's a miracle!
xraytech
Apr 2, 08:38 PM
Brilliant!!!
The BlackBerrys/Samsungs/Motorolas of the world just don't get it.
The BlackBerrys/Samsungs/Motorolas of the world just don't get it.
etrinh
Apr 24, 12:42 PM
It's amazing that a file that is stored locally (iDevices and iTunes) is causing so much uproar. Lolz! If you have access to my iDevices then I should be more worried than you having access to this location cache. Get a clue people.
firestarter
Mar 20, 01:14 PM
Can you give me an example where the basic RIGHTS of a religious person was violated by upholding gay rights?
Or an example of ANY right given to gay people that aren't likewise extended to every other citizen?
I suspect Daveoc64 is referring to this case (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-12214368) - concerning a gay couple from his home town.
Equivalent rights were not set against each other - the hoteliers believed they had a right to restrict their trading based on religious beliefs, the gay couple contested that and won. So it's incorrect to say that gay rights were held in a higher regard than religious - since the rights were awarded according to the situation.
The case is interesting nonetheless. It would be interesting to see what the result would be if the same case were to be contested in the US.
Or an example of ANY right given to gay people that aren't likewise extended to every other citizen?
I suspect Daveoc64 is referring to this case (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-12214368) - concerning a gay couple from his home town.
Equivalent rights were not set against each other - the hoteliers believed they had a right to restrict their trading based on religious beliefs, the gay couple contested that and won. So it's incorrect to say that gay rights were held in a higher regard than religious - since the rights were awarded according to the situation.
The case is interesting nonetheless. It would be interesting to see what the result would be if the same case were to be contested in the US.
animatedude
Sep 14, 07:04 PM
who the **** CARES about consumer reports? in fact i bet if you do a poll in here,most users will vote they didn't even know such thing even existed.
boycott the consumers reports.
boycott the consumers reports.
MacMan86
Apr 21, 04:05 PM
But it doesn't need to be as persistent and as precise as it is for that to work. My history of last year is not relevent. The file should be flushed/cleaned out after a certain time. After a point, the data isn't useful to the phone.
The data is nearly always useful to the phone. Cell towers don't move very often, cached data would very rarely be out of date. If you go back to a city you visited several months back but have no data connection, the cached cell tower data could still be used to find your rough location.
It also shouldn't be backed-up. The device starts with a new DB when its new, no reason it shouldn't start over when you restore. That would alleviate some of the privacy concerns at least.
I would agree, but there's a hell of a lot of other information in an iTunes backup (geotagged photos, passwords in clear text in plist files stored by 3rd party apps who don't bother to use the Keychain, SMS messages, call logs etc) and if you're worried about privacy you should already have ticked the 'Encrypt backups' box - that's all it takes. I'd say all the other data in an unencrypted backup is just as, if not more, valuable.
And if this same file isn't what is being sent to Apple, and you have information indicating this, then the summary of the article that makes it sound like it is should be fixed.
It says so quite clearly at the top of Levinson's article which this MR article links to (https://alexlevinson.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/3-major-issues-with-the-latest-iphone-tracking-discovery/):
1) Apple is not collecting this data.
And to suggest otherwise is completely misrepresenting Apple. I quote:
Apple is gathering this data, but it�s clearly intentional, as the database is being restored across backups, and even device migrations.
Apple is not harvesting this data from your device. This is data on the device that you as the customer purchased and unless they can show concrete evidence supporting this claim � network traffic analysis of connections to Apple servers � I rebut this claim in full. Through my research in this field and all traffic analysis I have performed, not once have I seen this data traverse a network.
If the phone sends Apple a cell tower ID and gets back a lat/lon of that tower (this is being done anonymously according to T&C's), what is the benefit to Apple of sending this log back to them? They've already got the information from the calls to their servers, no need to get it twice.
The data is nearly always useful to the phone. Cell towers don't move very often, cached data would very rarely be out of date. If you go back to a city you visited several months back but have no data connection, the cached cell tower data could still be used to find your rough location.
It also shouldn't be backed-up. The device starts with a new DB when its new, no reason it shouldn't start over when you restore. That would alleviate some of the privacy concerns at least.
I would agree, but there's a hell of a lot of other information in an iTunes backup (geotagged photos, passwords in clear text in plist files stored by 3rd party apps who don't bother to use the Keychain, SMS messages, call logs etc) and if you're worried about privacy you should already have ticked the 'Encrypt backups' box - that's all it takes. I'd say all the other data in an unencrypted backup is just as, if not more, valuable.
And if this same file isn't what is being sent to Apple, and you have information indicating this, then the summary of the article that makes it sound like it is should be fixed.
It says so quite clearly at the top of Levinson's article which this MR article links to (https://alexlevinson.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/3-major-issues-with-the-latest-iphone-tracking-discovery/):
1) Apple is not collecting this data.
And to suggest otherwise is completely misrepresenting Apple. I quote:
Apple is gathering this data, but it�s clearly intentional, as the database is being restored across backups, and even device migrations.
Apple is not harvesting this data from your device. This is data on the device that you as the customer purchased and unless they can show concrete evidence supporting this claim � network traffic analysis of connections to Apple servers � I rebut this claim in full. Through my research in this field and all traffic analysis I have performed, not once have I seen this data traverse a network.
If the phone sends Apple a cell tower ID and gets back a lat/lon of that tower (this is being done anonymously according to T&C's), what is the benefit to Apple of sending this log back to them? They've already got the information from the calls to their servers, no need to get it twice.
Reverend Wally
Jan 2, 03:31 PM
On a hunch I'm calling updated MacBook Pros.
Did that not just happen ... :cool:
Did that not just happen ... :cool:
swingerofbirch
Jul 18, 12:57 PM
I couldn't imagine movie production companies letting first run movies be downloaded before the DVD's come out. I would much rather go see it as a social thing then watch it in my own home.
Wow. Different worlds. If there's one thing I can't stand, it's people. I would pay top dollar to see first runs without going to a theatre.
Plus where I live we don't even get a lot of movies. It took months for us to get Brokeback Mountain, and there's no telling if we'll ever get Strangers with Candy.
Wow. Different worlds. If there's one thing I can't stand, it's people. I would pay top dollar to see first runs without going to a theatre.
Plus where I live we don't even get a lot of movies. It took months for us to get Brokeback Mountain, and there's no telling if we'll ever get Strangers with Candy.
pje65
Sep 25, 07:02 PM
The Griffin hardshell will come apart without damage, it is just VERY :cool: snuggly fit together.
I got a fingernail into the seam, then some steady force pulling the lower section straight back did the trick. It's a nice case with a beautiful fit.
I did not opt for a screen protector, no second thoughts. I've found these often get pretty mucked up themselves on other devices, and that by itself would be a shortcoming on this amazing display.
For a lot of traveling, maybe an inexpensive slip case? Best luck.
Thanks, Eolian.
I think I'll just go with the case for a while and see how it goes. If the front starts to take a beating, I can always use the Invisishield then. So far, I'm really liking this case.
I got a fingernail into the seam, then some steady force pulling the lower section straight back did the trick. It's a nice case with a beautiful fit.
I did not opt for a screen protector, no second thoughts. I've found these often get pretty mucked up themselves on other devices, and that by itself would be a shortcoming on this amazing display.
For a lot of traveling, maybe an inexpensive slip case? Best luck.
Thanks, Eolian.
I think I'll just go with the case for a while and see how it goes. If the front starts to take a beating, I can always use the Invisishield then. So far, I'm really liking this case.
iJawn108
Jan 11, 09:11 PM
i highly highly doubt they are calling it the "macbook air." that's borderline laughable. i am willing to bet the phase "there's something in the air" is referring to the soon to be announced rental service, not a piece of hardware. apple is making an obvious attempt to eliminate physical mediums altogether, first cds with mp3s and now dvds with downloadable vids (both via the itunes music store). everything will be available "in the air" or "up in the cloud," if you will. i'll be damned if they name their next product the "macbook air." c'mon people...
Aperture 2.0 via iTunes... or maybe it just reefers to iPhone/iPod Touch apps.
Or maybe it referes to a notebook that doesnt have a replaceable battery, though the new macbooks will be used as frisbees.
Aperture 2.0 via iTunes... or maybe it just reefers to iPhone/iPod Touch apps.
Or maybe it referes to a notebook that doesnt have a replaceable battery, though the new macbooks will be used as frisbees.
doo-hik-ee
Jan 3, 09:06 PM
give me an apple clothing line!
