nitynate
Sep 12, 02:53 PM
Dear Apple,
I appoligise for my earlier outburst.
I really do love you.
Well.... In a creepy-ish kind of way. THATS NOT THE POINT!!!!!
I want the 8GB nano in green.
Love,
Nathan
I appoligise for my earlier outburst.
I really do love you.
Well.... In a creepy-ish kind of way. THATS NOT THE POINT!!!!!
I want the 8GB nano in green.
Love,
Nathan
jjahshik32
May 3, 02:00 PM
Probably, but it might depend on whether you can download the Windows 7 drivers from ATI, or whether you have to use Apple's dual boot drivers.
Your question should be "can TBolt 'team' two channels for double bandwidth on one connection"?
For your question, the answer is "yes" if you can have two simultaneous 10 Gb/sec links. For my version, the answer is yes if you can have one 20 Gb/sec link.
Shipping sometime this summer - so the answer is "no, there are no TBolt devices available to buy".
The real worry about this fact, though, is that no Apples have been tested with openly purchased TBolt peripherals. I wonder how many software updates, firmware revisions, or motherboard replacements will be needed before TBolt devices work reliably without kernel panics.
I wouldnt worry about kernal panics or incompatibility issues with thunderbolt. Its like any other peripherals, its been heavily tested by apple and as long as other devices meets the requirements for thunderbolt, there will be no issues.
Your question should be "can TBolt 'team' two channels for double bandwidth on one connection"?
For your question, the answer is "yes" if you can have two simultaneous 10 Gb/sec links. For my version, the answer is yes if you can have one 20 Gb/sec link.
Shipping sometime this summer - so the answer is "no, there are no TBolt devices available to buy".
The real worry about this fact, though, is that no Apples have been tested with openly purchased TBolt peripherals. I wonder how many software updates, firmware revisions, or motherboard replacements will be needed before TBolt devices work reliably without kernel panics.
I wouldnt worry about kernal panics or incompatibility issues with thunderbolt. Its like any other peripherals, its been heavily tested by apple and as long as other devices meets the requirements for thunderbolt, there will be no issues.
yg17
Sep 26, 09:28 AM
No iPhone for me then. Cingular blows, we're leaving in December when our contract is up. They have to the the worst cell company in the US, both customer service and the actual cell service
DJMastaWes
Jul 17, 07:15 PM
So I think we may see the entire line get a revamp: mac mini gets faster chips (still Yonah), perhaps same with MB, though that may just get a price drop. MBPs/iMacs get new processors, and we get the new MPs.
All at WWDC?
All at WWDC?
donlphi
Sep 5, 08:56 PM
What the hell are you talking about? I don't know what HD trailers you were downloading, but they look fantastic on my screen. Also, yes, some of them take forever if you're on a slower connection but it sounds as though everyone's banking on broadband these days; it has become the rule, not the exception.
I downloaded a couple trailers and watched them on two different displays, and they were not "Fantastic"... perhaps fantastic compared to watching the low res version in full screen mode. I am talking about blowing it up and filling the screen with the trailer. It skipped frames, picture froze once in a while.
Either way, what are you going to do with a HD version of the movie on your computer? Stream it onto your TV from the room next door? If it's that slow with a 2 minute teaser on an Apple Store connection, and my home Comcast connection (which is generally slow - hurry up USB EVDO CARD!!!), I don't see people wanting to buy it, other than the fact that it is a new Apple product.
I certainly didn't run rigorous tests, just tried watching the new Transformers trailer, clicked the HD version of it, blew it up to full screen, and watched the chunks of video stop everywhere.
If you want to see TRUE HD, get comcast or any other Digital cable provider and watch the HD feed of NBC for a minute. THAT is what HD should look like. If it doesn't look clear, what's the point?
with that said, here is a picture of the new video HD video iPOD. This girl is carrying the ipod unit in her left hand and holding onto the 2 TB Hard Drive on her shoulder.
The bag comes in 3 different colors, which is nice, blue, pink, and titanium.
56728
I downloaded a couple trailers and watched them on two different displays, and they were not "Fantastic"... perhaps fantastic compared to watching the low res version in full screen mode. I am talking about blowing it up and filling the screen with the trailer. It skipped frames, picture froze once in a while.
Either way, what are you going to do with a HD version of the movie on your computer? Stream it onto your TV from the room next door? If it's that slow with a 2 minute teaser on an Apple Store connection, and my home Comcast connection (which is generally slow - hurry up USB EVDO CARD!!!), I don't see people wanting to buy it, other than the fact that it is a new Apple product.
I certainly didn't run rigorous tests, just tried watching the new Transformers trailer, clicked the HD version of it, blew it up to full screen, and watched the chunks of video stop everywhere.
If you want to see TRUE HD, get comcast or any other Digital cable provider and watch the HD feed of NBC for a minute. THAT is what HD should look like. If it doesn't look clear, what's the point?
with that said, here is a picture of the new video HD video iPOD. This girl is carrying the ipod unit in her left hand and holding onto the 2 TB Hard Drive on her shoulder.
The bag comes in 3 different colors, which is nice, blue, pink, and titanium.
56728
bdj21ya
Sep 15, 07:01 PM
The biggest reason phones suck today is because the interfaces are horrible (SE's being the best of them all). Motorola's phones are nice but their UI's are awful. What I am expecting from Apple is an easy to use phone that looks great and has, nothing less than, an excellent UI. Of course it'll work with iSync ... that's just obvious.
Hear hear! It bugs me no end that every time I use my Motorola phone's user interface I see obvious ways it could have been better, if anyone had bothered to put 5 minutes of thought into it. For example, menus should be able to be controlled by numbers. That way you can memorize a code to get to functions you use frequently, and you don't have to look at the screen or click up and down arrows all day long. (This is how my Samsung phone was)
Hear hear! It bugs me no end that every time I use my Motorola phone's user interface I see obvious ways it could have been better, if anyone had bothered to put 5 minutes of thought into it. For example, menus should be able to be controlled by numbers. That way you can memorize a code to get to functions you use frequently, and you don't have to look at the screen or click up and down arrows all day long. (This is how my Samsung phone was)
mcmlxix
Apr 20, 11:37 AM
This is a huge concern because of the use by law enforcement (http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20055431-1.html) of the Cellebrite device to download and scrutinize the data in cell phones. Apparently, police departments in Michigan are using this device when pulling drivers on traffic violations. Here (http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp) is another article on the use in Michigan.
Cellebrite's widget is apparently able to download and scrutinize (http://www.cellebrite.com/news-and-events/press-releases/190-cellebrite-releases-ufed-physical-analyzer-version-20-the-new-standard-for-mobile-phone-forensics-.html) the data from a vast variety of mobile devices, including Blackberry phones and the iPhone.
Isn't this illegal search and seizure?
Cellebrite's widget is apparently able to download and scrutinize (http://www.cellebrite.com/news-and-events/press-releases/190-cellebrite-releases-ufed-physical-analyzer-version-20-the-new-standard-for-mobile-phone-forensics-.html) the data from a vast variety of mobile devices, including Blackberry phones and the iPhone.
Isn't this illegal search and seizure?
notjustjay
Sep 19, 04:27 PM
He quoted that number on a 5M connection...is that what you have?
Pfff, who knows. The quality of our local DSL service has gone to crap lately. I would have thought in theory I should be getting 3M, but in reality, it's been pretty slow lately. It doesn't help that the DSL company I'm with now is one that I was dumped with because the one I had originally subscribed to went out of business. I would switch, but I'm not hearing very good things from neighbors with other companies...
But my point is that Steve talked about 30-minute downloads as if to say that this is what your average user can expect. Sure, some of you can do that. But those of us with crappy DSL/cable (or even.. gasp! dialup!) are not in a place yet where large movie downloads are convenient.
Pfff, who knows. The quality of our local DSL service has gone to crap lately. I would have thought in theory I should be getting 3M, but in reality, it's been pretty slow lately. It doesn't help that the DSL company I'm with now is one that I was dumped with because the one I had originally subscribed to went out of business. I would switch, but I'm not hearing very good things from neighbors with other companies...
But my point is that Steve talked about 30-minute downloads as if to say that this is what your average user can expect. Sure, some of you can do that. But those of us with crappy DSL/cable (or even.. gasp! dialup!) are not in a place yet where large movie downloads are convenient.
libertyforall
Nov 13, 03:15 PM
Maybe developers should just make jailbroken iPhone apps exclusively...
blizaine
Apr 4, 11:54 AM
I heard the mall cop got the head-shot while moving at full speed on a Segway. Simply amazing.
samiwas
Apr 18, 12:50 AM
why would I want to pay someone $17 an hour to a job a monkey is almost qualified to do? Sounds like an opportunity to hire less people, or jack my prices up. A job is worth simply what a job is worth. Period. If I'm trying to offer services at competitive prices, and someone is willing to bag groceries for $3 an hour, then they should be ALLOWED to. Rather than me just choose to hire nobody and using automated checkouts.
Yeah man, one of my biggest incentives to put my money on the line and open a small business is that I have the opportunity to pay someone to not work for a year.
So, needless to say, you don't support any type of workers' rights, correct? Basically, if someone wants to work, they better damn well be willing to work for the lowest possible dollar in your opinion. I mean, let's not worry about things like being able to pay rents or insurance, or even for transportation to and from work. Screw them, they are under your watch now.
And what YOU think a job is worth is not what everyone thinks a job is worth. I think most people are vastly underpaid for the work they do. And others, like entertainers, sports players, corporate CEOs, and types like that, are VASTLY overpaid. I don't know what world you might live in that acting in a movie or playing a few 3-hour games a year or driving in circles is actually WORTH $20 million or even much more.
So let's flip this the other way. Should an employer be able to change compensation at will? Let's say you have 10 employees working at $30 a day scooping scum out of sewers (in your fantasy $3 an hour type world). You want to get more work done, so you decide to require all workers to now work for 18 hours a day, 7 days a week without any extra compensation or be fired. Should that also be allowed? You know, free will and free market and all? Those pansies who wont accept such a deal can just go find something else?
And as for your maternity leave thing...it's just one part of having some sort of benefit that makes you have happy, productive workers. Now, I know that you believe that all workers should just be productive and follow orders and meet the goals without any sort of recognition or reward other than a measly paycheck, but how about as an employer you put a little up there, too, and treat your workers as fellow human beings with a few benefits, and not the punching bags that you seem to think they are.
For example...the company I work for has been cutting every possible "thank you" that we used to get. Full nights out at steak restaurants with open bar and all expenses paid, as a thank you for the weeks of hard work doing installs, have turned into "We'll take you to a Fridays and buy the first round" even though they are still doing very well. As every benefit has gone away, our desire to go that extra mile has gone with them. This past work period, the client took us out for numerous barbecues, group outings at local pubs, visits to local attractions, etc. Guess what? We went all out to return the love.
What happens then? More people find jobs, and prices go down. $3 dollars suddenly buys you a subway sandwich. # of consumers goes up bc more people are employed, which brings in more revenue, causes more hiring etc.
Also, people who do want to make $10 bucks an hour are forced to either be productive or learn something useful, which is good for everyone, plus that $10 is worth more now bc of deflation. Deflation would also drive interest rates on loans down bc the money you pay back is worth more.
All ideology. It's a nice thought, but it would never happen. With wages that low, these people wouldn't be able to afford anything. Your $3 an hour wage, working 40 hours a week would net less than $500 a month BEFORE any taxes. And with so many people making so little, they wouldn't be paying tax anyway probably, so all the various tax issues would not be solved.
And if you REALLY think that cost of everything across the board would fall drastically solely because of smaller wages on low-level jobs, you are delusional. Do you think transportation costs would drop drastically, rent would drop drastically, land costs would drop drastically, corporate wages would drop drastically? Just paying low-level workers less would solve all the country's problems? Really?
Best case scenario, taxes are low at this point, and the government isn't a handout machine, so people feel the need to donate to an EFFICIENT charity. Rather than to the government, which is the most inefficient entity on the planet.
Taxes are now the lowest they have almost EVER been, so those clearly aren't the problem. And with people making pretty much no money, I don't think it would solve your handout woes. And there is no private charity out there that has the reach and availability of the government, whether you like to believe that or not.
Overall result: More buying power, lower unemployment, more substantial and efficient charity, more innovation.
So using this chart...
http://consumerist.com/images/resources/2007/04/changeinceopaygraph.jpg
...answer this please: if taxes are the lowest they've been almost ever, worker pay hasn't increased much at all in 15-20 years, then why are corporate profits way up, and CEO pay ridiculously increased over the same period??
It would seem to me that it isn't taxes and worker pay that have caused the problem. It's putting the money in the wrong place. Instead of paying the CEO $20 million a year, you could pay him/her $18 million a year, and hire 66 new employees at $30,000 a year. The CEO would never notice that difference (no, they wouldn't), and 66 new people could afford to live comfortably, eat, and BUY STUFF IN THE ECONOMY.
How about instead of trying to cut standard wages down to unlivable numbers, we cut down ludicrous wages to just ridiculous wages. THAT is where our problem is. The majority of the money is going to owners, shareholders, and profits and not to workers. The workers are not the problem here....greed is the problem.
sydde: What is this supposed to show? That US corporations are more profitable? Is that a good thing? For whom?
bassfinger: Stock owners in these companies. Which are made up of middle class citizens
Oh my god...this is the most laughable statement of all....
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Figure_2a.gif
The bottom 90% owns 2% of financial securities, 19% of stock and mutual funds, and 21% of trusts. The top 10% (ie VERY LITTLE of the the middle class) owns the vast majority of it. The middle class benefits very little from massive profits of business in this sense. Give up that notion.
Face it...your ideas are crap.
Yeah man, one of my biggest incentives to put my money on the line and open a small business is that I have the opportunity to pay someone to not work for a year.
So, needless to say, you don't support any type of workers' rights, correct? Basically, if someone wants to work, they better damn well be willing to work for the lowest possible dollar in your opinion. I mean, let's not worry about things like being able to pay rents or insurance, or even for transportation to and from work. Screw them, they are under your watch now.
And what YOU think a job is worth is not what everyone thinks a job is worth. I think most people are vastly underpaid for the work they do. And others, like entertainers, sports players, corporate CEOs, and types like that, are VASTLY overpaid. I don't know what world you might live in that acting in a movie or playing a few 3-hour games a year or driving in circles is actually WORTH $20 million or even much more.
So let's flip this the other way. Should an employer be able to change compensation at will? Let's say you have 10 employees working at $30 a day scooping scum out of sewers (in your fantasy $3 an hour type world). You want to get more work done, so you decide to require all workers to now work for 18 hours a day, 7 days a week without any extra compensation or be fired. Should that also be allowed? You know, free will and free market and all? Those pansies who wont accept such a deal can just go find something else?
And as for your maternity leave thing...it's just one part of having some sort of benefit that makes you have happy, productive workers. Now, I know that you believe that all workers should just be productive and follow orders and meet the goals without any sort of recognition or reward other than a measly paycheck, but how about as an employer you put a little up there, too, and treat your workers as fellow human beings with a few benefits, and not the punching bags that you seem to think they are.
For example...the company I work for has been cutting every possible "thank you" that we used to get. Full nights out at steak restaurants with open bar and all expenses paid, as a thank you for the weeks of hard work doing installs, have turned into "We'll take you to a Fridays and buy the first round" even though they are still doing very well. As every benefit has gone away, our desire to go that extra mile has gone with them. This past work period, the client took us out for numerous barbecues, group outings at local pubs, visits to local attractions, etc. Guess what? We went all out to return the love.
What happens then? More people find jobs, and prices go down. $3 dollars suddenly buys you a subway sandwich. # of consumers goes up bc more people are employed, which brings in more revenue, causes more hiring etc.
Also, people who do want to make $10 bucks an hour are forced to either be productive or learn something useful, which is good for everyone, plus that $10 is worth more now bc of deflation. Deflation would also drive interest rates on loans down bc the money you pay back is worth more.
All ideology. It's a nice thought, but it would never happen. With wages that low, these people wouldn't be able to afford anything. Your $3 an hour wage, working 40 hours a week would net less than $500 a month BEFORE any taxes. And with so many people making so little, they wouldn't be paying tax anyway probably, so all the various tax issues would not be solved.
And if you REALLY think that cost of everything across the board would fall drastically solely because of smaller wages on low-level jobs, you are delusional. Do you think transportation costs would drop drastically, rent would drop drastically, land costs would drop drastically, corporate wages would drop drastically? Just paying low-level workers less would solve all the country's problems? Really?
Best case scenario, taxes are low at this point, and the government isn't a handout machine, so people feel the need to donate to an EFFICIENT charity. Rather than to the government, which is the most inefficient entity on the planet.
Taxes are now the lowest they have almost EVER been, so those clearly aren't the problem. And with people making pretty much no money, I don't think it would solve your handout woes. And there is no private charity out there that has the reach and availability of the government, whether you like to believe that or not.
Overall result: More buying power, lower unemployment, more substantial and efficient charity, more innovation.
So using this chart...
http://consumerist.com/images/resources/2007/04/changeinceopaygraph.jpg
...answer this please: if taxes are the lowest they've been almost ever, worker pay hasn't increased much at all in 15-20 years, then why are corporate profits way up, and CEO pay ridiculously increased over the same period??
It would seem to me that it isn't taxes and worker pay that have caused the problem. It's putting the money in the wrong place. Instead of paying the CEO $20 million a year, you could pay him/her $18 million a year, and hire 66 new employees at $30,000 a year. The CEO would never notice that difference (no, they wouldn't), and 66 new people could afford to live comfortably, eat, and BUY STUFF IN THE ECONOMY.
How about instead of trying to cut standard wages down to unlivable numbers, we cut down ludicrous wages to just ridiculous wages. THAT is where our problem is. The majority of the money is going to owners, shareholders, and profits and not to workers. The workers are not the problem here....greed is the problem.
sydde: What is this supposed to show? That US corporations are more profitable? Is that a good thing? For whom?
bassfinger: Stock owners in these companies. Which are made up of middle class citizens
Oh my god...this is the most laughable statement of all....
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Figure_2a.gif
The bottom 90% owns 2% of financial securities, 19% of stock and mutual funds, and 21% of trusts. The top 10% (ie VERY LITTLE of the the middle class) owns the vast majority of it. The middle class benefits very little from massive profits of business in this sense. Give up that notion.
Face it...your ideas are crap.
EagerDragon
Aug 23, 05:30 PM
Before this set of law suits between creative and Apple, Creative had a leg in the cript. Now the 100 million will probably save the company.
It is likely that someone screwed up and delayed in applying for a patent, as such, :eek: Creative got there first. Maybe that is why Steve sounded pissed.
It is likely that someone screwed up and delayed in applying for a patent, as such, :eek: Creative got there first. Maybe that is why Steve sounded pissed.
freeny
Sep 5, 12:39 PM
I believe Apple has been waiting for all the planets to align. If there is going to be a movie service there will be a true "video iPod".
They were whipped in the ass last time for the boom box release, they will be looking to gain back face this time around.
They were whipped in the ass last time for the boom box release, they will be looking to gain back face this time around.
rdowns
Aug 31, 04:46 PM
September 12 SteveNote. Well I must have posted that phrase scores of times earlier this year - just didn't think it would be in San Francisco instead of Paris. All the better. Perfect ending to a wonderful Summer 2006.
Lots for him to talk about.
Core 2 Duo will be the star.
End of Core Solo minis.
All new redesigned MacBook Pro.
All new iMac design with Conroe inside.
iTunes Media Store Movie Downloads.
Maybe even "One More Thing"
Pass the doobie
Lots for him to talk about.
Core 2 Duo will be the star.
End of Core Solo minis.
All new redesigned MacBook Pro.
All new iMac design with Conroe inside.
iTunes Media Store Movie Downloads.
Maybe even "One More Thing"
Pass the doobie
Uragon
Mar 30, 01:08 PM
The real question is why MS is so bothered about Apple using 'App Store'. Historically MS (almost) never used the word App, instead using the word Programs. Surely MS can come up with many alternatives that describe their own store equally well, if not better. Why fight with Apple over this? I can only conclude that it is to spite Apple, or to ride Apple's coat tails yet again.
Even if MS is right, logically, linguistically, I find their attitude over this rather puerile. PR-wise it says to me "Apple, if we can't imitate you, we'll sue you"
MS sinks lower in my opinion by the day.
Completely agree with you. Not sure why Microsoft making this a BIG deal.
Even if MS is right, logically, linguistically, I find their attitude over this rather puerile. PR-wise it says to me "Apple, if we can't imitate you, we'll sue you"
MS sinks lower in my opinion by the day.
Completely agree with you. Not sure why Microsoft making this a BIG deal.
milo
Sep 5, 06:03 PM
What if you downloaded the movie to your Macbook Pro and went on a business trip? Or you only own a laptop?
HOW are the members of your family going to watch the movie?
Just copy it to the computer at home. How are the members of your family going to use a computer if you take the only one with you?
HOW are the members of your family going to watch the movie?
Just copy it to the computer at home. How are the members of your family going to use a computer if you take the only one with you?
aiqw9182
Apr 22, 02:05 PM
Netbooks do not have optical drives. Ultraportables do.
The MBA looks good as a netbook. It looks bad as an ultraportable.
MBA and MBP are two different markets.
MBA is for people that want light. MBP is for people that want a full featured notebook.
So you want a big MBA.
If they could have the same processors, that would happen already at 13".
So, ONE netbook which has an optical drive. Which makes the MBA look bad because it doesn't have one.
Actually, most netbooks make the MBA look bad because it doesn't have gigabit ethernet.
And a 15" Zacate which is not a notebook because the CPU is too weak, it's not a netbook, and it's not an ultraportable because it's too big would make an MBP without optical disk look bad because of the price, even if it has little reason to exist (unclassifiable in a bad way).
I heard the name HP Envy, but I never bothered looking what it is. So yes, I ignore it.
So, if there's no option to have heated seats in the Audi, that looks bad.
My god, I haven't found myself reaching for the ignore button on this forum in a long time. You've just reset that timer.
The MBA looks good as a netbook. It looks bad as an ultraportable.
MBA and MBP are two different markets.
MBA is for people that want light. MBP is for people that want a full featured notebook.
So you want a big MBA.
If they could have the same processors, that would happen already at 13".
So, ONE netbook which has an optical drive. Which makes the MBA look bad because it doesn't have one.
Actually, most netbooks make the MBA look bad because it doesn't have gigabit ethernet.
And a 15" Zacate which is not a notebook because the CPU is too weak, it's not a netbook, and it's not an ultraportable because it's too big would make an MBP without optical disk look bad because of the price, even if it has little reason to exist (unclassifiable in a bad way).
I heard the name HP Envy, but I never bothered looking what it is. So yes, I ignore it.
So, if there's no option to have heated seats in the Audi, that looks bad.
My god, I haven't found myself reaching for the ignore button on this forum in a long time. You've just reset that timer.
Quadra610
Apr 25, 01:14 PM
Translated: Next macbook pro will be a macbook air. MBA will cease to exist as a discrete product line. Happening late fall 2011 (if we're lucky).
OrangeSVTguy
May 3, 10:22 AM
Now I want my mini with 4 thunderbolt ports and quad core. Bring on the new SB Mini :p
Those iMacs are so nice looking tho!
Those iMacs are so nice looking tho!
iGary
Sep 14, 10:15 AM
you can feel free to go ahead and explain yourself in your next post instead of just mindlessly making statements with nothing to back them up. thanks.
I already did that (explain myself) and you said I was ignorant for doing so - didn't leave me many options, really. :)
I already did that (explain myself) and you said I was ignorant for doing so - didn't leave me many options, really. :)
DrFrankTM
Sep 10, 05:19 AM
If my memory serves me correctly Conroe will not be pin compatible with Merom, is that right? I just can't remember what's what anymore. Old age.
As far as I know, the first generation Merom is pin-compatible with Yonah, the Core Duo mobile processor that is in the MacBook, MacBook Pro and Mac Mini at the moment. And if I'm not mistaken, Kentsfield will be pin-compatible with Conroe, which is not used in any Mac at the moment.
EDIT: But no, Conroe and Merom are not pin-compatible.
As far as I know, the first generation Merom is pin-compatible with Yonah, the Core Duo mobile processor that is in the MacBook, MacBook Pro and Mac Mini at the moment. And if I'm not mistaken, Kentsfield will be pin-compatible with Conroe, which is not used in any Mac at the moment.
EDIT: But no, Conroe and Merom are not pin-compatible.
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 20, 01:22 PM
Wasn't this the same info they told us about when they were collecting signal information?
Location and signal strength.
Location and signal strength.
maflynn
Mar 23, 04:32 PM
The seemingly only purpose of this app is to avoid the checkpoints could be dangerous to those of us who don't drink and drive. They should pull any app.
thisisahughes
Mar 30, 12:46 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Apple is upset at Amazon for using AppStore.
Microsoft is upset at Apple for using App Store.
Interesting.
Apple is upset at Amazon for using AppStore.
Microsoft is upset at Apple for using App Store.
Interesting.
0 comments:
Post a Comment