Eidorian
Mar 28, 04:47 PM
With the Mac App Store I can take a quick glance, click update all if there are any updates and be done with it.What happens if you never open the Mac App Store?
Chone
Mar 23, 06:16 PM
Excellent! :)
This is kind of a tricky situation... it's stealing, but if you allow it to happen you basically suck. :P
When I last went home to visit parents, I found an open router called "linksys" and I connected to its conf page using the default login/password and changed the SSID to "open_router_please_hack_me" ;)
Heh I know that will never happen to me, my walls are so thick, my neighbors walls are so thick and I have NO adjacent houses next to mine anyway... hell, the wireless signal barely gets to my room :D and even so I have it secured :)
Back on topic rtdgoldfish, at least now you know that whoever stole your Xbox360 is near you and you'll probably get it back, even if a little late. Best of luck :)
This is kind of a tricky situation... it's stealing, but if you allow it to happen you basically suck. :P
When I last went home to visit parents, I found an open router called "linksys" and I connected to its conf page using the default login/password and changed the SSID to "open_router_please_hack_me" ;)
Heh I know that will never happen to me, my walls are so thick, my neighbors walls are so thick and I have NO adjacent houses next to mine anyway... hell, the wireless signal barely gets to my room :D and even so I have it secured :)
Back on topic rtdgoldfish, at least now you know that whoever stole your Xbox360 is near you and you'll probably get it back, even if a little late. Best of luck :)
ehoui
May 4, 04:00 PM
Why is someone bothered if the question itself does no harm. Grow up or change doctors if you don't like to be asked questions. This law is about as anti-libertarian and useless government intrusion as it gets.
Amnak
Apr 25, 12:30 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_7 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E303 Safari/6533.18.5)
I definitly think this is a good idea, The screen the size it is now is fine , however the most important part is the phones physical sizes which is perfect
I definitly think this is a good idea, The screen the size it is now is fine , however the most important part is the phones physical sizes which is perfect
more...
Links
Aug 23, 01:22 AM
The following was posted on www.barefeats.com last Friday:
"August 18th, 2006 -- New Apple 23" Cinema impresses. We ordered a new 23" Cinema display for our Mac Pro 3GHz. This new model (numbers starting with 2A6281 or higher) is brighter with better contrast than the previous model. Best of all, the pink hue on grey screens is gone."
http://www.barefeats.com/quick.html
Guess they got lucky.
Gus, at Apple's Cinema Displays (Mid 2004) forum, wasn't and his is also a "newer" version than the one barefeats got.
"I ordered my ACD 23'' online, on August 14th, and I got a display serial number 2A6290, with serious backlight leakage, and a magenta cast on the left side. I am going to the store to exchange it or return it."
"August 18th, 2006 -- New Apple 23" Cinema impresses. We ordered a new 23" Cinema display for our Mac Pro 3GHz. This new model (numbers starting with 2A6281 or higher) is brighter with better contrast than the previous model. Best of all, the pink hue on grey screens is gone."
http://www.barefeats.com/quick.html
Guess they got lucky.
Gus, at Apple's Cinema Displays (Mid 2004) forum, wasn't and his is also a "newer" version than the one barefeats got.
"I ordered my ACD 23'' online, on August 14th, and I got a display serial number 2A6290, with serious backlight leakage, and a magenta cast on the left side. I am going to the store to exchange it or return it."
JoeG4
Mar 18, 09:34 PM
I admit, I do get sick of my iPhone-loving friends saying ew every time I bring out/mention my phone. Maybe they're jealous when we're in the same building they've got no signal and I've got some EDGE still. XD
more...
MacRumors
Apr 25, 11:44 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/25/photo-of-iphone-4s-with-larger-screen/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/25/123044-ee164ce60334b6df3bb8-LL.jpg
Cross With Dog Tags Tattoo.
more...
Dog tag military tattoo
dog tag, tattoo personal
more...
dog tag tattoos. Each dog tag necklace comes
Dot tag with tattoo design of
more...
Military Dog Tags Tattoos.
dog tags tattoo - Rate My Red
more...
dog tag tattoos
Tags: photo, Photoshopped
more...
Dog Tag Tattoo
dog tag tattoos. Ed Hardy Tattoo 2-piece Dog
Unique dog tag pendant and
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/25/123044-ee164ce60334b6df3bb8-LL.jpg
SthrnCmfrtr
Jan 9, 12:03 PM
really? do you have one or is this from a distance opinion? Asking, because I am on the verge...
I wouldn't put much faith in the opinions of a person demonstrably unable to coherently express himself.
I wouldn't put much faith in the opinions of a person demonstrably unable to coherently express himself.
more...
GSMiller
Jan 15, 09:22 PM
I don't know what is more lame...
The fact that Gizmodo actually pulled such a stunt or that Motorola used a presenter with a British accent.
The fact that Gizmodo actually pulled such a stunt or that Motorola used a presenter with a British accent.
Di9it8
Nov 23, 04:53 PM
Would a US .Mac code bought now work in the UK in February? ;-)
Should work anywhere from date of first use/registration:rolleyes:
Should work anywhere from date of first use/registration:rolleyes:
more...
marktwain
Nov 23, 06:52 PM
So wait... a $101 discount on the 17" iMac but only a $41 discount on the 24" model? That doesn't make sense. Usually the more expensive the item, the larger the discount.
The dicount is around $100...the highest end model is $2059...the 24" iMac with wireless keyboard and mouse...it's a configuration they stock in the stores.
The dicount is around $100...the highest end model is $2059...the 24" iMac with wireless keyboard and mouse...it's a configuration they stock in the stores.
radiohead14
Apr 16, 04:28 AM
Apple's success is in large part driven by the ecosystem that they have built around iPod/iTunes/iPhone/iPad. Good luck to anyone breaking into that anytime soon. The day I can buy a song on Mac/PC, synch it to my Android phone, then stream it around my home to HiFi or TV then we will have a competitor. Apple knows it, the record companies and studios know it, someone needs to tell Google.
What a shame. I really like Android OS but one of my biggest complaints by far is the lack of a solid service to sync and play music with my phone/tablet.
already exists - Amazon Cloud/Music Player
What a shame. I really like Android OS but one of my biggest complaints by far is the lack of a solid service to sync and play music with my phone/tablet.
already exists - Amazon Cloud/Music Player
more...
wmmk
Nov 24, 05:53 AM
ok, about to leave for the apple store! i'm psyched!
MacBoobsPro
Jan 5, 03:41 PM
it would be great if apple would put up a video feed of the keynote live.
If it was live you wouldnt get all the split screen editing etc. It would be quite a linear and boring presentation.
Editing the feed can give emphasis to certain aspects and also cut out anything that goes wrong.
If it was live you wouldnt get all the split screen editing etc. It would be quite a linear and boring presentation.
Editing the feed can give emphasis to certain aspects and also cut out anything that goes wrong.
more...
cRuNcHiE
Jul 21, 03:01 PM
For this video to have any kind of credit i think they should have the iPhone 4 next to it holding it at the same time...
Abstract
Sep 7, 10:03 PM
Maroon 5 sucks, though. Its so boring. Not on the same level as Keane, but still quite a snoozer.
Funny thing is that Kanye is a Maroon 5 fan, and has the lead singer from Maroon 5 on the 2nd track of his new album, Late Registration. Good song, too. :)
Funny thing is that Kanye is a Maroon 5 fan, and has the lead singer from Maroon 5 on the 2nd track of his new album, Late Registration. Good song, too. :)
more...
Lord Blackadder
Aug 10, 01:10 PM
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
slb
Mar 29, 11:26 AM
Welcome to 1984.
This has nothing to do with 1984.
This has nothing to do with 1984.
ddrueckhammer
Sep 12, 08:41 AM
I can't imagine why Apple would have an event like this if there was going to be only Disney content available.
Especially, if they don't have better prices or selection than the Amazon store released last week. Also, if they don't offer renting they are crazy. Who will buy a movie for $14.99 off of the internet without the media? I have actually rented a movie from the Unbox store and despite a crappy UI, problems starting the download, and having to use an S-video cable to connect my laptop to the TV, I found the experience better than expected. 90minutes downloaded in 1.5 hours and available to stream in 25 minutes is more than acceptable for me.
Especially, if they don't have better prices or selection than the Amazon store released last week. Also, if they don't offer renting they are crazy. Who will buy a movie for $14.99 off of the internet without the media? I have actually rented a movie from the Unbox store and despite a crappy UI, problems starting the download, and having to use an S-video cable to connect my laptop to the TV, I found the experience better than expected. 90minutes downloaded in 1.5 hours and available to stream in 25 minutes is more than acceptable for me.
nebulos
May 3, 10:41 PM
I'll buy one when it gets a capacitive pressure based screen/stylus (Like the HTC Flyer)
IMO, until the ipad gets this, which is entirely possible, it will remain more of a toy than a tool, and all these commercials will be nothing but fodder for the haters.
there's nothing wrong with toys, and this is a nice one, but these lines about doctors, CEOs, etc., are just plain ridiculous.
IMO, until the ipad gets this, which is entirely possible, it will remain more of a toy than a tool, and all these commercials will be nothing but fodder for the haters.
there's nothing wrong with toys, and this is a nice one, but these lines about doctors, CEOs, etc., are just plain ridiculous.
illegalfrogs
Apr 16, 09:52 AM
I think it could be real. Apple seems to be trying to get away from plastic in their more pretentious, pro-level products. I can see the high-end iPhone being this, with an aluminum body, and the low end $99 model becoming the plastic 3GS. (Similar to the plastic MacBook Consumer model and aluminum MacBook Pro arrangement). They also banned screen protectors and seem to insist don't need anything to protect your iPhone... the metal back would appear more durable. Some people have also been clamoring for a return to original 2G iPhone looks. Maybe they found a way to route cell reception through the front so they can fry our brains even further (creating more Apple zealot zombies in the process).
vassillios
Apr 15, 12:37 PM
Obviously fake. Look at the slanted iPhone writing on the bottom photo. Horrible photoshop skills
Ommid
Apr 25, 12:07 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
Despite the source of the image being not 100% trusted, this seems to be most accurate sounding rumour. Although I do not think that it will be called iPhone 4S as this will mess with the versioning numbers because the one after the 4S/5 would be 6.
No it will go from 4S to 5 lol
Despite the source of the image being not 100% trusted, this seems to be most accurate sounding rumour. Although I do not think that it will be called iPhone 4S as this will mess with the versioning numbers because the one after the 4S/5 would be 6.
No it will go from 4S to 5 lol
franswa za
May 2, 10:45 AM
I find it amusing that the G1 can run Android Gingerbread fairly well, but Apple makes it impossible to upgrade the original iPhone to the latest and greatest iOS.
and, your point is?
"old tech" wanting 2 b supported to include WHAT? you can still phone from the device, yes, my droogie?,
and, your point is?
"old tech" wanting 2 b supported to include WHAT? you can still phone from the device, yes, my droogie?,
No comments:
Post a Comment