BreuerEditor
Mar 25, 12:22 PM
Pretty quick response to fixing the issue with 4th gen iPod Touches. Was getting really annoying. :)
Vantage Point
Mar 14, 10:02 AM
There's no way Apple will wait until stock is completely depleted at the discount outlets.
Completely depleted is too strong a word. But, waiting for existing inventories to be relatively low before a release makes sense.
Anyway, we shall see. I can't wait until the wait is over and I can move on to deciding which new model makes for the best investment.
Completely depleted is too strong a word. But, waiting for existing inventories to be relatively low before a release makes sense.
Anyway, we shall see. I can't wait until the wait is over and I can move on to deciding which new model makes for the best investment.
OllyW
Mar 19, 05:31 AM
I applaud you. I would have done the same until they added the "convert higher bit rate to 128" option to the iPhone. Now, I can have 5200 songs on my iPhone 32GB, which is roughly half my iTunes library, with enough space for app, photos, and video. I see no reason to carry around two devices when one does everything I need, plus all the guilty pleasures of the web.
Try squeezing 26,000 songs on your iPhone. ;)
Try squeezing 26,000 songs on your iPhone. ;)
webman2k
Apr 12, 08:53 AM
I used to pirate then stopped. A responsible businessman should and in some cases has to when they use their software and hardware for legitimate purposes. It's a major tax write off at least.
I was still in college when I was using CS1 and CS2. Either way, I eventually grew up and purchased the EDU version of the software with my own cash. And at that time by the way, hacked versions were far more unstable. You couldn't update them, you had to run patching scripts ever so often, plugins wouldn't work or would crash the system etc. It was just better to have the legit copy and keep it moving instead of spending time troubleshooting your scripts.
I don't know how it is now, but I know that it was that way up until CS3 based on the students at my job that still pirated software.
I am sure said person (who doesn't work in the design field) would want to take up design and production as a part-time/tennis shoe money job to support their family yet doesn't have the money to get CS so they just steal it??????? :confused:
This person wouldn't want to get a part-time job that doesn't need him to steal? Or he/she could just claim he's/she's a student/educator and pay for the EDU version . . . at the VERY LEAST.
Read the comment thoroughly. ANYONE can learn the apps, any goofball like you stated yourself in the bold. I didn't put any time restraint on this goofball. But I did mention that it take far more to be a good designer.
Yes it is IMHO. Far better than just taking it. At least you are paying something for someone's work. Using your student ID at the movies, camera shop for film and agitator, Apple store, etc is far better than just stealing from them out right.
No hard feelings bro.
All good points. Let's leave it as different people in different circumstances. For the record, it's not right for anyone to pirate software. However, there are some people, in some situations, that feel that doing the right thing at the time isn't always the best thing. Definitely no hard feelings - just discussion.
I was still in college when I was using CS1 and CS2. Either way, I eventually grew up and purchased the EDU version of the software with my own cash. And at that time by the way, hacked versions were far more unstable. You couldn't update them, you had to run patching scripts ever so often, plugins wouldn't work or would crash the system etc. It was just better to have the legit copy and keep it moving instead of spending time troubleshooting your scripts.
I don't know how it is now, but I know that it was that way up until CS3 based on the students at my job that still pirated software.
I am sure said person (who doesn't work in the design field) would want to take up design and production as a part-time/tennis shoe money job to support their family yet doesn't have the money to get CS so they just steal it??????? :confused:
This person wouldn't want to get a part-time job that doesn't need him to steal? Or he/she could just claim he's/she's a student/educator and pay for the EDU version . . . at the VERY LEAST.
Read the comment thoroughly. ANYONE can learn the apps, any goofball like you stated yourself in the bold. I didn't put any time restraint on this goofball. But I did mention that it take far more to be a good designer.
Yes it is IMHO. Far better than just taking it. At least you are paying something for someone's work. Using your student ID at the movies, camera shop for film and agitator, Apple store, etc is far better than just stealing from them out right.
No hard feelings bro.
All good points. Let's leave it as different people in different circumstances. For the record, it's not right for anyone to pirate software. However, there are some people, in some situations, that feel that doing the right thing at the time isn't always the best thing. Definitely no hard feelings - just discussion.
OllyW
Nov 24, 01:10 PM
The publishing rights are what was being discussed and it's every song in the Beatles catalog. There are other songs by the Beatles and the individual artists which are not part of the catalog being discussed. I wasn't referring to those, or the mechanical rights.
People seemed to think that Sony/ATV controlled (and profited from) the Beatles music available on iTunes so I was just making it clear. :)
People seemed to think that Sony/ATV controlled (and profited from) the Beatles music available on iTunes so I was just making it clear. :)
bembol
Mar 21, 11:46 PM
Amazing story, great move by Apple and congrats to this man.
bigmc6000
Aug 3, 08:50 AM
I think they are using the "we don't want this to get out into the wild" thing as a scam. If you do it in person people might actually ask questions like 1) Why not use the built in wireless card? ('cause we're not good enough to hack that) 2) What are the security settings on the Mac? (everything open and enabled, making it childs play to "hack" in 3) Why would anyone ever use a USB external wifi-card with a MacBook? (They wouldn't - this is about as hypothetical a "hacK" as there ahs ever been).
It's really funny to see earlier in the thread how some of the hacker friends were claiming victory about how the Mac is vulnerable and Mac users are just smug blah blah blah. Strangely, there aren't any posts like that after it was discovered about the 3rd party card and all of the other inconsistencies. This smells just like that "Hack a Mac" contest. Lets make this thing as easy to crack as possible and see if someone can do it - DUH!
It's really funny to see earlier in the thread how some of the hacker friends were claiming victory about how the Mac is vulnerable and Mac users are just smug blah blah blah. Strangely, there aren't any posts like that after it was discovered about the 3rd party card and all of the other inconsistencies. This smells just like that "Hack a Mac" contest. Lets make this thing as easy to crack as possible and see if someone can do it - DUH!
vitaboy
Oct 16, 03:47 PM
We heard something really similar to that when every other company released video-playing mp3 players before Apple did, and Jobs said he didn't see anybody wanting to have portable video. Well, Apple bit its tongue and released it, calling it "innovation".
You know what, Steve never said Apple would NEVER do a video iPod. What he said was that video just didn't make sense at the time. For one thing, he said that there was practically zero demand from iPod users for video. Then he qualified his statement by saying that the situation might be different in the future, but the media being what it is, his comment was reduced to the overly simplistic (but easy to report), "APPLE WILL NEVER MAKE A VIDEO IPOD."
And for your information, the release of the video iPod was innovative because Apple launched it in conjunction with $1.99 music videos and TV shows on the iTunes Store. Less than a year later, there are like 250 TV shows you can buy on iTunes, from the latest hits like Grey's Anatomy to old classics like Knight Rider.
I always get a little peeved that people are so easily dismissive of the iTunes piece of the iPod pie. iPod wouldn't be where it is today without iTunes and the iTunes Store. If it took Apple 18 months to convince the music companies to sell their music for $0.99 on iTunes, then don't you think Apple made the right decision by waiting to launch the video iPod simultaneously with iTunes video offerings? iPod is nothing without content and Steve clearly believes that iPod should never lack for legal music/video content, ever.
I, for one, know from an Apple iPod engineer that Apple had a working video iPod in the labs more than 2 years ago, but it's quite clear that Steve had the patience and foresight to wait until the time was right for video, instead of launching a product into a vacuum. History is full of products that - while technical marvels - utterly failed because they were before their time. Newton was one. The Tucker automobile was another.
I'm a big iPod fan (i've purchased 3) but wireless capabilities is the way of the future. I don't see ourselves in 10 years still being limited by wired headphones and such. Maybe it'll be easier than the Zune (haven't seen the demo) but the idea of beaming a song for somebody else to download/hear is pretty cool to me.
Glad you are such a big fan of the iPod. :) I own 4 iPods myself. :-P
Your prediction about wireless isn't necessarily wrong, but what Steve understands is 1) timing is important and 2) technology in context is even more important. Microsoft never understood this - they're all about feature bullet points and will enthusiastically push out new tech that ends up being poorly implemented and doesn't even end up solving the problems that consumers face in using technology.
Zune is wireless for the sake of wireless. It's wireless crap. Having wireless will not make Zune a better device - in fact, I think most people will soon come to the conclusion that it's crap because there will be no other Zune users within 100 miles to "squirt" each other with.
What people seem to forget is that Apple isn't stupid. It's like all the bruhala that erupted last year when geeks of every stripe claimed iPod would finally be killed because the music cell phone would be the killer product. What's funny is how these people assume Apple suddenly sent all its engineers home and decided, "Well, we've sold 50 million iPods. Time to call it day. No new iPods, ever."
As is now all but certain, Apple has been working on an iPod phone for a while. So much for music phones killing the iPod - maybe this year's iPod, but Apple is not a company to stand still.
Same thing with wireless. What people seem to forget is that Apple already has shown the way in terms of wireless. I'm talking about the broadcasting features already built in to iTunes via Bonjour networking. If you go to any college dorm or library, you'll notice a few to a dozen iTunes music libraries that will show up in your iTunes. People are already streaming their music for free, direct from iTunes, over 802.11. iTunes Sharing has already been doing the "music community" thing for a long time now.
So it seems quite obvious to me that a wireless iPod will be able to pick up these local iTunes streams like a Mac or PC running iTunes can already do.
If Apple wanted to push the technology a bit, then iPods would be able to stream music iPod-to-Mac(s), iPod-to-PC(s), and iPod-to-iPod(s). None of these limited point-to-point crap like Zune. No slow, time-bomb file transfers. Instead, we'll see live streaming from one iPod to many iPods, PCs, or Macs. No music file will actually be transferred, just as in iTunes sharing, which allows Apple to avoid the messiness of wrapping files in DRM like with Zune. A wireless iPod could tune in simultaneously with many different streams at the same time, and it'd be instantaneous because no transfers actually occur.
Sure, you won't be able to take the streams with you, but wireless iPod with iTunes Sharing would be infinitely more usable and fun than some geeky, slow, unworkable Zune model.
So I say just wait. I mean, can you imagine how badly Zune will blow up after Microsoft has launched the product (when they've committed to expensive manufacturing and the R&D is finished) and Apple launches a wireless iPod that actually works like a wireless device is supposed to?
Remember - just think "iPod with iTunes Sharing" and compare that to Zune, and realize with a smile that Microsoft is rushing forward into one of the biggest trainwrecks in music history. Apple's just waiting for them to build up momentum so the spectacle will be spectacular when the tracks get cut out from under them! ;)
You know what, Steve never said Apple would NEVER do a video iPod. What he said was that video just didn't make sense at the time. For one thing, he said that there was practically zero demand from iPod users for video. Then he qualified his statement by saying that the situation might be different in the future, but the media being what it is, his comment was reduced to the overly simplistic (but easy to report), "APPLE WILL NEVER MAKE A VIDEO IPOD."
And for your information, the release of the video iPod was innovative because Apple launched it in conjunction with $1.99 music videos and TV shows on the iTunes Store. Less than a year later, there are like 250 TV shows you can buy on iTunes, from the latest hits like Grey's Anatomy to old classics like Knight Rider.
I always get a little peeved that people are so easily dismissive of the iTunes piece of the iPod pie. iPod wouldn't be where it is today without iTunes and the iTunes Store. If it took Apple 18 months to convince the music companies to sell their music for $0.99 on iTunes, then don't you think Apple made the right decision by waiting to launch the video iPod simultaneously with iTunes video offerings? iPod is nothing without content and Steve clearly believes that iPod should never lack for legal music/video content, ever.
I, for one, know from an Apple iPod engineer that Apple had a working video iPod in the labs more than 2 years ago, but it's quite clear that Steve had the patience and foresight to wait until the time was right for video, instead of launching a product into a vacuum. History is full of products that - while technical marvels - utterly failed because they were before their time. Newton was one. The Tucker automobile was another.
I'm a big iPod fan (i've purchased 3) but wireless capabilities is the way of the future. I don't see ourselves in 10 years still being limited by wired headphones and such. Maybe it'll be easier than the Zune (haven't seen the demo) but the idea of beaming a song for somebody else to download/hear is pretty cool to me.
Glad you are such a big fan of the iPod. :) I own 4 iPods myself. :-P
Your prediction about wireless isn't necessarily wrong, but what Steve understands is 1) timing is important and 2) technology in context is even more important. Microsoft never understood this - they're all about feature bullet points and will enthusiastically push out new tech that ends up being poorly implemented and doesn't even end up solving the problems that consumers face in using technology.
Zune is wireless for the sake of wireless. It's wireless crap. Having wireless will not make Zune a better device - in fact, I think most people will soon come to the conclusion that it's crap because there will be no other Zune users within 100 miles to "squirt" each other with.
What people seem to forget is that Apple isn't stupid. It's like all the bruhala that erupted last year when geeks of every stripe claimed iPod would finally be killed because the music cell phone would be the killer product. What's funny is how these people assume Apple suddenly sent all its engineers home and decided, "Well, we've sold 50 million iPods. Time to call it day. No new iPods, ever."
As is now all but certain, Apple has been working on an iPod phone for a while. So much for music phones killing the iPod - maybe this year's iPod, but Apple is not a company to stand still.
Same thing with wireless. What people seem to forget is that Apple already has shown the way in terms of wireless. I'm talking about the broadcasting features already built in to iTunes via Bonjour networking. If you go to any college dorm or library, you'll notice a few to a dozen iTunes music libraries that will show up in your iTunes. People are already streaming their music for free, direct from iTunes, over 802.11. iTunes Sharing has already been doing the "music community" thing for a long time now.
So it seems quite obvious to me that a wireless iPod will be able to pick up these local iTunes streams like a Mac or PC running iTunes can already do.
If Apple wanted to push the technology a bit, then iPods would be able to stream music iPod-to-Mac(s), iPod-to-PC(s), and iPod-to-iPod(s). None of these limited point-to-point crap like Zune. No slow, time-bomb file transfers. Instead, we'll see live streaming from one iPod to many iPods, PCs, or Macs. No music file will actually be transferred, just as in iTunes sharing, which allows Apple to avoid the messiness of wrapping files in DRM like with Zune. A wireless iPod could tune in simultaneously with many different streams at the same time, and it'd be instantaneous because no transfers actually occur.
Sure, you won't be able to take the streams with you, but wireless iPod with iTunes Sharing would be infinitely more usable and fun than some geeky, slow, unworkable Zune model.
So I say just wait. I mean, can you imagine how badly Zune will blow up after Microsoft has launched the product (when they've committed to expensive manufacturing and the R&D is finished) and Apple launches a wireless iPod that actually works like a wireless device is supposed to?
Remember - just think "iPod with iTunes Sharing" and compare that to Zune, and realize with a smile that Microsoft is rushing forward into one of the biggest trainwrecks in music history. Apple's just waiting for them to build up momentum so the spectacle will be spectacular when the tracks get cut out from under them! ;)
iDisk
Mar 28, 08:28 PM
there better be a new iphone
or what?......
or what?......
FadeToBlack
Sep 12, 06:54 PM
Is it just me or do the colors seem brighter than the Mini's? It could just be my screen.
They look brighter to me, as well. Can't wait to get my Silver one!
They look brighter to me, as well. Can't wait to get my Silver one!
spyker3292
Mar 11, 03:49 PM
dam, could you imagine how many happy people their would be on this forum if apple released new mac pros and macbook pros the same day... i think the servers would crash. and the last purchased thread would be over loaded with new mac goodies :p
And if it all happened on the same day as iPad pre-orders.... :o
And if it all happened on the same day as iPad pre-orders.... :o
gkarris
May 5, 10:47 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I meant when they do put caps on.
By the way I use like 2 gigs a week on AT&T and they leave me alone
They just capped us home and business owners (DSL and Fiber)... :eek:
I would imagine that wireless will follow. AT&T and Verizon will have to honor contracts for the time being. But when the contract is over... :eek:
I meant when they do put caps on.
By the way I use like 2 gigs a week on AT&T and they leave me alone
They just capped us home and business owners (DSL and Fiber)... :eek:
I would imagine that wireless will follow. AT&T and Verizon will have to honor contracts for the time being. But when the contract is over... :eek:
Distortions
Aug 3, 10:26 PM
This is corrected perspective version I made from the source image.
(1600x231, ~90Kb JPEG)
http://temp.bhmm.net/wwdc-2006-dist.jpg
(1600x231, ~90Kb JPEG)
http://temp.bhmm.net/wwdc-2006-dist.jpg
spriter
Sep 4, 02:14 PM
Come on Apple, an 80GB or higher (120!) capacity 5g ipod please with better battery life (more cache memory) please! Hopefully the Movie Store will push capacity to 80GB-100GB.
You can keep yer full-blown video iPod!
You can keep yer full-blown video iPod!
Warbrain
Nov 6, 11:13 PM
...finally...
Apple has dropped the ball here. Now that most laptops ship with the same chips, Apple can't claim the "Mhz Myth" or anything like that. They will have to keep up to speed, no pun intended.
The other company's comparable machines to the MacBook Pro have C2D processors. The ones that compete against the MacBook don't for the most part. Apple didn't drop the ball.
Apple has dropped the ball here. Now that most laptops ship with the same chips, Apple can't claim the "Mhz Myth" or anything like that. They will have to keep up to speed, no pun intended.
The other company's comparable machines to the MacBook Pro have C2D processors. The ones that compete against the MacBook don't for the most part. Apple didn't drop the ball.
edoates
Aug 3, 11:41 AM
No, the way this works is to effectly by-pas all that. All buffer overflow "hacks" do this.
What you do is send a poorly formatted, out of spec network packet. The driver reads the packet which is oversized and places it in memory. The packet being over sized over writes some of the driver code. Some of this over written code is an entry point to the driver. So the next time that entry point is called the hackers code is executed. .
Some of this points out the wisdom of the IBM AS400 design: code and data were separately tagged entities. It was not possible to execute "data," nor was it possible to tag "data" as "code" without OS intervention; even drivers could not do this since the tagging was a hardware function and drivers ran at a different security level. Of course, the machine was exceedingly slow, but it was an interesting hardware/software design decision to tag all contents of memory.
What you do is send a poorly formatted, out of spec network packet. The driver reads the packet which is oversized and places it in memory. The packet being over sized over writes some of the driver code. Some of this over written code is an entry point to the driver. So the next time that entry point is called the hackers code is executed. .
Some of this points out the wisdom of the IBM AS400 design: code and data were separately tagged entities. It was not possible to execute "data," nor was it possible to tag "data" as "code" without OS intervention; even drivers could not do this since the tagging was a hardware function and drivers ran at a different security level. Of course, the machine was exceedingly slow, but it was an interesting hardware/software design decision to tag all contents of memory.
CFreymarc
Mar 28, 09:21 PM
Dang! Had $1599 extra cash burnin' a hole in my pocket...:p
Same here. Guess a trip to Vegas is in order.
Same here. Guess a trip to Vegas is in order.
takao
Apr 2, 03:20 PM
And if the US spent even a fraction of the $600 billion a year it spends on its military on aid then we'd all be better off - free mosquito nets for Africans would be a good start (http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/03/libya_v_aid?page=4).
it would be already a good start if current US foreign aid would be used for aid and not military expenses
in some cases of that foreign aid those countries are even required to use the money for military equipment from the US ...
it would be already a good start if current US foreign aid would be used for aid and not military expenses
in some cases of that foreign aid those countries are even required to use the money for military equipment from the US ...
DJinTX
Mar 25, 02:24 PM
Then how do you turn it off? If it's a feature I should have the option to change it back to how it was. It's pretty annoying and I'm surprised no one else is complaining about it. I understand how some people might like it, but you would think there would be the option to decide which one you want. Similar to changing the rotation lock on the iPad to mute, some liked it and some didn't
I could be wrong, but I think I know what you are describing.
It sounds like you need to change your 'play alert tone' setting. In settings>messages, there is a setting that says "play alert tone", and you can set this to once, twice, etc. I believe twice is the default, but you can change it if you prefer. I know you are asking about vibrate, but if you have your mute switch activated, then it will vibrate instead. So this wold account for double vibrating.
I could be wrong, but I think I know what you are describing.
It sounds like you need to change your 'play alert tone' setting. In settings>messages, there is a setting that says "play alert tone", and you can set this to once, twice, etc. I believe twice is the default, but you can change it if you prefer. I know you are asking about vibrate, but if you have your mute switch activated, then it will vibrate instead. So this wold account for double vibrating.
buffsldr
Oct 13, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by tfaz1
Well said. I have to agree with you.
Most friends and relatives bring up the clock speed and price. But when they see how the machine looks on my desk, when they step up to OS X and take it for a spin, they see why I could take a speed "loss" for all the luxury that Apple brings to the user experience.
Now, a lot of us rumor-heads are focused on bleeding-edge. And it kinda burns us that Intel/Athlon chips are closing in on 3GHz and we've just broken 1 gig. But we (rumor-heads) are the few, and PC marketing no longer seems to focus on speed. And I believe that Apple is slowly turing more heads out there.
And I have to agree with you.
Apple is a business. They have shareholders that hold them accountable for their performance. They goal for them is to maximize profitability. To achieve this goal, apple has a marketing department. I know very little about marketing, but what I do tells me that the four P's of marketing are place, price, promotion, and product. My understanding is that "place" pertains to where you want to position yourself in the market. Do you want to sell high end, mid or low end? You get the idea. It is totally possible to sell a low end product, have less market share and still be more profitable than a company that sells high end and has more market share.
Bottom line, Apple does not exist to outperform pc's. They exist to make their share holders money. The original question was who should we blame? I am not sure that there is a problem. As one consumer, I would love to see macs outperform pc's, but before I am willing to accept there is a problem that will affect apple's profitability I would like to see a business case explaining how apple can make more money by fixing these alleged "problems". But, I really dont care. I use apple because i like it. when apple stops meeting my computer needs, i can go somewhere else, or do without.
Edvinow,l you do raise some thought provoking questions and I apprecaite that. My point was that just because we want more, doesnt necessarily means that a company's strategy is flawed. After all, you are dissappointed with some of what apple does, and they got your money didn't they :)
Well said. I have to agree with you.
Most friends and relatives bring up the clock speed and price. But when they see how the machine looks on my desk, when they step up to OS X and take it for a spin, they see why I could take a speed "loss" for all the luxury that Apple brings to the user experience.
Now, a lot of us rumor-heads are focused on bleeding-edge. And it kinda burns us that Intel/Athlon chips are closing in on 3GHz and we've just broken 1 gig. But we (rumor-heads) are the few, and PC marketing no longer seems to focus on speed. And I believe that Apple is slowly turing more heads out there.
And I have to agree with you.
Apple is a business. They have shareholders that hold them accountable for their performance. They goal for them is to maximize profitability. To achieve this goal, apple has a marketing department. I know very little about marketing, but what I do tells me that the four P's of marketing are place, price, promotion, and product. My understanding is that "place" pertains to where you want to position yourself in the market. Do you want to sell high end, mid or low end? You get the idea. It is totally possible to sell a low end product, have less market share and still be more profitable than a company that sells high end and has more market share.
Bottom line, Apple does not exist to outperform pc's. They exist to make their share holders money. The original question was who should we blame? I am not sure that there is a problem. As one consumer, I would love to see macs outperform pc's, but before I am willing to accept there is a problem that will affect apple's profitability I would like to see a business case explaining how apple can make more money by fixing these alleged "problems". But, I really dont care. I use apple because i like it. when apple stops meeting my computer needs, i can go somewhere else, or do without.
Edvinow,l you do raise some thought provoking questions and I apprecaite that. My point was that just because we want more, doesnt necessarily means that a company's strategy is flawed. After all, you are dissappointed with some of what apple does, and they got your money didn't they :)
miketcool
Nov 27, 10:16 AM
If I recall, the way the Beatles recorded, it was almost overkill. It should be intersting to see if they remaster it to optimize it for compressed digital. Otherwise, I really love listening to every sound that the recordings have picked up as I listen to the fab four on a 30 LP.
zapp
May 4, 11:54 PM
I want to see wifi syncing first...
I just want to be running the same version on my Verizon iPhone as everyone else (that is not using the Verizon iPhone)
I just want to be running the same version on my Verizon iPhone as everyone else (that is not using the Verizon iPhone)
Jacqui83
Nov 8, 08:52 AM
I am so freakin excited! Ugh hehehe I just want the Apple Store to be back up so that I place the freakin order!
However, do you think that the black model has become Glossy or is it still made of Matte material? i.e. The black outisde not the screen.
However, do you think that the black model has become Glossy or is it still made of Matte material? i.e. The black outisde not the screen.
lmalave
Nov 8, 09:25 AM
My money is on Apple announcing the iTV and Leopard earlier than expected.
Speaking of which....
I wonder if the MacBook update also included a "stealth" upgrade to 802.11n?
Speaking of which....
I wonder if the MacBook update also included a "stealth" upgrade to 802.11n?
