wclyffe
Nov 7, 11:16 AM
I've now read through all 48 comments and I just ordered the Tom Tom Car Kit for $87....here's why. At this price, its a phenomenal deal for the following reasons:
a) I needed a Bluetooth Speakerphone (the law in CA) and was looking at the BluAnt for $79. For a few dollars more, I get a lot more.
b) I love that it is a powered cradle/dock as the current one I have is always a hassle trying to plug in for power, and these apps drain power big time. I use Navigon....it's fabulous.
c) I can directly connect the 3.5mm line out right into my car system and even plug in an FM transmitter when I travel to output the sound from my iPhone 3Gs. Now I can tuck these cables away leaving enough slack to turn it to landscape, but its all ready to use by just snapping the phone in.
d) The enhanced gps receiver chip seems to make quite a difference in the numerous tests you can view on Youtube. Much faster response time when re-routing occurs in "low signal areas". One test in particular left the un-aided iPhone without a signal for quite a long time. Even if we all start using the new Google Maps app, this chip will greatly enhance its performance, too.
e) Landscape mode is fast and easy which is not available in my current dock configuration. A simple, no frills dock like the Kensington that has no power connect, no bluetooth speakerphone, no gps chip, etc lists for $40.
This purchase at this price is a no brainer.
a) I needed a Bluetooth Speakerphone (the law in CA) and was looking at the BluAnt for $79. For a few dollars more, I get a lot more.
b) I love that it is a powered cradle/dock as the current one I have is always a hassle trying to plug in for power, and these apps drain power big time. I use Navigon....it's fabulous.
c) I can directly connect the 3.5mm line out right into my car system and even plug in an FM transmitter when I travel to output the sound from my iPhone 3Gs. Now I can tuck these cables away leaving enough slack to turn it to landscape, but its all ready to use by just snapping the phone in.
d) The enhanced gps receiver chip seems to make quite a difference in the numerous tests you can view on Youtube. Much faster response time when re-routing occurs in "low signal areas". One test in particular left the un-aided iPhone without a signal for quite a long time. Even if we all start using the new Google Maps app, this chip will greatly enhance its performance, too.
e) Landscape mode is fast and easy which is not available in my current dock configuration. A simple, no frills dock like the Kensington that has no power connect, no bluetooth speakerphone, no gps chip, etc lists for $40.
This purchase at this price is a no brainer.
SirHaakon
Mar 31, 07:00 PM
Only for a year. Fill up that 20 Gigs and a year later you can either empty it down to the free 5, or pony up.
This thing will be sued to hell and back before the year is up, so it won't make a difference. :)
This thing will be sued to hell and back before the year is up, so it won't make a difference. :)
azentropy
Apr 21, 03:00 PM
I'm more interested in the price/performance improvements on the lower end. The entry level Mac Pro is simply a horrible horrible value in terms of price per performance. I don't care how wonderful the build quality is or what other "features" it has, a $2500 system should have more than 4 DIMM slots and better than a under $300 CPU.
JapaneseMonkey
Mar 29, 09:49 PM
Well screw Japan
now Apple is being ruined by Japanese again ;;
now Apple is being ruined by Japanese again ;;
AHDuke99
Mar 27, 12:14 PM
I doubt they'll release a new phone without a new OS. It just doesn't make a bit of sense.
ThaDoggg
Apr 26, 04:23 PM
Oh well who cares besides shareholders? As long as we keep getting quality products with stable software we should be happy.
RKpro
Apr 7, 10:27 AM
So, what is Apple doing with a bunch of 7" touch screens, since Jobs said "7 inch tablets are dead on arrival"?
I also don't recall RIM ever giving a date before April 19th.
LoL, I can just imagine Steve Jobs karate chopping stacks of 7" touch screens in Cupertino.
I also don't recall RIM ever giving a date before April 19th.
LoL, I can just imagine Steve Jobs karate chopping stacks of 7" touch screens in Cupertino.
Applejuiced
Mar 26, 11:38 PM
No, they come out with new phones every WEEK, and you actually mean "cheaper and ********". This is not coming from a fanboy, I own and use daily an android device.
I would very highly doubt if they actually delayed the release. Techcrunch doesn't have an amazing track record, if I remember right.
True, they got tons of them comming out.
They might be cheaper but some of them do have better hardware specs but when it comes to the OS and the way it runs everything they sure are crappy and cant compete with the iOS.
I'm going to laugh at all those who say iOS 5 wont be delayed when it actually will be :rolleyes:
I give it by July there will be a new ios out and a new iphone.
Just my guess judging by the last 4 years but we will see how it goes.
Nobody really knows.
I would very highly doubt if they actually delayed the release. Techcrunch doesn't have an amazing track record, if I remember right.
True, they got tons of them comming out.
They might be cheaper but some of them do have better hardware specs but when it comes to the OS and the way it runs everything they sure are crappy and cant compete with the iOS.
I'm going to laugh at all those who say iOS 5 wont be delayed when it actually will be :rolleyes:
I give it by July there will be a new ios out and a new iphone.
Just my guess judging by the last 4 years but we will see how it goes.
Nobody really knows.
Makosuke
May 6, 05:10 AM
I'm not so much joining in the discussion as publicly recording what I think is going to happen in a few years based not really on this prediction, but the way things are going in general, so that I can point to this post in a few years and either say "I told you so" or "look how clueless I was."
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
OdduWon
Nov 28, 10:06 PM
So for you a tablet pretty well means a Laptop, without a keyboard?
i belive that the tablet edition macbook will have a full virtual interfacing touch slab where the keyboard is, or it will be a flip back cover that becomes the stand for the tablet. if they go with a more notebook tablet i dont think they will go for the swivel screen like hp has. in stead i belive they will hav the touch pad be the lower half and the top the screen. though this nay tie in with the 17 inch flat screen rumor and ipod docking keyboard.
i belive that the tablet edition macbook will have a full virtual interfacing touch slab where the keyboard is, or it will be a flip back cover that becomes the stand for the tablet. if they go with a more notebook tablet i dont think they will go for the swivel screen like hp has. in stead i belive they will hav the touch pad be the lower half and the top the screen. though this nay tie in with the 17 inch flat screen rumor and ipod docking keyboard.
Spoony
Apr 18, 03:25 PM
One more thing. I'm not sure you guys know how Samsung works or really know how Big Samsung is.
It is the world's largest private conglomerage by Revenue. Annual Revenue of over 170Billion.
Apple Inc. (2nd largest market cap, pretty massive company) Over 65B of sales.
Samsung is almost 3X bigger in terms of Sales.
My point being that Samung phones and Samsung component makers are pretty much two separate companies that consolidate together. I'd bet that Samung Components treats Samsung phones just like any other vendor.
Apple suing the phone arm of samsung probably has zero impact on the component piece. Different entities almost with different relationships etc.. Samsung definitely values the apple relationship. It's the phone arm that ripped off apple's design and funtionality.
It is the world's largest private conglomerage by Revenue. Annual Revenue of over 170Billion.
Apple Inc. (2nd largest market cap, pretty massive company) Over 65B of sales.
Samsung is almost 3X bigger in terms of Sales.
My point being that Samung phones and Samsung component makers are pretty much two separate companies that consolidate together. I'd bet that Samung Components treats Samsung phones just like any other vendor.
Apple suing the phone arm of samsung probably has zero impact on the component piece. Different entities almost with different relationships etc.. Samsung definitely values the apple relationship. It's the phone arm that ripped off apple's design and funtionality.
Eidorian
Jul 22, 11:14 PM
Maybe the low end MacBook will keep Yonah and get a price drop, while the higher end MacBook, black and white, will get Merom. That might lead to the most sales, to both those looking for a cheaper MacBook, and those waiting for Merom.I don't think Apple should divide a single line between Core Duo and Core 2 Duo. The average idiot customer won't be able to conprehend why Merom is performs better at the same clock speed as Yonah. Between two entirely separate product lines it's not a problem. Unless you start throwing in products with Yonah/Merom at the same clock speed. Watch those heads spin.
aye5882
Aug 11, 08:43 PM
Merom isn't just bragging rights you should check out the comparison in the link that somebody provided. It's about 10% faster for the same price and power consumption. And the next generation of Front Row might take advtange of the 64-bitness.
Also, I plan on booting Vista with it also, which has a 64-bit version if/when it comes out next year.
well, i know there was some marginal increase in processing speed but i'm talking about actually running 64bit programs. i thought you need alot more horsepower to run 64bit programs than whats currently offered... maybe i was just tired and totally misread an article a couple of weeks ago.
Also, I plan on booting Vista with it also, which has a 64-bit version if/when it comes out next year.
well, i know there was some marginal increase in processing speed but i'm talking about actually running 64bit programs. i thought you need alot more horsepower to run 64bit programs than whats currently offered... maybe i was just tired and totally misread an article a couple of weeks ago.
citizenzen
Apr 16, 01:23 PM
It's spending on investment rather than spending on consumption.
This is a key point to the growing inequity of wealth in America. The rich have surplus funds that they are able to invest, while the poor, and a growing number of people are spending all of the income on consumption.
In 2007 Zhu Xiao Di wrote a report for the Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies title, Growing Wealth, Inequity, and Housing in the United States [PDF] (http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/publications/markets/w07-1.pdf)
Abstract
The rapid growth of household wealth in the United States has been accompanied by drastic growing inequality. This paper discusses both wealth and inequality growth, examines demographic factors behind the growth, and analyzes housing�s role in it, using the Survey of Consumer Finances data collected by the Federal Reserve Bank. While aggregate household net wealth grew from $25.9 trillion in 1995 to $50.1 trillion in 2004 (both in 2004 dollars), nearly 90 percent of the net gains occurred only among the top quartile of households in the wealth distribution. Although housing wealth (both home equity and housing value) was still more evenly distributed than other types of wealth, it largely served to widen the wealth gap rather than to narrow it during the last decade.
In this report, he clearly illustrates the difference between household net wealth and household income.
Wealth Inequality and Household Net Wealth Growth
It is well known that the distribution of household net wealth is even more unbalanced than that of household income. Net wealth is defined as all assets net out all debts. In the top quartile of the household net wealth distribution held the lion�s share�87 percent (or $43.6 trillion) while the bottom quartile of households had nothing. The upper and lower middle quartiles combined held $6.5 trillion, or 13 percent of total household net wealth (see Chart 1).
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/members/citizenzen-albums-album-picture1305-screen-shot-2011-04-16.png
As he says in the report, "In other words, the bottom 28 million of American households in 2004 had nothing once their debt is netted out ..."
The difference between inequalities in wealth and income is quite natural, as one is from a stock perspective and the other is from a flow perspective. Low income households have to spend most or all of their incomes on life necessities with little capability of saving and investment so they can hardly accumulate any household net wealth. Thus they often remain in the bottom distribution of household wealth with nothing; the exception is the group of low income senior households who recently fell into the low-income category due to retirement and the loss of income. In short, while the bottom quartile of income distribution still has income, the bottom quartile of wealth distribution does not have any wealth net of debt.
This is a key point to the growing inequity of wealth in America. The rich have surplus funds that they are able to invest, while the poor, and a growing number of people are spending all of the income on consumption.
In 2007 Zhu Xiao Di wrote a report for the Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies title, Growing Wealth, Inequity, and Housing in the United States [PDF] (http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/publications/markets/w07-1.pdf)
Abstract
The rapid growth of household wealth in the United States has been accompanied by drastic growing inequality. This paper discusses both wealth and inequality growth, examines demographic factors behind the growth, and analyzes housing�s role in it, using the Survey of Consumer Finances data collected by the Federal Reserve Bank. While aggregate household net wealth grew from $25.9 trillion in 1995 to $50.1 trillion in 2004 (both in 2004 dollars), nearly 90 percent of the net gains occurred only among the top quartile of households in the wealth distribution. Although housing wealth (both home equity and housing value) was still more evenly distributed than other types of wealth, it largely served to widen the wealth gap rather than to narrow it during the last decade.
In this report, he clearly illustrates the difference between household net wealth and household income.
Wealth Inequality and Household Net Wealth Growth
It is well known that the distribution of household net wealth is even more unbalanced than that of household income. Net wealth is defined as all assets net out all debts. In the top quartile of the household net wealth distribution held the lion�s share�87 percent (or $43.6 trillion) while the bottom quartile of households had nothing. The upper and lower middle quartiles combined held $6.5 trillion, or 13 percent of total household net wealth (see Chart 1).
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/members/citizenzen-albums-album-picture1305-screen-shot-2011-04-16.png
As he says in the report, "In other words, the bottom 28 million of American households in 2004 had nothing once their debt is netted out ..."
The difference between inequalities in wealth and income is quite natural, as one is from a stock perspective and the other is from a flow perspective. Low income households have to spend most or all of their incomes on life necessities with little capability of saving and investment so they can hardly accumulate any household net wealth. Thus they often remain in the bottom distribution of household wealth with nothing; the exception is the group of low income senior households who recently fell into the low-income category due to retirement and the loss of income. In short, while the bottom quartile of income distribution still has income, the bottom quartile of wealth distribution does not have any wealth net of debt.
osxtasy
Apr 5, 01:38 PM
"Toyota had agreed to do so to "maintain their good relationship with Apple," "
Toyota has a relationship with Apple, good or bad? Why? I don't see the connection.
Well, to be honest, BOTH of there "Quality Assurance" (or rather lack thereof) has gone severly downhill in the last couple years. Oh yea, I say this as an owner of BOTH companies products....sadly:(:(
Now "HOW YA LIKE THEM APPLES STEVE JOBS??"
Toyota has a relationship with Apple, good or bad? Why? I don't see the connection.
Well, to be honest, BOTH of there "Quality Assurance" (or rather lack thereof) has gone severly downhill in the last couple years. Oh yea, I say this as an owner of BOTH companies products....sadly:(:(
Now "HOW YA LIKE THEM APPLES STEVE JOBS??"
wclyffe
Jan 6, 04:41 PM
I've had mine since November, generally use it in the horizontal position, and haven't had problems with it rattling (and I've got a car with a not-very-smooth-ride). That would suggest that the mechanism is not always loose. I am nervous about it wearing loose over time, because it is surprisingly easy to move by hand, and seems kind of delicate.
tstreete, nice to see you are still checking in...I remember you were one of the first to get a car kit. In the landscape view, my unit does not rattle, but in the vertical position it rattles a lot and I often keep it like this to charge the phone or listen to music, etc when I'm not using the nav app. I'm going to exchange it and see how I fair while waiting to see what the word on the Magellan kit is. Thanks for your help.
tstreete, nice to see you are still checking in...I remember you were one of the first to get a car kit. In the landscape view, my unit does not rattle, but in the vertical position it rattles a lot and I often keep it like this to charge the phone or listen to music, etc when I'm not using the nav app. I'm going to exchange it and see how I fair while waiting to see what the word on the Magellan kit is. Thanks for your help.
Reach
Sep 16, 01:08 AM
Sorry for being stupid here, but why do you guys want magnetic latches? It just doesn't seem superior to me, but then again I haven't tried the new macbooks, I just know that the solution on my old 17" powerbook was fine.
The swappable HD is nice though, I'd like that.
Anyway, fingers crossed, let it be true please! :)
The swappable HD is nice though, I'd like that.
Anyway, fingers crossed, let it be true please! :)
clibinarius
Mar 29, 02:54 PM
The batteries of note are probably for the nano/shuffle, not the touch. Hence why the supply isn't a problem yet with the iphones.
Try to remember, people who post these things, there's several types of ipods.
Try to remember, people who post these things, there's several types of ipods.
emotion
Aug 2, 11:02 AM
I like this guy. He's being reasonable. However, I'd bet that Apple does NOT update any other Macs to Core 2. Yet. Save that for Expo Paris.
Don't forget that apple dont just compete with themselves but other PC manufacturers now, and that release schedule would put them way behind. I expect speedbump/updated MBP and iMac at least. Probably on a random Tuesday soon.
Don't forget that apple dont just compete with themselves but other PC manufacturers now, and that release schedule would put them way behind. I expect speedbump/updated MBP and iMac at least. Probably on a random Tuesday soon.
andrewbecks
May 4, 03:57 PM
How would one do a "complete fresh reinstall" by this method? Or will we be able to burn to a disc/USB key?
I'm wondering the same thing.
Personally, I'd rather not risk eating up my AT&T crappy bandwidth limit and would love to be able to pickup a USB-key in the store. It would also be necessary to have for fresh installs.
I'm wondering the same thing.
Personally, I'd rather not risk eating up my AT&T crappy bandwidth limit and would love to be able to pickup a USB-key in the store. It would also be necessary to have for fresh installs.
Don't panic
May 4, 12:05 PM
Your insolence grows tiresome. :)
What does the OP mean we found a healing treasure and it has no effect? I thought we'd get an extra 5 HP for that.
i think it only restores health that was lost, up to your level.
since we just started we are at full health, so it has no effect.
i don't know if we can come back later and use it, or take it with us and use it later.
i would imagine we can, otherwise it seems kind of pointless to put this treasure in the first room (unless treasure placement was done randomly).
do we get a map of the next room? are there any other doors?
EDIT: i see we have a map, but shouldn't we see the next room?
EDIT2: ahah! :)
What does the OP mean we found a healing treasure and it has no effect? I thought we'd get an extra 5 HP for that.
i think it only restores health that was lost, up to your level.
since we just started we are at full health, so it has no effect.
i don't know if we can come back later and use it, or take it with us and use it later.
i would imagine we can, otherwise it seems kind of pointless to put this treasure in the first room (unless treasure placement was done randomly).
do we get a map of the next room? are there any other doors?
EDIT: i see we have a map, but shouldn't we see the next room?
EDIT2: ahah! :)
CainIs4Charlie
Nov 8, 07:24 AM
can anyone comment on the sound quality when playing music on the iphone via the tomtom kit when it's connected to the car's sound system?
reason for asking: when i use a standard audio cable from the headphone output of my iphone into my car's aux in, the sound quality leaves a lot to be desired. i basically have to crank up the volume all the way on both my car system and the iphone to hear anything, and even what i hear isn't all that great.
reason for asking: when i use a standard audio cable from the headphone output of my iphone into my car's aux in, the sound quality leaves a lot to be desired. i basically have to crank up the volume all the way on both my car system and the iphone to hear anything, and even what i hear isn't all that great.
MorphingDragon
May 6, 06:45 AM
I'm not surprised about people getting overhyped. Just look the "3D" thread here.
Like I understand the benefits the new design could bring, its just that I'm a bit cynical when it comes to CPU enhancements, especially after Cell B.E. and the original Phenom architecture.
Intel's hype machine is also very efficient. :rolleyes:
Like I understand the benefits the new design could bring, its just that I'm a bit cynical when it comes to CPU enhancements, especially after Cell B.E. and the original Phenom architecture.
Intel's hype machine is also very efficient. :rolleyes:
Erasmus
Jul 21, 09:12 PM
Perhaps if I mention my wishes in every related thread, someone at apple will take note?
iMac Ultra: At least 2.4 Ghz Conroe, 512Mb ATI X1800, and a 23" Screen.
Macbook: I don't want Merom in it. I don't want a faster processor in it. I want a price drop!
I've said it before, I hardly think the iMac is unworthy of a WWDC appearance. In my opinion, it's close enough to a Professional machine. Albeit an inexpensive one in a compact enclosure.
Is there really any chance that the MBP's WON'T get an upgrade to 2.16/2.33 Meroms???
They can leave the faster Mac Minis, Macbooks and iPods for Paris Expo.
Don't care about iPods.
This is what Lord Erasmus wants. If he is not appeased, Steve himself will bear the brunt of my experiments into human nature!
(For all you Legends of Dune fans out there. For all who haven't read the BEST TRILOGY OF ALL TIME, that means dissection!)
iMac Ultra: At least 2.4 Ghz Conroe, 512Mb ATI X1800, and a 23" Screen.
Macbook: I don't want Merom in it. I don't want a faster processor in it. I want a price drop!
I've said it before, I hardly think the iMac is unworthy of a WWDC appearance. In my opinion, it's close enough to a Professional machine. Albeit an inexpensive one in a compact enclosure.
Is there really any chance that the MBP's WON'T get an upgrade to 2.16/2.33 Meroms???
They can leave the faster Mac Minis, Macbooks and iPods for Paris Expo.
Don't care about iPods.
This is what Lord Erasmus wants. If he is not appeased, Steve himself will bear the brunt of my experiments into human nature!
(For all you Legends of Dune fans out there. For all who haven't read the BEST TRILOGY OF ALL TIME, that means dissection!)
