bandalay
Apr 25, 01:43 PM
That something that could be explained in two lines by someone in the know has to go to a Federal lawsuit. Clearly Apple is trying to avoid getting drawn into a privacy discussion, because as we know, there's no end to the absurd lengths people will declare their rights trod upon.
Someone's trying to make a "big thing�" out of this.
Someone's trying to make a "big thing�" out of this.
janstett
Oct 23, 11:44 AM
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
Deefuzz
Aug 11, 08:20 PM
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
LOL...the gem of the thread! Thanks for the laugh :D
LOL...the gem of the thread! Thanks for the laugh :D
Silentwave
Aug 18, 11:54 PM
possible clovertown obstacles....
OK here are some possible DIY upgrade to clovertown obstacles
1) firmware- will it even boot?
2) FSB- 1066 for clovertown is slower than 1333 for woody
3) RAM- Clovertown uses 533 FB-DIMM instead of the 667 FBDIMM Woodcrest uses
4) power/heat- the Clovertown has a TDP in practical use about 20W higher than the hottest Woodcrest...multiply this by two because its dual processor, and you've got a good 40W beyond the design, maybe more.
5) size- will it fit the existing coolers?
OK here are some possible DIY upgrade to clovertown obstacles
1) firmware- will it even boot?
2) FSB- 1066 for clovertown is slower than 1333 for woody
3) RAM- Clovertown uses 533 FB-DIMM instead of the 667 FBDIMM Woodcrest uses
4) power/heat- the Clovertown has a TDP in practical use about 20W higher than the hottest Woodcrest...multiply this by two because its dual processor, and you've got a good 40W beyond the design, maybe more.
5) size- will it fit the existing coolers?
andiwm2003
Apr 25, 03:01 PM
Maybe next time read the post you are responding to - rather negatively to boot. The post I quoted discussed Apple exploiting people.
So an old post says apple is exploiting them and you imply I said that then? I said on numerous occasions clearly that this is not about Apple using this data. Interesting way to quote posts you have there:rolleyes:
So an old post says apple is exploiting them and you imply I said that then? I said on numerous occasions clearly that this is not about Apple using this data. Interesting way to quote posts you have there:rolleyes:
Veinticinco
Apr 6, 10:42 AM
At least I now have a short finite timeline to work with to buy my 13"/2.13GHz C2D/256GB MBA before they "upgrade" it to a vastly inferior Intel GPU.
SevenInchScrew
Dec 8, 12:54 PM
^^^ Again, from Sony and referenced in my post 152 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11513752&postcount=152)
I'm not arguing, just pointing out what Sony themselves have to say on the subject. Of course, as you progress further into the game, you are going to use more Premium racing models.
I understand that Sony are saying damage is not "unlocked" at some point in the game. And that is correct. When you start the game, there is damage. You can head on crash at 120 into a wall, and your bumper will crumple a little, in a Premium car. But, do this same thing, in the same Premium car, at level 20 and 40 and you will see increasing levels of damage.
So yea, Sony is right that damage itself isn't "unlocked" at some point, but the higher degrees of damage ARE. And not just from using race cars, Premium cars as well. Just like how as you progress, the AI gets slightly less brain-dead, the cars will start to somehow damage more.
I'm not arguing, just pointing out what Sony themselves have to say on the subject. Of course, as you progress further into the game, you are going to use more Premium racing models.
I understand that Sony are saying damage is not "unlocked" at some point in the game. And that is correct. When you start the game, there is damage. You can head on crash at 120 into a wall, and your bumper will crumple a little, in a Premium car. But, do this same thing, in the same Premium car, at level 20 and 40 and you will see increasing levels of damage.
So yea, Sony is right that damage itself isn't "unlocked" at some point, but the higher degrees of damage ARE. And not just from using race cars, Premium cars as well. Just like how as you progress, the AI gets slightly less brain-dead, the cars will start to somehow damage more.
Mammoth
Jul 15, 10:14 AM
Looking at PC product offerings by ATI (http://www.ati.com/products/workstation/fireglmatrix.html), you can see that they also offer video cards with two dual-link DVI ports on a single card. You can even get this on a Radeon X1900 series card (http://www.ati.com/products/radeonx1900/radeonx1900xtx/specs.html).
I believe you are wrong (http://www.ati.com/designpartners/media/images/RX1900_Board_lg.jpg).
(Believe)
I believe you are wrong (http://www.ati.com/designpartners/media/images/RX1900_Board_lg.jpg).
(Believe)
mcrain
Mar 22, 08:26 AM
Are you suggesting that Obama has gotten comparable treatment from the media as compared to Bush? The double standard is hilariously transparent... Obama justified, Bush not. Obama builds strong coalition, Bush doesn't. Obama trying to save people, Bush going after the oil. Obama savior, Bush satan.
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable... all the talk about Obama's great coalition and how its a justifiable war.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
If you actually want change, vote for Ron Paul, vote for fiscal responsibility, vote for small government and non intervention. Vote for the destruction bailouts, stimulus, subsidies, and all other forms of crony-capitalism. I can't imagine him being nominated to run for president by the GOP. Did you see that "ghostwritten" pamphlet put out by his campaign? I'm sure he never approved of it, but against the 1st black president? With a son who tripped all over the Civil Rights Act? I hope he mounts a third party campaign. With Palin as VP, or better yet, Palin as a fourth party candidate.
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition: I know, I don't get it either. But, again this is the first week. The only ones "touting" are the white house, and it's already falling on deaf ears and criticism. Already!
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable... all the talk about Obama's great coalition and how its a justifiable war.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
If you actually want change, vote for Ron Paul, vote for fiscal responsibility, vote for small government and non intervention. Vote for the destruction bailouts, stimulus, subsidies, and all other forms of crony-capitalism. I can't imagine him being nominated to run for president by the GOP. Did you see that "ghostwritten" pamphlet put out by his campaign? I'm sure he never approved of it, but against the 1st black president? With a son who tripped all over the Civil Rights Act? I hope he mounts a third party campaign. With Palin as VP, or better yet, Palin as a fourth party candidate.
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition: I know, I don't get it either. But, again this is the first week. The only ones "touting" are the white house, and it's already falling on deaf ears and criticism. Already!
gekko513
Jul 14, 10:08 PM
The pricing seems reasonable compared to the current models.
I agree that it would be nice to have a cheaper upgradable model, but unless they introduce a new middle range with a different and cheaper design all around, I don't see it happening.
I agree that it would be nice to have a cheaper upgradable model, but unless they introduce a new middle range with a different and cheaper design all around, I don't see it happening.
littleman23408
Dec 6, 10:25 PM
IC-10 license test is killing me. I can only manage 2nd. I can get into 3rd pretty quick (at the hairpin before the long straight) and then I can't get 2nd until the same turn, and then there is just not enough race left to get past 1st. I can get kind of close to him, but nowhere near close enough to cut him off at the last turn.
PhantomPumpkin
Apr 27, 10:55 AM
The difference is a question of access. To get at the records kept by your cell phone provider, you need a subpoena. Any roommate/guest/thief/stalker with access to your computer or iPhone can get the data off your iphone or the backup as it exists right now. I don't mind the former, but I want to do everything I can to prevent the latter.
Keep better tabs on your phone. Encrypt the computer backup. Yeah yeah, I know sometimes we lose things. Hell, I've lost my iphone in my couch and took a half hour to find out WHERE in the couch it went.
Even still, you have to take some responsibility at some point. We can't all rely on Apple/Google/Purina Brand Puppy Chow to keep our data completely 100% safe. As they say in the IT security industry, "Your biggest threats are the end users". Technology can only go so far.
If you're REALLY paranoid, install Where's my Iphone, and if you lose it, remote wipe it.
Keep better tabs on your phone. Encrypt the computer backup. Yeah yeah, I know sometimes we lose things. Hell, I've lost my iphone in my couch and took a half hour to find out WHERE in the couch it went.
Even still, you have to take some responsibility at some point. We can't all rely on Apple/Google/Purina Brand Puppy Chow to keep our data completely 100% safe. As they say in the IT security industry, "Your biggest threats are the end users". Technology can only go so far.
If you're REALLY paranoid, install Where's my Iphone, and if you lose it, remote wipe it.
FF_productions
Jul 15, 01:30 AM
Is it possible that the lower end models (rumored to be single processor) will be upgradeable by BTO or later on by the user by putting in another processor?
Depends on how it is built, I'm sure you will be able to though. I know just as much as you.
Depends on how it is built, I'm sure you will be able to though. I know just as much as you.
pmz
Apr 6, 10:30 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
VanNess
Aug 5, 05:59 PM
Im glad we will be getting a bit of closure on monday, while I love the rumors its been getting a bit to much, im actively avoiding all mac related sites... I dont want to be the boy that spoilt his own Xmas! :D
Here, let me show you the art and science of rumoring (http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/), Apple-style.
Here, let me show you the art and science of rumoring (http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/), Apple-style.
FF_productions
Jul 14, 04:14 PM
2003: "In 12 months, we'll be at 3GHz".
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).
Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system. Maybe Intel will bring us 3 ghz next month, a quad 3 ghz Xeon, does that even exist?
My problem with having 4 cores at 2.6 ghz is what will the other Mac Pro's offer? One more month...
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).
Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system. Maybe Intel will bring us 3 ghz next month, a quad 3 ghz Xeon, does that even exist?
My problem with having 4 cores at 2.6 ghz is what will the other Mac Pro's offer? One more month...
Multimedia
Jul 28, 06:00 PM
I'll chime in and try to help alleviate your quandary. I would take it back. You've got a narrow window of opportunity to take it back, and we're just a few days away from an event that will likely harold the release of a new iMac. Even if you wanted to keep this model, if you take it back and then buy it after the release of the new one, you'll likely be able to get it at a fairly discounted price. So, that's what you have to weigh against having a computer to play with for the next couple of weeks...Point. You will be able to repurchase as refurbished - which you could have done already BTW - for the same as what you will get back. Refurbished is same as new with new warranty but lower price. Core 2 Duo iMac may be an entirely new design. It's not necessarily going to be just a tweak. I wouldn't risk keeping the one you bought.
We're not saying it will be out after WWDC. We're saying it is DUE by September.
We're not saying it will be out after WWDC. We're saying it is DUE by September.
Eriamjh1138@DAN
Mar 26, 06:12 PM
No Rosetta, no sale for me. Not ready to move on.
Hastings101
Apr 6, 03:29 PM
But hey, haven't you heard, Honeycomb is a real tablet OS. (Whatever the heck that means.)
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
No more a real tablet OS than iOS is
The corporate brainwashing continues ;)
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
No more a real tablet OS than iOS is
The corporate brainwashing continues ;)
Danksi
Aug 15, 01:16 PM
Video cards won't make a difference in FCP as of now if that's what you are asking performance wise. If you are using Motion/Games, anything that really feeds off the video card, then I'd go for the higher end video card.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
I've not really used Motion yet, just the other apps within FC-Studio.
Just been comparing their iMac 1.9 G5 results with those of the 2.66Ghz Mac Pro numbers... I don't think I'll be disappointed in the performance boost! :D
I guess my main concern is whether or not Apple integrates the individual Final Cut Studio applications more closely, so all of a sudden you'd need a better graphics card to comfortably run the 'editor', rather than just Motion as is the case at the moment.
I think I'll stick to the 2.66Ghz and standard graphics card, as FCP and compressor are more CPU intensive I believe.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
I've not really used Motion yet, just the other apps within FC-Studio.
Just been comparing their iMac 1.9 G5 results with those of the 2.66Ghz Mac Pro numbers... I don't think I'll be disappointed in the performance boost! :D
I guess my main concern is whether or not Apple integrates the individual Final Cut Studio applications more closely, so all of a sudden you'd need a better graphics card to comfortably run the 'editor', rather than just Motion as is the case at the moment.
I think I'll stick to the 2.66Ghz and standard graphics card, as FCP and compressor are more CPU intensive I believe.
takao
Dec 1, 12:46 PM
the difficulty of the special stages/licenses tests is varying a lot .. on some of the 'b'-license tests i had to try 10 times to even get a silver medal edging out those 0.010 of a second and on the 'a' license tests i managed to get 4 gold ratings on the first try and once beating the needed time by more than half a second
as for the second top gear challenge... for me it's next to impossible ... your lotus seem to have tires which seem to slide around corners much more and the AI somehow manages to break much, much, MUCH harder than you can:
i was driving along around 40 meters behind one and went on full brakes when i saw their braking lights and still got disqualified for slamming into their back like a madman ... what gives
i found the first n�rburgring specials much easier than the first top gear challenge
after trying out the nascar challenges: :confused:... honestly they should have rather spent their money on getting more recent street cars ... thanks for having 10+ premium nascar cars :rolleyes:
as for the second top gear challenge... for me it's next to impossible ... your lotus seem to have tires which seem to slide around corners much more and the AI somehow manages to break much, much, MUCH harder than you can:
i was driving along around 40 meters behind one and went on full brakes when i saw their braking lights and still got disqualified for slamming into their back like a madman ... what gives
i found the first n�rburgring specials much easier than the first top gear challenge
after trying out the nascar challenges: :confused:... honestly they should have rather spent their money on getting more recent street cars ... thanks for having 10+ premium nascar cars :rolleyes:
RussOniPhone
Apr 6, 01:15 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Does this mean I should cancel my order on the 11" Mac Book Air 1.4GZ, I got it with 4GB ram and it's a refurb so I saved some cash. Should I wait until June.
Thanks in advance for your advise!!
Does this mean I should cancel my order on the 11" Mac Book Air 1.4GZ, I got it with 4GB ram and it's a refurb so I saved some cash. Should I wait until June.
Thanks in advance for your advise!!
Spanky Deluxe
Nov 28, 06:30 PM
They can **** right off, the greedy *******s!! :mad: :mad: :mad:
maelstromr
Apr 19, 04:58 PM
Obsession can be positive or negative. Loving or hating a company is irrational.
You're missing the point. It's more fun to come to an Apple rumors site and irrationally bait the residents into irrationally baiting you into irrationally...well, you get the point. :rolleyes:
You're missing the point. It's more fun to come to an Apple rumors site and irrationally bait the residents into irrationally baiting you into irrationally...well, you get the point. :rolleyes:
