FX120
Apr 16, 12:50 PM
Did you miss the USB to PS2 ports or are you just avoiding that? Are you also avoiding how I said it's too difficult for you to carry around an inch long adapter?
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how those adapters work. Going from thunderbolt to USB 3 would require active electronics embedded in the adapter. The $6 MDP to HDMI adapter is just copper internally because the signaling is compatible from the source.
LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
Again, you have a fundamental flaw in your argument that you're not addressing. It doesn't matter if the bus is capable of delivering massive speed when the source is incapable of serving data fast enough. Any single-drive enclosure that is currently available will be incapable of maxing out a USB 3 connection.
Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
When they contain active electronics, they get expensive. Apple's own MDP to dual-link DVI adapter is a great example, at $99.00. USB 3 and Thunderbolt are not electrically compatible, and therefore it is impossible to have a simple copper-only dongle that has a TB port on one end, and USB on the other.
Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
Then why do you keep pointing to that article as proof that USB 3 is incapable of reaching it's theoretical maximum?
I never said it would go away. It said it will be used for the same things USB 2 is used for which is low bandwidth peripherals like mice which you don't need USB 3 for which is why it is essentially a useless upgrade.
USB 2 is the universal standard for high speed devices. If you think otherwise, you must have never used a USB thumb drive.
Yes, believe it or not we are talking about the future and the future for Thunderbolt looks a hell of a lot better than the future of USB 3 since it isn't locked at a certain bandwidth. Technology moves fast. The reason Intel decided to support USB 3 is simply because it is (as they said) complimentary to Thunderbolt. Once again you use Thunderbolt for things that need the speed and you use USB for low bandwidth peripherals.
Thunderbolt in a copper implementation is capped at 10Gbs. For higher speeds, the physical connections become impractical for "normal" devices, which is why Intel designed TB as a transport bus, say for a single cable between a tower and a monitor, which would then break the TB bus back into it's component protocols, including USB 3.
It has USB compatibility, hell it has compatibility with pretty much any IO on the planet. The connector is simply a means to an end and it scales much better for the future when said port is smaller.
Which as I said above, makes it practical for a transport bus. For replacing USB? Not so much. Backwards compatibility alone will likely dictate the continual presence of USB 3 ports on virtually every computer for years to come.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how those adapters work. Going from thunderbolt to USB 3 would require active electronics embedded in the adapter. The $6 MDP to HDMI adapter is just copper internally because the signaling is compatible from the source.
LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
Again, you have a fundamental flaw in your argument that you're not addressing. It doesn't matter if the bus is capable of delivering massive speed when the source is incapable of serving data fast enough. Any single-drive enclosure that is currently available will be incapable of maxing out a USB 3 connection.
Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
When they contain active electronics, they get expensive. Apple's own MDP to dual-link DVI adapter is a great example, at $99.00. USB 3 and Thunderbolt are not electrically compatible, and therefore it is impossible to have a simple copper-only dongle that has a TB port on one end, and USB on the other.
Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
Then why do you keep pointing to that article as proof that USB 3 is incapable of reaching it's theoretical maximum?
I never said it would go away. It said it will be used for the same things USB 2 is used for which is low bandwidth peripherals like mice which you don't need USB 3 for which is why it is essentially a useless upgrade.
USB 2 is the universal standard for high speed devices. If you think otherwise, you must have never used a USB thumb drive.
Yes, believe it or not we are talking about the future and the future for Thunderbolt looks a hell of a lot better than the future of USB 3 since it isn't locked at a certain bandwidth. Technology moves fast. The reason Intel decided to support USB 3 is simply because it is (as they said) complimentary to Thunderbolt. Once again you use Thunderbolt for things that need the speed and you use USB for low bandwidth peripherals.
Thunderbolt in a copper implementation is capped at 10Gbs. For higher speeds, the physical connections become impractical for "normal" devices, which is why Intel designed TB as a transport bus, say for a single cable between a tower and a monitor, which would then break the TB bus back into it's component protocols, including USB 3.
It has USB compatibility, hell it has compatibility with pretty much any IO on the planet. The connector is simply a means to an end and it scales much better for the future when said port is smaller.
Which as I said above, makes it practical for a transport bus. For replacing USB? Not so much. Backwards compatibility alone will likely dictate the continual presence of USB 3 ports on virtually every computer for years to come.
tatonka
Apr 20, 01:40 PM
Apparently, this is related to AT&T only and it is not based on GPS location services but rather a database of cell towers. It contains no identifiable information and is sent to AT&T for analysis for signal strength statistics.
Since it does not contain personal information and is being used to analyze the state of the AT&T network, I don't see a problem here. People who are not inside of the US are not affected by this.
So why does it track the cell tower in the UK as well then? Click 2. Video (http://petewarden.github.com/iPhoneTracker/)
Since it does not contain personal information and is being used to analyze the state of the AT&T network, I don't see a problem here. People who are not inside of the US are not affected by this.
So why does it track the cell tower in the UK as well then? Click 2. Video (http://petewarden.github.com/iPhoneTracker/)
MacinDoc
Sep 9, 11:28 AM
AMEN
Do you realize the Dell XPS 700 is capable of running 2 Nvidea GeForce - 1GB 7950 GX2 Quad SLI card for a total of 2 GB of Video
The fact that the new 24" Imac is only capable of handling a 256MB Video card is an embarassment as far as I am concered.
Sorry, but that's a ridiculous comparison. The only Mac you can reasonably compare the XPS 700 to is the Mac Pro, which has a lot more computing power for that kind of money.
Do you realize the Dell XPS 700 is capable of running 2 Nvidea GeForce - 1GB 7950 GX2 Quad SLI card for a total of 2 GB of Video
The fact that the new 24" Imac is only capable of handling a 256MB Video card is an embarassment as far as I am concered.
Sorry, but that's a ridiculous comparison. The only Mac you can reasonably compare the XPS 700 to is the Mac Pro, which has a lot more computing power for that kind of money.
jofarmer
Sep 12, 05:31 PM
And we FAIL to get ability to load 640x480 H.264 Baseline encoded video "...because it cannot be played on this 11month "old" iPod." What a crock! It's a load of bullocks I tell ya!
I take it that your conversion is over and the old iPod cannot play "Hi-Res H.264" and my asumptions prior in this thread where right :/
And as I already pointed out, that owners of "old" iPod 5G will have to reconvert movies and TV series and EVERYTHING they download from this day an, since all movies and tv episodes will be in 640x480 from now on.
Geez. Unlike M$ Apple has never been to much concerned with backwards compatibility, users without at least 10.3 Panther don't get much new fun these days. But like this....?
I take it that your conversion is over and the old iPod cannot play "Hi-Res H.264" and my asumptions prior in this thread where right :/
And as I already pointed out, that owners of "old" iPod 5G will have to reconvert movies and TV series and EVERYTHING they download from this day an, since all movies and tv episodes will be in 640x480 from now on.
Geez. Unlike M$ Apple has never been to much concerned with backwards compatibility, users without at least 10.3 Panther don't get much new fun these days. But like this....?
cozmot
Mar 18, 12:00 AM
The Safari exploit launched a Mac OSX program. How is that NOT an "OS" issue? The exploit could have just as easily told the Mac to delete a directory on the hard drive, for instance. So it's not just Safari that's an issue but the fact that OSX would let Safari execute a program outside the browser.
I'd like to know where this idea that "many have tried" to create viruses and/or malware for OSX comes from. How do you know what people have done or tried? I'm not saying Unix is easy to exploit, but I know darn well it's not invulnerable. If they held an OS hacking event with a prize, I'm sure someone would prove my point for me.
And this idea that nothing can be done on the Mac until a virus or other malware exploit shows up on a news site is absurd. There are plenty of tools out there, for instance, to point out dangerous web sites that could be a threat to a computer. Most OSX users wouldn't bother to install one if one was offered to them because they believe themselves invulnerable. So why worry about visiting a malware site? Some exploits are potentially cross-platform (adobe flash, for example). Again, I say most OSX users are far too comfortable in a foolish belief that they are not in danger from anything out there.
Before I could even get to this, cwt1nospam and GGJstudios jumped on it. I'll add that a Safari exploit just can't take over an OS X system. It can do some minor things, but doesn't give admin or root access to the OS.
You nervous Windows users -- and you have every right to be -- are used to exploits commandeering your computers. It's your every day reality. For Mac users, it doesn't happen. Never has. But to characterize us as engaging in "foolish belief" that we're not in danger out there is a false argument.
Rather than go through the laborious repeat of my earlier post to you, please re-read it. Mac users don't deny the dangers. Unlike Windows users we're just not lulled into installing expensive, beastly software that drags our systems down that gives us a false sense of security that we're safe and protected. Most exploits come from unsafe computing, including the incomplete list I assembled above. Mac users don't take this dope, and have clearer minds about the proper steps to protect their systems.
I have multiple lines of defense built up against attackers using malware, viruses, worms, Trojan Horses and the like. It starts with the firewall in my wireless router, OpenDNS, safe practices and other methods I've learned from Mac and other forums.
I have never experienced a hack, a virus, a worm, a Trojan Horse or any other exploit in over 20 years because of this. And in the next 20 I will not either, because I'll keep learning and building up my defenses, without wasting a dollar on beastly software that gives me a false sense of security and relieves me of my responsibility for safe computing.
I'd like to know where this idea that "many have tried" to create viruses and/or malware for OSX comes from. How do you know what people have done or tried? I'm not saying Unix is easy to exploit, but I know darn well it's not invulnerable. If they held an OS hacking event with a prize, I'm sure someone would prove my point for me.
And this idea that nothing can be done on the Mac until a virus or other malware exploit shows up on a news site is absurd. There are plenty of tools out there, for instance, to point out dangerous web sites that could be a threat to a computer. Most OSX users wouldn't bother to install one if one was offered to them because they believe themselves invulnerable. So why worry about visiting a malware site? Some exploits are potentially cross-platform (adobe flash, for example). Again, I say most OSX users are far too comfortable in a foolish belief that they are not in danger from anything out there.
Before I could even get to this, cwt1nospam and GGJstudios jumped on it. I'll add that a Safari exploit just can't take over an OS X system. It can do some minor things, but doesn't give admin or root access to the OS.
You nervous Windows users -- and you have every right to be -- are used to exploits commandeering your computers. It's your every day reality. For Mac users, it doesn't happen. Never has. But to characterize us as engaging in "foolish belief" that we're not in danger out there is a false argument.
Rather than go through the laborious repeat of my earlier post to you, please re-read it. Mac users don't deny the dangers. Unlike Windows users we're just not lulled into installing expensive, beastly software that drags our systems down that gives us a false sense of security that we're safe and protected. Most exploits come from unsafe computing, including the incomplete list I assembled above. Mac users don't take this dope, and have clearer minds about the proper steps to protect their systems.
I have multiple lines of defense built up against attackers using malware, viruses, worms, Trojan Horses and the like. It starts with the firewall in my wireless router, OpenDNS, safe practices and other methods I've learned from Mac and other forums.
I have never experienced a hack, a virus, a worm, a Trojan Horse or any other exploit in over 20 years because of this. And in the next 20 I will not either, because I'll keep learning and building up my defenses, without wasting a dollar on beastly software that gives me a false sense of security and relieves me of my responsibility for safe computing.
![charlie chaplin oona o. charlie chaplin oona. Oona Chaplin Geraldine Chaplin; Oona Chaplin Geraldine Chaplin. Silverfist. Apr 25, 03:43 PM. [QUOTEkillr_b;12458559]As a consumer,](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_uJkzLwtzUGrSn-TSSf8ogjBbcaVTwM-gNNB8O2_PBawqNVMgNqzCyTf_W_KglWvoml_Qvhr85i8rfjwu7-Dt3aIyFxImVc2OfViXWi4vjNBpBsXSNNE-EoAPGL1k49jxUu1bth0BrFN4G_v8qt2ZobqS_MOjMxhkaBQ5l3QQCQBU_A6hx60cAR9m8=s0-d "charlie chaplin oona. Oona Chaplin Geraldine Chaplin; Oona Chaplin Geraldine Chaplin. Silverfist. Apr 25, 03:43 PM. [QUOTEkillr_b;12458559]As a consumer,")
Eraserhead
Nov 13, 05:16 PM
Apple is the copyright holder of those images and they provide the right to use those images in Applications running on macs via the API on a Mac running OS X.
So why can't you use an official Apple API on the iPhone? That's crazy.
So why can't you use an official Apple API on the iPhone? That's crazy.
brad.c
Sep 13, 11:02 AM
I had ripped my Finding Nemo DVD so my daughter could watch on my 5G 60Gb iPod during a flight last month. I ripped them into individual chapters, and transferred them as sequential movies under a Finding Nemo video playlist. Worked great, except for the playback gap between chapters.
Now, with my MBP and my iPod fully updated, the gapless feature is selectable when the chapters are selected as a group, but not individually (Part of a gapless album is greyed out). And the gaps remain.
Not a biggie, but interesting nonetheless. Or am I that boring? (Rhetorically asked. Replies are redundantly unnecessary.)
Now, with my MBP and my iPod fully updated, the gapless feature is selectable when the chapters are selected as a group, but not individually (Part of a gapless album is greyed out). And the gaps remain.
Not a biggie, but interesting nonetheless. Or am I that boring? (Rhetorically asked. Replies are redundantly unnecessary.)
spiderman0616
Apr 28, 03:49 PM
Microsoft lets too many things die on the vine. Everything has to be run up the flagpole to get the green light, and that whole process takes so long that nothing truly innovative ever happens.
Windows 7 is awesome, Office 2010 is awesome, and I sure do love my Xbox 360, but right now, mobile gadgets sell. Zune was a bust, Courier looked amazing but was cancelled for some reason (I REALLY wanted a Courier), and Windows Phone 7.....jury's out. I would buy a Windows 7 phone before I'd buy an Android phone, but who knows what kind of lasting support it's going to have. Maybe when Nokia is making these in full force I'll take another look.
I've been saying it for the last year, and I'll say it again--Microsoft is in a death spiral. The days of people camping out in line for the next version of Windows are over.
Windows 7 is awesome, Office 2010 is awesome, and I sure do love my Xbox 360, but right now, mobile gadgets sell. Zune was a bust, Courier looked amazing but was cancelled for some reason (I REALLY wanted a Courier), and Windows Phone 7.....jury's out. I would buy a Windows 7 phone before I'd buy an Android phone, but who knows what kind of lasting support it's going to have. Maybe when Nokia is making these in full force I'll take another look.
I've been saying it for the last year, and I'll say it again--Microsoft is in a death spiral. The days of people camping out in line for the next version of Windows are over.
cube
Mar 30, 12:04 PM
I'm not sure why there is so much argument about the term "app". The trademark is for "App Store" not for "app". It would be like arguing that "Burger King" is not a valid trademark because "burger" is a generic term.
What about "Burger Store" ?
What about "Burger Store" ?
foo10
Jul 17, 09:31 AM
I hope well have a Core 2 Duo on a MBP soon. I've been thinking of selling my 20" G5 iMac and buying a 17" MBP.
crap freakboy
Jul 14, 11:28 AM
Remember that the pulse width is the reciprocal of frequency. At 4 GHz, the pulse width is 250 picoseconds. Light travels 0.000075 km in 250 picoseconds. There are 1 million mm in a km, hence light travels about 75mm in that time.
The size of the Core 2 chip is 143 square mm, or about 12mm x 12mm and getting smaller with each new process generation. At 4GHz, a single pulse can go back and forth across the chip at least 6 times.
In practice, propagation delays of this type are analyzed by CAD tools and the chip's physical layout is designed to minimize the signal path.
that was just noise.
Either way I'll wait until the imac gets a desktop chip rather than a Laptop one.
The size of the Core 2 chip is 143 square mm, or about 12mm x 12mm and getting smaller with each new process generation. At 4GHz, a single pulse can go back and forth across the chip at least 6 times.
In practice, propagation delays of this type are analyzed by CAD tools and the chip's physical layout is designed to minimize the signal path.
that was just noise.
Either way I'll wait until the imac gets a desktop chip rather than a Laptop one.
cwt1nospam
Jan 2, 02:04 PM
And is the alleged attack proceeding through the Mac community? No.
Once again, targeting and successfully attacking are worlds apart.
Oh, and the "time" needed to identify that you're on an Apple (or other) operating system is essentially zero. All you have to do is look at the user agent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_agent) header.
Once again, targeting and successfully attacking are worlds apart.
Oh, and the "time" needed to identify that you're on an Apple (or other) operating system is essentially zero. All you have to do is look at the user agent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_agent) header.
segfaultdotorg
May 3, 02:32 PM
Shouldn't it show faster performance for the i7?:confused:
Perhaps they're comparing the old i7 to the new i7?
Perhaps they're comparing the old i7 to the new i7?
Dmac77
Apr 25, 01:51 AM
And your ethics take an even worse.
The system is clearly broken and you are living proof of it.
Heck if something like that you did that me i would use this thread as poof your actions and laugh my ass off when end up in jail.
Good luck tracking my actual identity down. And also good luck getting anything you dug up admitted in court, because there is absolutely nothing legal about introducing any evidence of my identity you found by tying this account back to my IP/ISP without a warrant.
-Don
The system is clearly broken and you are living proof of it.
Heck if something like that you did that me i would use this thread as poof your actions and laugh my ass off when end up in jail.
Good luck tracking my actual identity down. And also good luck getting anything you dug up admitted in court, because there is absolutely nothing legal about introducing any evidence of my identity you found by tying this account back to my IP/ISP without a warrant.
-Don
Maxx Power
Oct 27, 05:29 PM
I was thinking of buying an iPod Shuffle for my niece for Xmas but she'll be getting something else instead. My MacBook purchase is on hold as well.
Well, always nice to see someone taking a stand! I'm sure your niece will be proud of you too, once she can understand why you did what you did.
Well, always nice to see someone taking a stand! I'm sure your niece will be proud of you too, once she can understand why you did what you did.
milo
Sep 5, 05:19 PM
I've seen some posts about transferring "that much data" in disbelief. I calculate that a two hour movie will no more about 450MB. I hope it is, of course. This is based on a 1-hr episode of Lost is about 200MB. I fudge in 50MB for the fact that each Lost episode never is EXACTLY 1 hour.
I can transfer that size (450MB) from my ReplayTV wirelessly to my PowerBook in less than a half hour with my Airport Extreme Basestation.
So... I see no problem. Perhaps the show will be delayed a little but not more than a few minutes
Lost runs about 42 minutes, so more like 600 meg. And you're assuming they'll ship movies at 320x240, which I doubt. If they up the quality to anything approaching DVD, file sizes will go way up. But I still think a well implemented wireless solution should be able to keep up, people are doing it already.
I can transfer that size (450MB) from my ReplayTV wirelessly to my PowerBook in less than a half hour with my Airport Extreme Basestation.
So... I see no problem. Perhaps the show will be delayed a little but not more than a few minutes
Lost runs about 42 minutes, so more like 600 meg. And you're assuming they'll ship movies at 320x240, which I doubt. If they up the quality to anything approaching DVD, file sizes will go way up. But I still think a well implemented wireless solution should be able to keep up, people are doing it already.
gnasher729
Mar 30, 01:12 PM
If Apple wins this argument, obviously that would prevent MS from calling theirs the "App Store" - but can they still use the phrase descriptively? I.e. "Welcome to App Market, Microsoft's app store."
If they can't (and Microsoft, Google, Blackberry etc. all trademark the others, App Shop, App Market etc.), then how do you describe what the App Store/App Shop is? I can't think of a more generic variant which could be used to describe it. "Windows" is an OS. "Internet Explorer" is a browser. "Office" is an application suite. "App Store" is...errr... an app store.
Application store. Software store. If you want to use the word store. But there is no need to. App Market is clear enough, isn't it? A market is a friendly, open place where you buy a variety of things at good prices, not walled in and regulated like a store. I'd say "Welcome to App Market, the place where you find all the software you need".
If they can't (and Microsoft, Google, Blackberry etc. all trademark the others, App Shop, App Market etc.), then how do you describe what the App Store/App Shop is? I can't think of a more generic variant which could be used to describe it. "Windows" is an OS. "Internet Explorer" is a browser. "Office" is an application suite. "App Store" is...errr... an app store.
Application store. Software store. If you want to use the word store. But there is no need to. App Market is clear enough, isn't it? A market is a friendly, open place where you buy a variety of things at good prices, not walled in and regulated like a store. I'd say "Welcome to App Market, the place where you find all the software you need".
Am3822
Sep 14, 09:26 AM
The merom/mbp thing is turning to be the macrumors' production of Godot.
iMacZealot
Sep 14, 02:09 AM
I bought a XDA II PDA phone TWO or Three years ago already have WiFI.
I should have said anything with Windows that's a phone. But that's my point: basically, the only types of phones that have Wifi in them are some "mobile" windows devices.
Happy Now? :)
I should have said anything with Windows that's a phone. But that's my point: basically, the only types of phones that have Wifi in them are some "mobile" windows devices.
Happy Now? :)
kresh
Sep 19, 03:43 PM
I think Apple should seriously consider offering rentals too. Its dumb not to try it out :)
If it destroys their whole business model, then it is not dumb to not "try it out".
Apple is clearly not interested in the subscription or rental business models.
edit: Clarity
If it destroys their whole business model, then it is not dumb to not "try it out".
Apple is clearly not interested in the subscription or rental business models.
edit: Clarity
digitalbiker
Aug 23, 07:12 PM
"I'd hardly call a [url=http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/8356/95% drop in profits "doing better than ever."
Despite MP3 players that offered more, Creative was on a downward spiral. Now they become a sheep following the iPod shepherd and Apple wins the battle.
First, Creative did not have a drop of 85% in profits.
Second, Creative makes a lot more than mp3 players. They were not going anywhere with mp3 players.
3rd, they are a very durable company, have servived many ups and downs in the computer industry and are a very efficiently run company out of Singapore.
Despite MP3 players that offered more, Creative was on a downward spiral. Now they become a sheep following the iPod shepherd and Apple wins the battle.
First, Creative did not have a drop of 85% in profits.
Second, Creative makes a lot more than mp3 players. They were not going anywhere with mp3 players.
3rd, they are a very durable company, have servived many ups and downs in the computer industry and are a very efficiently run company out of Singapore.
damnyooneek
Apr 25, 01:50 PM
Absolutely perfect design? Not even close.
Things apple needs to do to make a better MBP with a redesign:
MUST DO:
(1) IPS screen. I actually don't mind lower resolutions on small screens (1280x800 is fine for 13.3"), but please, please give me a real IPS panel.
what is the point of an IPS screen with a low resolution? IPS is good for viewing angles but people rarely look at a laptop from extreme viewing angles. the color and contrast on the current mbp screen are pretty good right now.
Things apple needs to do to make a better MBP with a redesign:
MUST DO:
(1) IPS screen. I actually don't mind lower resolutions on small screens (1280x800 is fine for 13.3"), but please, please give me a real IPS panel.
what is the point of an IPS screen with a low resolution? IPS is good for viewing angles but people rarely look at a laptop from extreme viewing angles. the color and contrast on the current mbp screen are pretty good right now.
weitzner
Oct 27, 08:09 PM
When the day comes that holographic screens make it to the market...maybe the green lust will be satiated and all will be well..unless the projector for holograms is a candy-coated ball of lead, powered by the liver of an infant.
well what else CLOULD it be?
well what else CLOULD it be?
thisisahughes
Apr 20, 10:14 AM
My favorite was a few years ago when Apple tried to stop New York (aka the Big Apple) from using this logo for their "Green New York" environmental project.
Apple claimed it would "seriously injure the reputation which it has established for its goods and services."
.
nice. you always post the most interesting stuff.
Apple claimed it would "seriously injure the reputation which it has established for its goods and services."
.
nice. you always post the most interesting stuff.