psychofreak
Nov 26, 12:48 PM
Not. Gonna. Happen. The tablet market is very small, and for good reason. Why use a tablet when a laptop fits the bill? Or a PDA? It's a glorified scribble toy. Apple's not going to try and grab such a miniscule market. There's no reason to even try.
As people mentioned, one could have said the same thing about mp3 players before the iPod.
"Not. Gonna. Happen. The mp3 player market is very small, and for good reason. Why use an mp3 player when a minidisk or CD fits the bill? Or a cassette? It's a glorified walkman. Apple's not going to try and grab such a miniscule market. There's no reason to even try"
As people mentioned, one could have said the same thing about mp3 players before the iPod.
"Not. Gonna. Happen. The mp3 player market is very small, and for good reason. Why use an mp3 player when a minidisk or CD fits the bill? Or a cassette? It's a glorified walkman. Apple's not going to try and grab such a miniscule market. There's no reason to even try"
Torrijos
May 6, 02:56 AM
BS to the power of FUD ^^
The thing is although ARM chips are pretty good in the low power range right now, nothing says that they will perfectly scale in power for a higher performance range.
Every major player in the chips industry started seeing more and more problems when they started reaching the manufacturing processes ARM will only reach in a couple of years (currently A15 -> 45nm).
High performance is where Intel is very good at, and their announcement of 3D transistor in Ivy Bridge already will only make them way better in performance and power consumption, and all that as soon as the end of this year (first machines probably next year).
Now transition from a software standpoint would be painful, but maybe not horrible...
Apple's compiler already manages ARM architecture, and part of the interest in LLVM is the possibility of JIT compilation.
But a switch of architecture right now would need Apple to ask devs to re-compile their software, and maybe a change from some libraries, all that for an uncertain gain right now and improbable gain in the future (Intel will remain the master in high performance computing).
The thing is although ARM chips are pretty good in the low power range right now, nothing says that they will perfectly scale in power for a higher performance range.
Every major player in the chips industry started seeing more and more problems when they started reaching the manufacturing processes ARM will only reach in a couple of years (currently A15 -> 45nm).
High performance is where Intel is very good at, and their announcement of 3D transistor in Ivy Bridge already will only make them way better in performance and power consumption, and all that as soon as the end of this year (first machines probably next year).
Now transition from a software standpoint would be painful, but maybe not horrible...
Apple's compiler already manages ARM architecture, and part of the interest in LLVM is the possibility of JIT compilation.
But a switch of architecture right now would need Apple to ask devs to re-compile their software, and maybe a change from some libraries, all that for an uncertain gain right now and improbable gain in the future (Intel will remain the master in high performance computing).
NebulaClash
Apr 25, 11:25 AM
Jobs is spinning his BS again as usual. Even when there is overwheming evidence to the contrary...he still insults the intelligence of his customers who he clearly regards as beneath him.
You can tell these lies if you feel they confirm your bias, but they are not true statements.
You can tell these lies if you feel they confirm your bias, but they are not true statements.
-aggie-
May 4, 10:39 AM
The other downside is we have half our health and action points. I'm not sure how big of a trap we can see early in a game, but if it has 3 or more that wipes out a whole team possibly.
shurcooL
Apr 24, 12:03 AM
You could argue that when they pump all consumer Mac resolutions up to the limit of human perception, resolution independence becomes sort of moot.
Almost, but not quite. Full resolution independence would allow you to change the scale/size of UI elements. Even if you can't see the pixels, some people may prefer smaller or larger "virtual" resolutions.
Almost, but not quite. Full resolution independence would allow you to change the scale/size of UI elements. Even if you can't see the pixels, some people may prefer smaller or larger "virtual" resolutions.
ticman
Dec 3, 04:03 PM
Jape,
sent an email this afternoon and received the following:
(tried to cut and paste but it didn't work).
In a nutshell the ETA from manufacturer is past due (gee we already figured that out) and they have requested info from mfger and will send when they get it. long story short nothing yet so just wait and will let u know.
damn
sent an email this afternoon and received the following:
(tried to cut and paste but it didn't work).
In a nutshell the ETA from manufacturer is past due (gee we already figured that out) and they have requested info from mfger and will send when they get it. long story short nothing yet so just wait and will let u know.
damn
rdowns
May 4, 04:43 PM
You metric people ought to hook up with the military time people.
wclyffe
Jan 19, 12:59 PM
One thing I think the kit can improve on is the voice volume of a call conversation. It could be a bit louder.
Yeah, I felt that too, but it was passable in most situations except for on the freeways. Well, I ordered a Magellan car kit so we'll see what that brings. I am looking forward to just being able to pop the phone into the cradle, case and all.
Yeah, I felt that too, but it was passable in most situations except for on the freeways. Well, I ordered a Magellan car kit so we'll see what that brings. I am looking forward to just being able to pop the phone into the cradle, case and all.
qwerto
Aug 12, 02:52 AM
sorry if this is a stupid question, but i'm just asking. I just bought a mbp, and now that its too late, i was wondering if i could just pop in a merom processor into my mbp and upgrade the bios? Or is that not possible?
treblah
Aug 4, 12:08 AM
I dont' think either one of us are feeling angry toward one another are we?
Absolutely not. It was just a good old fashioned conversation. And I look forward to more in the future. :)
Absolutely not. It was just a good old fashioned conversation. And I look forward to more in the future. :)
Yamcha
May 4, 05:14 PM
Yup, I didn't read the whole thing like most everyone :P. Yes its true that Apple is targeting Mac App Store as the preferred method, but according to the article they will also be distributing retail versions of Lion on Disc since some people are running an older version of OSX, and to those who don't have a high speed internet connection..
Conclusion, everyones happy, if you prefer discs, you can buy one, if you prefer digital download then you can download it..
Conclusion, everyones happy, if you prefer discs, you can buy one, if you prefer digital download then you can download it..
TalonFlyer
Dec 2, 04:39 PM
TalonFlyer..
Here is how I grade the Car Kit (1-10):
Mounting: 8
Rotation: 7
Articulation: 3
Hands-Free: 4 (Weak, speaker is facing away from you, VOX'ing problem)
GPS: 6 (Only very slightly better that the built in GPS)
Compatibility: 3 (Can't use iPod Touch)
Bluetooth: 2 (Phone will not pair until docked, can't pair with other devices)
Overall it's a $79.00 retail mount with a questionable hands-free, only a small incremental change in GPS accuracy and a useless bluetooth implementation. I'll give it a generous 5 out of 10 for now.
*************************************************************
Nice review, and thanks. It sounds like you might have gotten a unit that is sub par. The rotation and articulation of the car kit in many of the Youtube videos seems very tight, very solid with strong mounting. Did it just loosen up over that short time or did it start out not so great? Maybe send it back?
I thought I remember reading that the Handsfree Bluetooth is duplex so I'm also not sure where your issue comes from. That said, I may get that as a separate item on the visor of my car if its below quality. I have another car with a BluAnt unit in it and its terrific.
Also, there are now several places where you can order the car kit for much less money. I have an order into BTL for $87 which sounds like a more reasonable price for the unit. I'm sure it will continue to drop.
Thanks again!
I updated my post and yesterday I returned the Car Kit.
This is a slick looking mount with to many functional limitations.
I exchanged the car kit and had the same hands-free issues.
What I noticed after many calls is that there is a GATE circuit (similar to an AGC (Automatic Gain Control) circuit) that is turning off the speaker most likely to reduce background noise. The problem is that this GATING is causing the audio to be choppy making it very difficult to hear your call.
The useless hands-free along with other limitations make it far to expensive to just sit around and charge the phone.
You cannot mount it on you dash due to the off-center swivel making it impossible to rotate it vertical (unless the mount is hanging over the edge a little).
Why the bluetooth does not connect until docked does not make any sense and makes it even less valuable.
Having to remove the case every time is a real pain as well.
Why do you need a different unit for the iPod touch? The connection is the same and if the little pins retracted it would work.
They did a great job getting everyone excited, but then Bernie Madoff did also.
The bottom line, it's not worth it, get something else.
Here is how I grade the Car Kit (1-10):
Mounting: 8
Rotation: 7
Articulation: 3
Hands-Free: 4 (Weak, speaker is facing away from you, VOX'ing problem)
GPS: 6 (Only very slightly better that the built in GPS)
Compatibility: 3 (Can't use iPod Touch)
Bluetooth: 2 (Phone will not pair until docked, can't pair with other devices)
Overall it's a $79.00 retail mount with a questionable hands-free, only a small incremental change in GPS accuracy and a useless bluetooth implementation. I'll give it a generous 5 out of 10 for now.
*************************************************************
Nice review, and thanks. It sounds like you might have gotten a unit that is sub par. The rotation and articulation of the car kit in many of the Youtube videos seems very tight, very solid with strong mounting. Did it just loosen up over that short time or did it start out not so great? Maybe send it back?
I thought I remember reading that the Handsfree Bluetooth is duplex so I'm also not sure where your issue comes from. That said, I may get that as a separate item on the visor of my car if its below quality. I have another car with a BluAnt unit in it and its terrific.
Also, there are now several places where you can order the car kit for much less money. I have an order into BTL for $87 which sounds like a more reasonable price for the unit. I'm sure it will continue to drop.
Thanks again!
I updated my post and yesterday I returned the Car Kit.
This is a slick looking mount with to many functional limitations.
I exchanged the car kit and had the same hands-free issues.
What I noticed after many calls is that there is a GATE circuit (similar to an AGC (Automatic Gain Control) circuit) that is turning off the speaker most likely to reduce background noise. The problem is that this GATING is causing the audio to be choppy making it very difficult to hear your call.
The useless hands-free along with other limitations make it far to expensive to just sit around and charge the phone.
You cannot mount it on you dash due to the off-center swivel making it impossible to rotate it vertical (unless the mount is hanging over the edge a little).
Why the bluetooth does not connect until docked does not make any sense and makes it even less valuable.
Having to remove the case every time is a real pain as well.
Why do you need a different unit for the iPod touch? The connection is the same and if the little pins retracted it would work.
They did a great job getting everyone excited, but then Bernie Madoff did also.
The bottom line, it's not worth it, get something else.
kpbpsw
Nov 2, 05:55 PM
There is no reason to put anti-virus software on your Mac!
It will not protect you from anything that is out there.
Sophos may be a reputable company or it may not be but you do not need this and it can only harm your system and promote a business that feeds on fear.
We (the Mac community) should not let the security industry get a toe hold in OSX.
It will not protect you from anything that is out there.
Sophos may be a reputable company or it may not be but you do not need this and it can only harm your system and promote a business that feeds on fear.
We (the Mac community) should not let the security industry get a toe hold in OSX.
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
LagunaSol
Apr 7, 03:58 PM
Apple is anticompetitive and should be shut down. By producing products customers want when others in the industry can't, they are forcing the competition out of business.
Thanks for the feedback, comrade.
All Apple did was created a premium brand. Technology was cheap and affordable in the MP3 market. You could pick up an MP3 player for under a $100 bucks until Apple came into the market with its $300 dollar iPod.
Bear in mind that the original iPod was the only one with the combination of capacity (5GB) and physical size (pocketable) that made it attractive to the general market. The Creative Nomad of the time looked like my old portable Sony CD player. :(
So it's not that Apple created a market for devices at a particular price point - they created the devices people wanted to buy. At the right price. There was nothing "premium" about the original iPod when you saw what you got for the money. The equivalent 2.5" hard drive of that capacity at the time was selling for as much as the iPod.
Thanks for the feedback, comrade.
All Apple did was created a premium brand. Technology was cheap and affordable in the MP3 market. You could pick up an MP3 player for under a $100 bucks until Apple came into the market with its $300 dollar iPod.
Bear in mind that the original iPod was the only one with the combination of capacity (5GB) and physical size (pocketable) that made it attractive to the general market. The Creative Nomad of the time looked like my old portable Sony CD player. :(
So it's not that Apple created a market for devices at a particular price point - they created the devices people wanted to buy. At the right price. There was nothing "premium" about the original iPod when you saw what you got for the money. The equivalent 2.5" hard drive of that capacity at the time was selling for as much as the iPod.
MacRumors
Sep 15, 04:18 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
MacShrine believes that Apple will update the MacBook Pro (http://www.macshrine.com/2006/09/15/merom-macbook-pro-at-photokina/) to use Core 2 Duo "Merom" processors at Photokina (in addition to the anticipated Aperture 1.2 update (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060822235447.shtml)). According to the site, Apple will employ the 2.33 and 2.16 GHz variants of the chip, however there is no mention of any other updates (enclosure, etc). The MacBook Pro was last updated (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/04/20060424085129.shtml) in April 2006 with the introduction of the 17" model.
At this time, MacBook updates are not expected despite consistent worldwide shortages, which was anticipated in Apple's most recent financial conference call.
Apple will be hosting a special event on September 25th (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060914090209.shtml) (just before the beginning of photokina, which begins on the 26th).
MacShrine believes that Apple will update the MacBook Pro (http://www.macshrine.com/2006/09/15/merom-macbook-pro-at-photokina/) to use Core 2 Duo "Merom" processors at Photokina (in addition to the anticipated Aperture 1.2 update (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060822235447.shtml)). According to the site, Apple will employ the 2.33 and 2.16 GHz variants of the chip, however there is no mention of any other updates (enclosure, etc). The MacBook Pro was last updated (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/04/20060424085129.shtml) in April 2006 with the introduction of the 17" model.
At this time, MacBook updates are not expected despite consistent worldwide shortages, which was anticipated in Apple's most recent financial conference call.
Apple will be hosting a special event on September 25th (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060914090209.shtml) (just before the beginning of photokina, which begins on the 26th).
KnightWRX
Apr 6, 07:35 AM
Apple brought design elements to desktops and delivered us from the tan box tower.
Apple wasn't the first to break from the Beige box syndrome. ;) In fact, I think I know where they got the idea for the Blue G3 case :
http://blakespot.com/sgi/images/sgi_open1.jpg
Apple wasn't the first to break from the Beige box syndrome. ;) In fact, I think I know where they got the idea for the Blue G3 case :
http://blakespot.com/sgi/images/sgi_open1.jpg
Thunderbird
Apr 23, 04:30 PM
Seeing as how the iPad 2 didn't get retina display, I doubt iMacs will.
Imagine the cost of that!!
Imagine the cost of that!!
dshan
May 6, 07:26 AM
I can't see them making another architecture transition. The switch to intel was enough...
Why not? They've already done it twice - don't forget the 68K to PPC transition. I went through that too, and all I can say is: no, no, please, not again! I couldn't stand another transition.
CPU architecture transitions waste years of time, cost Apple and their customers huge amounts of money. The only way it's worth it is if the architecture you're going from is dead or dying, and the new one is much better, faster and cheaper. This was true for the 68K and sadly later for the PPC too, but there's no sign of the x86 losing it's edge in the price/performance stakes for laptops and above.
While it's not totally impossible that ARM might one day challenge Intel's x86 in the low-end notebook and el cheapo desktop space I can't see them ever seriously getting near Intel (or AMD) in the real desktop, server and serious MacBook Pro space. Intel's process lead, now a full generation and soon with 3D transistors too, will likely keep them ahead of any alternative architecture (barring perhaps a breakthrough in quantum computing or somesuch) for the foreseeable future. I can't see how Apple would gain anything real from moving away from x86 for the Mac. In fact, by 2013 the Atom may be seriously challenging ARM in the low-power performance stakes for tablets (and even possibly phones), so it might make more sense for iOS to transition to x86 rather than the reverse. Maybe.
Why not? They've already done it twice - don't forget the 68K to PPC transition. I went through that too, and all I can say is: no, no, please, not again! I couldn't stand another transition.
CPU architecture transitions waste years of time, cost Apple and their customers huge amounts of money. The only way it's worth it is if the architecture you're going from is dead or dying, and the new one is much better, faster and cheaper. This was true for the 68K and sadly later for the PPC too, but there's no sign of the x86 losing it's edge in the price/performance stakes for laptops and above.
While it's not totally impossible that ARM might one day challenge Intel's x86 in the low-end notebook and el cheapo desktop space I can't see them ever seriously getting near Intel (or AMD) in the real desktop, server and serious MacBook Pro space. Intel's process lead, now a full generation and soon with 3D transistors too, will likely keep them ahead of any alternative architecture (barring perhaps a breakthrough in quantum computing or somesuch) for the foreseeable future. I can't see how Apple would gain anything real from moving away from x86 for the Mac. In fact, by 2013 the Atom may be seriously challenging ARM in the low-power performance stakes for tablets (and even possibly phones), so it might make more sense for iOS to transition to x86 rather than the reverse. Maybe.
chaosbringer
Apr 22, 07:31 AM
Some designs changes i'd like to see (all the rest i'm fine with):
- Dust filters
- Thunderbolt ports, front and back (instead of one of the firewire ports)
- Usb 3.0 replacing usb 2.0 ports
- PSU on bottom to keep it cool
- HD's on bottom to keep them cool too
- At least one dedicated SSD bay
- Dust filters
- Thunderbolt ports, front and back (instead of one of the firewire ports)
- Usb 3.0 replacing usb 2.0 ports
- PSU on bottom to keep it cool
- HD's on bottom to keep them cool too
- At least one dedicated SSD bay
navguy
Jan 6, 06:10 PM
after a week of experimenting ...
no rattle
good bluetooth connection
landscape position is delicate, but holding fine - no movement on bumps (i've tested center position on back and shifted toward bottom in landscape; both work well)
GPS lock is interesting ... 1. definitely takes mount GPS 20-30 seconds from cold start; 2. fast lock is no doubt iPhone assisted GPS initially; 3. there is a moment 30 seconds from cold start when it switches over to mount GPS once lock is achieved (a noticable lag moment - but gotta be watching close)
while i don't have complete facts, i do think the satnavs use the mount most of the time, except from cold start when GPS lock is a bit slower then phone's assisted GPS
speaker works fine - although i'd like to be able to change the inital volume (too loud) w/in the free app
no use of AUX
one add'l thing i've found is that phone boots the mount bluetooth for ear piece - no multi connect option as far as i can tell (iPhone 'feature'?)
otherwise, enjoying the integrated features of the mount so far ...
no rattle
good bluetooth connection
landscape position is delicate, but holding fine - no movement on bumps (i've tested center position on back and shifted toward bottom in landscape; both work well)
GPS lock is interesting ... 1. definitely takes mount GPS 20-30 seconds from cold start; 2. fast lock is no doubt iPhone assisted GPS initially; 3. there is a moment 30 seconds from cold start when it switches over to mount GPS once lock is achieved (a noticable lag moment - but gotta be watching close)
while i don't have complete facts, i do think the satnavs use the mount most of the time, except from cold start when GPS lock is a bit slower then phone's assisted GPS
speaker works fine - although i'd like to be able to change the inital volume (too loud) w/in the free app
no use of AUX
one add'l thing i've found is that phone boots the mount bluetooth for ear piece - no multi connect option as far as i can tell (iPhone 'feature'?)
otherwise, enjoying the integrated features of the mount so far ...
iFanboy
Mar 30, 05:41 PM
Dear Apple
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
wacky4alanis
Nov 3, 12:25 PM
Suction mounts are magnets for thieves. They leave a circular mark on the windshield that says "break into my car - I have a GPS unit for you to steal!". The thief will be very annoyed when they just find the Tom-Tom mount - until they figure out that they sell for > $100 LOL They will undoubtedly steal other stuff and break your window in the process.
I prefer the friction mounts that just sit on your dashboard and fit easily into the glove box. They are much more stealthy, and work great. Mine never slips or slides around. This is the one I use for my Garmin Nuvi:
http://www.buy.com/prod/garmin-010-10908-00-portable-friction-mount-garmin-portable-friction/q/loc/111/204297424.html
Is there something like that for the iPhone? If so, I would like to buy one.
*edit* I did a web search and found that Arkon sells a general purpose friction mount that could most likely be used with the Tom-Tom mount:
http://www.arkon.com/weighted_friction_dash_mount.php
They also sell a mount designed for the iPhone.
I prefer the friction mounts that just sit on your dashboard and fit easily into the glove box. They are much more stealthy, and work great. Mine never slips or slides around. This is the one I use for my Garmin Nuvi:
http://www.buy.com/prod/garmin-010-10908-00-portable-friction-mount-garmin-portable-friction/q/loc/111/204297424.html
Is there something like that for the iPhone? If so, I would like to buy one.
*edit* I did a web search and found that Arkon sells a general purpose friction mount that could most likely be used with the Tom-Tom mount:
http://www.arkon.com/weighted_friction_dash_mount.php
They also sell a mount designed for the iPhone.
NebulaClash
May 4, 02:43 PM
Distribution of Mac OS X Lion through the Mac App Store would of course not be a surprise
But will be greeted with outrage here anyway, just you watch.
But will be greeted with outrage here anyway, just you watch.