Thunderhawks
Apr 6, 04:35 PM
Don't understand that there needs to be a pissing contest about Xoom OR ipad.
Why are the Xoom guys even here on a Mac site, to tell us THEIR device is better?
Let's even assume they are right.
Go buy your Xoom and be happy if it does what you want No harm, no foul.
The Apple users buy Apple until something better comes along also as long as it does what they want.
They love the possible integration with their other devices and when that comes to Xoom or something else is better they will switch.
Technology pace is amazingly fast and nobody knows what is next.
Why are the Xoom guys even here on a Mac site, to tell us THEIR device is better?
Let's even assume they are right.
Go buy your Xoom and be happy if it does what you want No harm, no foul.
The Apple users buy Apple until something better comes along also as long as it does what they want.
They love the possible integration with their other devices and when that comes to Xoom or something else is better they will switch.
Technology pace is amazingly fast and nobody knows what is next.
MacinDoc
Jul 30, 06:23 PM
Vista ships early 2007 and way preceeds the Core 3 launch. :rolleyes:
That is, Bill Gates has stated that there is an 80% chance that Vista will ship in early which, when multiplied by the 80% probability that his estimate is something smelly that comes out of the backside of a bull (and only 20% chance that it is actually true), gives a 16% chance that Vista will REALLY ship in early 2007. ;)
That is, Bill Gates has stated that there is an 80% chance that Vista will ship in early which, when multiplied by the 80% probability that his estimate is something smelly that comes out of the backside of a bull (and only 20% chance that it is actually true), gives a 16% chance that Vista will REALLY ship in early 2007. ;)
kny3twalker
Apr 6, 10:36 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
ULV CPUs (17W) will go to 11.6". The TDP of 320M is not known but 9400M has TDP of 12W so it is quite safe to assume that the TDP is similar to that. That means current 11.6" MBA has TDP of 22W (includes CPU, GPU, chipset) while SB 11.6" MBA would have a TDP of 21W (17W for the CPU and ~4W for the PCH).
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
You should submit this. As the current article had me confused as to the potential configurations, and I am sure I am not alone there as your reply represents.
ULV CPUs (17W) will go to 11.6". The TDP of 320M is not known but 9400M has TDP of 12W so it is quite safe to assume that the TDP is similar to that. That means current 11.6" MBA has TDP of 22W (includes CPU, GPU, chipset) while SB 11.6" MBA would have a TDP of 21W (17W for the CPU and ~4W for the PCH).
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
You should submit this. As the current article had me confused as to the potential configurations, and I am sure I am not alone there as your reply represents.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 03:48 PM
I standby my assumption that the amount of internet usage is probably a good gauge of cell phone usage.
I am sure you are...
Care to dispute, then provide your own "facts".
My assumption (http://www.gsmworld.com/index.shtml). I was wrong. It is not 81%, it is 82%. Sorry, I will check my sources better next time.
I am sure you are...
Care to dispute, then provide your own "facts".
My assumption (http://www.gsmworld.com/index.shtml). I was wrong. It is not 81%, it is 82%. Sorry, I will check my sources better next time.
Dagless
Aug 10, 05:21 AM
Nope, just Windows unfortunately.
And they aint half brilliant. GT reminds me of a casualised WTCC (or at least the rally tracks). It's a very serious toy for very serious sim drivers.
And they aint half brilliant. GT reminds me of a casualised WTCC (or at least the rally tracks). It's a very serious toy for very serious sim drivers.
rosalindavenue
Mar 31, 03:18 PM
Not a problem for me. HTC does a great job keeping phones updated.
Spoken like someone who never owned an Eris.
Spoken like someone who never owned an Eris.
maclaptop
Apr 19, 03:01 PM
Sigh. The iPhone is still gaining market share. Not losing market share.
Yes they are.
Apple's doing a great job with one exception.
It's the fact that they just can't be happy and celebrate all they've accomplished.
They have to desperately dive into the slimy gutter and fire off law suits.
april may 2011 calendar
april may 2011 calendar
april may 2011 calendar
april may 2011 calendar
May 2011 Calendar template;
march april may calendar 2011.
april may 2011 calendar
april may 2011 calendar
2011 calendar template april.
april may 2011 calendar
april may 2011 calendar
april 2011 calendar template.
Yes they are.
Apple's doing a great job with one exception.
It's the fact that they just can't be happy and celebrate all they've accomplished.
They have to desperately dive into the slimy gutter and fire off law suits.
mumbo
Aug 26, 12:49 PM
I called this week to have the mighty mouse that came with my DC 2.3 G5 replaced. The guy was helpful and my new mouse came the next day, from California to Canada. I'm pretty impressed!
afrowq
Apr 11, 05:59 PM
Exactly. Apple has been neglecting its professional products since the iPhone and iOS release, and focusing on consumer level products. A lot of people on MacRumors are new to Mac/Apple. For those of us who have used Mac's for 10+ years, mostly for work, we have become weary of the direction the company is taking for US, not for the average Joe. FCP was a standard at the time, for less than its competitors it offered a great GUI at a reasonable price point. The hardware and software are business investments.
As for the sarcastic comment regarding someone not leaving Apple now before FCP is released, it's because leaving is a huge decision. We have lots of money, time and equipment invested in our work. It's not as simple as dropping everything you have used for many, many years and investing and training yourself for another platform.
Sorry, but I am tired of the new users brought in from iPhone's and iPods and MacBook's getting snarky with the professionals who carried Apple through tough times and rely on Apple's professional line for our work. First the dedicated ACD's are neglected and replaced with ONE 27" LED LCD panel from the 27" iMac, OS X Lion is morphing into an iOS GUI, the Xeon Server processors in the Mac Pro line that replaced the affordable PowerMac G4/5's are over priced and over powered for some of our needs, Xserve was dropped not due to less sales but less marketing and development due to Apple's focus on iDevices, less OS X development such as Resolution Independence, 64-bit implementation, TRIM support for third party Sandforce SSD's, and so on. Heck, even professional such as Annie Leibovitz has left Apple due its lack of professional level products over the past four years.
There's much more to Apple than iDevices, as great as they may be. iMac's, iPads, MacBooks - they don't replace the systems Apple has left that are necessary for our work.
*and before anyone states that Apple has made billions on iDevices and iOS, they certainly can take a small amount of that cash reserve and reinvest it into a much needed market, such as a mid-level tower that fits between the top level iMac and entry level Mac Pro for those of us who need 5+ tower's but now can't afford them since the Intel transition. Apple could easily restructure their professional focus with new project managers to give a much needed refresh of their high end niche, and they could easily make a profit from that market. They created/restructured a niche market with iDevices and made a killing, why not with their professional end products? There are thousands if not more of us who would gladly pony up and stick with Apple.
Nailed it
As for the sarcastic comment regarding someone not leaving Apple now before FCP is released, it's because leaving is a huge decision. We have lots of money, time and equipment invested in our work. It's not as simple as dropping everything you have used for many, many years and investing and training yourself for another platform.
Sorry, but I am tired of the new users brought in from iPhone's and iPods and MacBook's getting snarky with the professionals who carried Apple through tough times and rely on Apple's professional line for our work. First the dedicated ACD's are neglected and replaced with ONE 27" LED LCD panel from the 27" iMac, OS X Lion is morphing into an iOS GUI, the Xeon Server processors in the Mac Pro line that replaced the affordable PowerMac G4/5's are over priced and over powered for some of our needs, Xserve was dropped not due to less sales but less marketing and development due to Apple's focus on iDevices, less OS X development such as Resolution Independence, 64-bit implementation, TRIM support for third party Sandforce SSD's, and so on. Heck, even professional such as Annie Leibovitz has left Apple due its lack of professional level products over the past four years.
There's much more to Apple than iDevices, as great as they may be. iMac's, iPads, MacBooks - they don't replace the systems Apple has left that are necessary for our work.
*and before anyone states that Apple has made billions on iDevices and iOS, they certainly can take a small amount of that cash reserve and reinvest it into a much needed market, such as a mid-level tower that fits between the top level iMac and entry level Mac Pro for those of us who need 5+ tower's but now can't afford them since the Intel transition. Apple could easily restructure their professional focus with new project managers to give a much needed refresh of their high end niche, and they could easily make a profit from that market. They created/restructured a niche market with iDevices and made a killing, why not with their professional end products? There are thousands if not more of us who would gladly pony up and stick with Apple.
Nailed it
kavika411
Feb 28, 08:20 PM
According to the school's website (http://www.chc.edu/News/2011/February/statement_regarding_jim_st_george/), he was not fired as the OP's article suggests. Rather, his contract was not renewed. AFAIK, adjunct instructors do not enjoy the same privileges as tenured professors. If his contract ran out and was simply not renewed, then that's that, unless it can be argued that the college has some legal obligation to offer a new contract.
But threads like this are above further research. Not sure why you'd want to mess up a perfectly good party.
But threads like this are above further research. Not sure why you'd want to mess up a perfectly good party.
BillyShears
Aug 7, 10:03 PM
Perhaps sometime between now and Spring 2007 they might find the time to change that.
Right, but certainly not "all the pictures" show a unified interface, which is what I was replying to. I'd like if it were unified, though.
Right, but certainly not "all the pictures" show a unified interface, which is what I was replying to. I'd like if it were unified, though.
59031
Aug 7, 06:50 PM
Is Leopard going to take advantage of the 64 bit Dual G5?
Yes, absolutely:
Enhanced 64-bit Support
Leopard delivers 64-bit power in one, universal OS. Now Cocoa and Carbon application frameworks, as well as graphics, scripting, and the rest of the system are all 64-bit. Leopard delivers 64-bit power to both Intel- and PowerPC-based Macs, so you don’t have to install separate applications for different machines. There’s only one version of Mac OS X, so you don’t need to maintain separate operating systems for different uses.
Bridge the Generation Gap
Now that the entire operating system is 64-bit, you can take full advantage of the Xeon chip in Mac Pro and Xserve. You get more processing power at up to 3.0GHz, without limiting your programs to command-line applications, servers, and computation engines. From G3 to Xeon, from MacBook to Xserve, there is just one Leopard.
Yes, absolutely:
Enhanced 64-bit Support
Leopard delivers 64-bit power in one, universal OS. Now Cocoa and Carbon application frameworks, as well as graphics, scripting, and the rest of the system are all 64-bit. Leopard delivers 64-bit power to both Intel- and PowerPC-based Macs, so you don’t have to install separate applications for different machines. There’s only one version of Mac OS X, so you don’t need to maintain separate operating systems for different uses.
Bridge the Generation Gap
Now that the entire operating system is 64-bit, you can take full advantage of the Xeon chip in Mac Pro and Xserve. You get more processing power at up to 3.0GHz, without limiting your programs to command-line applications, servers, and computation engines. From G3 to Xeon, from MacBook to Xserve, there is just one Leopard.
Warbrain
Aug 26, 04:06 PM
Im guessing hopefully by the years end for the G5.... :) :)
I was told it would be released before Christmas. I can't wait!
I was told it would be released before Christmas. I can't wait!
gregorsamsa
Aug 27, 11:36 AM
Thanks mate, of course I vent my disappointment regarding the overall quality issues. In any case, it should not be luck to catch a good piece of hardware from a company like APPLE, right? It seems as if the hardware quality has in general decreased, I suspect partly because of the place where this hardware is now manufactured... CHINA. I have my own experience on a corporate level with a large mobile phone manufacturer...
I found that there is a general lack of understanding what quality should be, and especially how long it should last:rolleyes:
CIAO
I agree, it shouldn't be luck. Also, whilst I'm trying to keep an open mind about these issues, I think it's pertinent that quite a few people have pointed to the China-connection as partly responsible for some of the hardware problems. I guess a company like Dell, who sell some very cheap computers, can always get away with imperfect products more so. Because people buying Apple know that they're paying a premium for a certain extra Apple quality, they're entitled to expect Apple to consistently deliver.
I'm definitely not going to excuse Apple for a seemingly alarming number of faults with their first batch of Intel laptops. There's an apparent problem here, however debatable the degree of it, & it needs sorting out. I'd be interested, however, in seeing some statistics about the percentage of faulty laptops from Apple, perhaps over a 12 month period, & how that compares with similarly-priced PC laptops.
Certainly, before I make my next computer purchase (a 15.4" laptop next year), I'll be paying careful attention to Macrumors, & particularly any postings about the quality, or otherwise, of the latest Mac computers.
I found that there is a general lack of understanding what quality should be, and especially how long it should last:rolleyes:
CIAO
I agree, it shouldn't be luck. Also, whilst I'm trying to keep an open mind about these issues, I think it's pertinent that quite a few people have pointed to the China-connection as partly responsible for some of the hardware problems. I guess a company like Dell, who sell some very cheap computers, can always get away with imperfect products more so. Because people buying Apple know that they're paying a premium for a certain extra Apple quality, they're entitled to expect Apple to consistently deliver.
I'm definitely not going to excuse Apple for a seemingly alarming number of faults with their first batch of Intel laptops. There's an apparent problem here, however debatable the degree of it, & it needs sorting out. I'd be interested, however, in seeing some statistics about the percentage of faulty laptops from Apple, perhaps over a 12 month period, & how that compares with similarly-priced PC laptops.
Certainly, before I make my next computer purchase (a 15.4" laptop next year), I'll be paying careful attention to Macrumors, & particularly any postings about the quality, or otherwise, of the latest Mac computers.
shamino
Jul 14, 04:01 PM
I think we'll see more cores per cpu before we see 3GHz. IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz.
Intel has already announced 3GHz Woodcrest CPUs.
The question isn't about when the chips will become available but when Apple chooses to put one in a system.
Which might be in the first batch of systems. Remember, we're all discussing a rumor from an anonymous source, not an actual product announcement.
Intel has already announced 3GHz Woodcrest CPUs.
The question isn't about when the chips will become available but when Apple chooses to put one in a system.
Which might be in the first batch of systems. Remember, we're all discussing a rumor from an anonymous source, not an actual product announcement.
sampdoria
Jun 14, 01:46 PM
I just visited my local radio shack near my office and spoke with a sales person who seemed pretty well prepared for this, but take it for what it's worth...
Pre-order: In-store at 7am EST. He suggested to pre-order as soon as possible, because by the time it reaches the west coast, they could run out. "They" meaning radio shack, he wasn't speaking for apple or att. And yes, pre-ordering guarantees me an iphone on launch-day.
Launch-day: This store guaranteed me to have them on the 24th. And it will open earlier than usual (between 5am and 6am), depending on how the pre-orders go.
Trade-ins: Any cell phones, active and non-active ones (with chargers) will be accepted on launch-day. I have razrs and blackberries that I will happily trade in for a credit towards new iphones. This is why I'm leaning towards radioshack more so than the others.
Tip: Get to know your salesperson and vice-versa, before the whole madness begins, that way you'll get better service and no surprises.
-Samp
Boston
Pre-order: In-store at 7am EST. He suggested to pre-order as soon as possible, because by the time it reaches the west coast, they could run out. "They" meaning radio shack, he wasn't speaking for apple or att. And yes, pre-ordering guarantees me an iphone on launch-day.
Launch-day: This store guaranteed me to have them on the 24th. And it will open earlier than usual (between 5am and 6am), depending on how the pre-orders go.
Trade-ins: Any cell phones, active and non-active ones (with chargers) will be accepted on launch-day. I have razrs and blackberries that I will happily trade in for a credit towards new iphones. This is why I'm leaning towards radioshack more so than the others.
Tip: Get to know your salesperson and vice-versa, before the whole madness begins, that way you'll get better service and no surprises.
-Samp
Boston
ten-oak-druid
Apr 19, 05:04 PM
One of the three basics that must be proven in order to win a trade dress case, is the likelihood of confusion.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
That is not the case. The user can know they are buying a product that is a rip off of another and it is still wrong.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
That is not the case. The user can know they are buying a product that is a rip off of another and it is still wrong.
poppe
Jul 14, 02:39 PM
As usual though they come with 50% of the necessary RAM :rolleyes:, why Apple can't get this right I don't know.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
You would think they would come out with the fastest chip...
I mean what seperates them from a Dell or HP workstation that is top of the line? OS X (yes), but to the ones on the fence that doesn't justify paying more for less.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
You would think they would come out with the fastest chip...
I mean what seperates them from a Dell or HP workstation that is top of the line? OS X (yes), but to the ones on the fence that doesn't justify paying more for less.
shawnce
Jul 20, 11:43 AM
Strike:
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
Insert:
-release of 10.5
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
Insert:
-release of 10.5
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
gnasher729
Jul 27, 05:59 PM
but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
steve_hill4
Jul 27, 02:13 PM
What difference does it make if virtually no consumer software is effected by 64-bit processors, even now?
Remember that the G5 is 64 bit. While the consumer apps may not be too directly affected at first, (speed increases, but nothing else), as more memory is required, 32 bit will hit a brick wall at 4GiB, whereas 64 bit can go along happily to 2,305,843,009,200,000,000GiB.
Realistically, it will take some time to get to that level, but with the last G5 supporting 16GiB, 32 then 64 wouldn't be too far off. within 10 years, I'm sure 1TiB will start to become common.
Remember that the G5 is 64 bit. While the consumer apps may not be too directly affected at first, (speed increases, but nothing else), as more memory is required, 32 bit will hit a brick wall at 4GiB, whereas 64 bit can go along happily to 2,305,843,009,200,000,000GiB.
Realistically, it will take some time to get to that level, but with the last G5 supporting 16GiB, 32 then 64 wouldn't be too far off. within 10 years, I'm sure 1TiB will start to become common.
jaxstate
Jul 27, 11:11 AM
I read the link, and it give no mention of the speeds of the notebook chips. It only gives a range for the desktop chips. Maybe you didn't read it.
If you read the linked articled you will find the answer.
Also, right from the macrumors page is a quote that says, "Core 2 Duo runs at slower clock speeds than Pentium-era chips, but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle." I think that would show that this has nothing to do with the Mhz myth but is the opposite.
When did Apple have pentium-era chips in their machines?
If you read the linked articled you will find the answer.
Also, right from the macrumors page is a quote that says, "Core 2 Duo runs at slower clock speeds than Pentium-era chips, but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle." I think that would show that this has nothing to do with the Mhz myth but is the opposite.
When did Apple have pentium-era chips in their machines?
dernhelm
Aug 26, 07:13 PM
I'm Really hoping for a new iMac this Tues. But I might jump on a Core 2 Duo mini if they offer that instead...
Anyone have any idea if they'll be using "laptop chips" in the iMac and mini still - or if they'll move the iMac to a "desktop" chip instead?
Anyone have any idea if they'll be using "laptop chips" in the iMac and mini still - or if they'll move the iMac to a "desktop" chip instead?
rishio
Apr 6, 12:24 AM
The apple store is down so maybe they are announcing it tomorrow?
No comments:
Post a Comment