11thIndian
Apr 6, 07:38 AM
The functions inside FCP do not need the OS support. Apple can install private frameworks, and they do it already, for their own applications. So i think they will support SL.
AV Foundation brings back QT7-features to QTX. Apple uses AV Foundation in the new QTX-player of Lion.
And AV Foundation is what allows iOS devices like the iPhone and iPad, with their significantly slower processors and reduced RAM, to view and edit h264 media.
AV Foundation sidesteps ALL the problems of QTKit. It's a fresh start.
Here's a great article from Philip Hodgett's site:
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
AV Foundation brings back QT7-features to QTX. Apple uses AV Foundation in the new QTX-player of Lion.
And AV Foundation is what allows iOS devices like the iPhone and iPad, with their significantly slower processors and reduced RAM, to view and edit h264 media.
AV Foundation sidesteps ALL the problems of QTKit. It's a fresh start.
Here's a great article from Philip Hodgett's site:
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
logandzwon
Apr 19, 02:36 PM
Couldn't Samsung just claim that the Galaxy S line is an evolution of the Samsung F700? Pretty strong argument for samsung.
They could. Except, "Jobs unveiled the iPhone to the public on January 9, 2007 at Macworld 2007" according to Wikipedia. F700 after that; http://www.google.com/search?q=samsung+F700+announced
They could. Except, "Jobs unveiled the iPhone to the public on January 9, 2007 at Macworld 2007" according to Wikipedia. F700 after that; http://www.google.com/search?q=samsung+F700+announced
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 01:47 PM
Well, to be fair, your radio ROM/software can have some effect on your reception, and different companies release different radio software at different times, and that can have some effect.
My 8125 has a t-mobile radio ROM, but I run it on cingular. There are a few wrinkles in that, but you are generally correct.
You are correct. With my testing, I used an unlocked Nokia 6620 (originally from Cingular) with both T-Mo and Cingular SIMs. Also did the same with a SE T610 (unlocked, but originally T-Mo). In both cases, I found Cingular's service (NOT CUSTOMER SERVICE!!!) much better.
My 8125 has a t-mobile radio ROM, but I run it on cingular. There are a few wrinkles in that, but you are generally correct.
You are correct. With my testing, I used an unlocked Nokia 6620 (originally from Cingular) with both T-Mo and Cingular SIMs. Also did the same with a SE T610 (unlocked, but originally T-Mo). In both cases, I found Cingular's service (NOT CUSTOMER SERVICE!!!) much better.
tortoise
Aug 7, 09:26 PM
Well I wouldn't say "Nothing" as obviously it required a lot of programmer time to move the OS to Intel, create the new XCode compiler, create & debug rosetta, re-write all of the iLife, and Pro-Apps offered by Apple, etc. etc.
This should be pretty trivial for the most part, mostly just a rebuild of the code base plus a rewrite of some tiny core bits that will be in assembly code (like locking primitives) and a few drivers. The normal applications should require approximately no porting effort at all.
I would point out that the Intel compiler for OSX is much better than the PPC compiler for the same. I found a couple extremely irritating compiler bugs under XCode PPC, while I have never even seen a bug in contemporaneous versions of GCC for Intel. This by itself is worth something. Current versions of GCC for x86 and AMD64 are on par with the best commercial compilers. GCC for PPC was a usable but inferior pile of dog poo that gave me many problems.
This should be pretty trivial for the most part, mostly just a rebuild of the code base plus a rewrite of some tiny core bits that will be in assembly code (like locking primitives) and a few drivers. The normal applications should require approximately no porting effort at all.
I would point out that the Intel compiler for OSX is much better than the PPC compiler for the same. I found a couple extremely irritating compiler bugs under XCode PPC, while I have never even seen a bug in contemporaneous versions of GCC for Intel. This by itself is worth something. Current versions of GCC for x86 and AMD64 are on par with the best commercial compilers. GCC for PPC was a usable but inferior pile of dog poo that gave me many problems.
cjoy
Apr 25, 02:37 PM
Since they do not collect this data, Apple is NOT tracking you.
Do you know this for certain?
As far as I'm concerned, I am pretty sure apple does track this information. Why else force everyone that wants to use apples devices to agree to this in their TOU?
Tattoo Fonts Ideas For Girls
best cursive tattoo fonts
wrist cursive tattoo fonts
free cursive tattoo fonts
tattoo fonts cursive. tree
free cursive tattoo fonts
Top Cursive Tattoo Fonts
tattoo fonts cursive. cursive
Cursive | Tattoo Magazines
Cursive Tattoo Fonts are used
Cursive Tattoo Fonts 1
tattoo fonts cursive.
cursive tattoo fonts for
Print Cursive Tattoo Fonts
Do you know this for certain?
As far as I'm concerned, I am pretty sure apple does track this information. Why else force everyone that wants to use apples devices to agree to this in their TOU?
logandzwon
Apr 25, 02:49 PM
OMG, have you heard? Apple is secretly spying on our TXT messages, contacts, and e-mail! Seriously! If someone stole my iPhone and guessed my passcode they would be able to look through this list of "contacts" and find out where I lived. They could even check my calendar and know when I'm not home and come rob me. Even if I put fake info in my contacts they can still see my e-mails! All they have to do is look through my e-mails and find a receipt, or shipping notice, or the bill for the power, or my cellphone bill, or my water bill and they would have my home address!
Doctor Q
Jul 14, 04:02 PM
top heavy is just idiotic.Case designers aren't perfect, but they aren't idiots either. Some PCs have power supplies on top, despite the top heaviness and the extra path for the power cable. What's the reason? There must be some tradeoff involved or they'd never build them that way.
AppleJustWorks
Aug 26, 09:56 AM
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
Right on. I made the same argument to someone on a different forum, and it's just amazing how fanboy mac users concoct these elaborate theories of why apple screwing up is acceptable.
The point is, by simple logic, yes, the following revisions of a product tend to be more reliable because they've had time to address issues, but no, that doesn't mean (anyone) shouldn't buy a machine purely because of it's revision number. If that was the case, then Apple would be out of business. Period.
Right on. I made the same argument to someone on a different forum, and it's just amazing how fanboy mac users concoct these elaborate theories of why apple screwing up is acceptable.
The point is, by simple logic, yes, the following revisions of a product tend to be more reliable because they've had time to address issues, but no, that doesn't mean (anyone) shouldn't buy a machine purely because of it's revision number. If that was the case, then Apple would be out of business. Period.
tumblebird
Nov 28, 11:30 PM
That Doug Morris is a slimeball. Who's to say I even own any Universal music. I listen to Indie, primarily. I buy all my music, most of it on CD which I digitize, or via the iTunes Music Store. Who is Universal to demand my dollar? Or three for that matter, one for each iPod I have purchased. There are a lot of labels out there. They can't all get a portion. Apple owes them NOTHING. Did they get music from Sony for the Walkman? How many of us listened to mix tapes from friends on those? I know that most of my tapes were mixes from records and CDs. Universal is off base and greedy. Don't let this happen, Mr. Steve Jobs! You're in the right.
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 06:44 PM
Which launched 6 months after the original iPhone...and was displayed in February of 2007 with an entirely different interface.
The point is no one will ever confuse this with Apple's iPhone... But what Samsung is doing now is another story.
If you look at each item that Apple takes exception with individually it seems silly, but when you put them all together in a single device it's a twin to the iPhone... An iClone.:rolleyes:
The point is no one will ever confuse this with Apple's iPhone... But what Samsung is doing now is another story.
If you look at each item that Apple takes exception with individually it seems silly, but when you put them all together in a single device it's a twin to the iPhone... An iClone.:rolleyes:
RebootD
Mar 31, 04:44 PM
Ironically, most of the people on this forum said iPhone on Verizon would be game over for Android.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
Ah linux trolls are my favorite :rolleyes: I lost count how many times I've answered a question and/or posted on something to have the random linux guy show up and spout "Or just toss out your mac/pc and install linux on a new machine". Of course no one asked about linux.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
Ah linux trolls are my favorite :rolleyes: I lost count how many times I've answered a question and/or posted on something to have the random linux guy show up and spout "Or just toss out your mac/pc and install linux on a new machine". Of course no one asked about linux.
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
hyperpasta
Nov 28, 06:27 PM
And I don't understand why they should...Can somebody explain it?
The rationale is that iPods are used only for stolen music (which they aren't) and this will help offset the losses (which it won't).
The rationale is that iPods are used only for stolen music (which they aren't) and this will help offset the losses (which it won't).
treblah
Aug 5, 03:40 PM
Displays?
alphaod
Dec 4, 05:08 PM
I've been doing B-spec the whole time. Just set a race up and then go do other stuff. Come back it's done; repeat. :p
bep207
Aug 15, 01:03 PM
has adobe dropped any hints as to when CS3 will be available
maelstromr
Apr 25, 02:33 PM
Honestly If this does not bug you it should Apple along with Law enforcement have know about this they have been using devices to read this info and use it against the Phones owners if the info proves useful. Good I totally support a lawsuit Apple should be embarrassed and ashamed this is a big deal. Nothing should trace where your going and keep a record. This info can also be used by criminals but the true criminal here is Law Enforcement since they knew about this info and used it against suspects.
Please take note suspects are not criminals they are you and me and getting pulled over or involved with the Police. It can happen to anyone for many reasons other than causing a crime.
Apple has just brought us the closest we have EVER been to 1984.
Protect our Freedoms
Rants are harder to read without punctuation.
Where'd you get the info on Apple and law enforcement? Little green men? Perhaps you tuned it in through your tinfoil cap?
Please take note suspects are not criminals they are you and me and getting pulled over or involved with the Police. It can happen to anyone for many reasons other than causing a crime.
Apple has just brought us the closest we have EVER been to 1984.
Protect our Freedoms
Rants are harder to read without punctuation.
Where'd you get the info on Apple and law enforcement? Little green men? Perhaps you tuned it in through your tinfoil cap?
georgi0
Sep 19, 12:54 AM
.. i am wondering if the price of the current line of MB and MBP will drop or it will stay the same and it will be replaced by shiping out MEROM laptops.
thanks..
thanks..
reel2reel
Apr 11, 09:43 AM
I hope they remove the Constant Crash feature.
I hope the new version comes in a box with a free t-shirt.
I've still got the t-shirt they gave out w/ Version 1.0. Somewhere.
Aww, give them a break, they're probably just trying to keep with the 90's design of the UI. :D
Honestly, the website totally sucks. Looks like a get-rich-quick advertisement site. They might be FCP pros, but they know amateur HTML.
In keeping with the videos they produce (the one's I've seen anyway)
I hope the new version comes in a box with a free t-shirt.
I've still got the t-shirt they gave out w/ Version 1.0. Somewhere.
Aww, give them a break, they're probably just trying to keep with the 90's design of the UI. :D
Honestly, the website totally sucks. Looks like a get-rich-quick advertisement site. They might be FCP pros, but they know amateur HTML.
In keeping with the videos they produce (the one's I've seen anyway)
KnightWRX
Apr 27, 09:17 AM
There's a nuclear disaster in Japan and treacherous weather throughout, people are jobless and homeless and the dollar's in the sh***er and our Supreme Court ruled that companies can give unlimited financial aid to any politician putting business interests in our government and people are worried about Apple possibly tracking them on their iDevice?
None of which are affecting my day to day life. However, since you say I can't go on living my life until all other worldly issues are resolved, I will be waiting for a e-mail letting me know when I can resume going about my daily routine.
Until then, I will stay fixed in front of my computer screen. :rolleyes:
This argument that we shouldn't worry about anything because bigger things are going on has got to stop. It's the most disingenuous comment you can make.
None of which are affecting my day to day life. However, since you say I can't go on living my life until all other worldly issues are resolved, I will be waiting for a e-mail letting me know when I can resume going about my daily routine.
Until then, I will stay fixed in front of my computer screen. :rolleyes:
This argument that we shouldn't worry about anything because bigger things are going on has got to stop. It's the most disingenuous comment you can make.
fivepoint
Mar 22, 07:45 AM
Fox News, huh?
That reminds me -- I gotta put some pine cleaner down my toilet.
Which fact do you deny? Pathetic red herring.
How many of those in the first list have the capability of fielding an airforce? I'm just guessing here, but I imagine that Afghanistan, Albania, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Nicaragua and Uzbekistan would be less than useful contributors.
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.
They pull the same bullcrap, and all the lefties can do is struggle to find some sort of justification to make them feel better about their first black president. To make them feel better about their 'hope' and 'change'. Like I clearly pointed out in the OP, there is no hope and change, it's just more of the same. 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.
That reminds me -- I gotta put some pine cleaner down my toilet.
Which fact do you deny? Pathetic red herring.
How many of those in the first list have the capability of fielding an airforce? I'm just guessing here, but I imagine that Afghanistan, Albania, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Nicaragua and Uzbekistan would be less than useful contributors.
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.
They pull the same bullcrap, and all the lefties can do is struggle to find some sort of justification to make them feel better about their first black president. To make them feel better about their 'hope' and 'change'. Like I clearly pointed out in the OP, there is no hope and change, it's just more of the same. 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.
srxtr
Mar 22, 01:28 PM
What's with all these tablets being advertised in landscape??
I've had the first ipad since it came out last year and I'd say my Portrait to landscape usage ratio is like 70% portrait / 30% landscape.
I view webpages, read the WSJ, NYPost, books, ipod etc.. all in portrait.
Landscape is for tv shows / movies and some games.
Why are these tablets all designed as if the user is going to hold them landscape 90% of the time? Are magazines designed to be held landscape? I don't get these horizontal tablets.
I think the majority of the people use landscape (but don't quote me on that).
Most activities (websites, emails, documents, etc) require scrolling top to bottom, not side to side, so landscape will usually give you a greater view usually.
I've had the first ipad since it came out last year and I'd say my Portrait to landscape usage ratio is like 70% portrait / 30% landscape.
I view webpages, read the WSJ, NYPost, books, ipod etc.. all in portrait.
Landscape is for tv shows / movies and some games.
Why are these tablets all designed as if the user is going to hold them landscape 90% of the time? Are magazines designed to be held landscape? I don't get these horizontal tablets.
I think the majority of the people use landscape (but don't quote me on that).
Most activities (websites, emails, documents, etc) require scrolling top to bottom, not side to side, so landscape will usually give you a greater view usually.
ChickenSwartz
Aug 7, 11:22 AM
Assuming they're released, they'd probably bring the Apple Store back online around 2:00pm.
(They traditionally take it down during a keynote...)
The store is down.
(They traditionally take it down during a keynote...)
The store is down.
gnasher729
Apr 20, 12:37 PM
No they werent, what apple describes was already shows and build BEFORE iphone. If any apple basicly admits they copied it themselves and should get sued.
Who says? Some people refer to the Samsung F700, but that was shown for the first time a month after the iPhone, and released about five months after the iPhone. (Faked images by Android fanboys won't count in court).
Who says? Some people refer to the Samsung F700, but that was shown for the first time a month after the iPhone, and released about five months after the iPhone. (Faked images by Android fanboys won't count in court).
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét