dalvin200
Oct 23, 06:47 AM
Well when you really think about it, at least one of these rumours has got to be true. We have MBP Merom rumours that cover every week from August til January 2007.
and you know this :)
it just bugs you when you dont get any indication of what's coming.. especially when you're on the fence as to whether to buy now or wait till tuesday..
maybe the pre-announcement of the iTV is a start of the turning trend? i think not.. :D
macrumors buyers guide (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/) says not to buy the MPB as an update is coming soon..
and you know this :)
it just bugs you when you dont get any indication of what's coming.. especially when you're on the fence as to whether to buy now or wait till tuesday..
maybe the pre-announcement of the iTV is a start of the turning trend? i think not.. :D
macrumors buyers guide (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/) says not to buy the MPB as an update is coming soon..
cityathrt
Sep 11, 11:02 PM
Gelaskins has just posted their iPt4 cases, unfortunately, they're not covering the bottom dock area and the top buttons area. :( Invisible shield here I come..
AppliedVisual
Oct 24, 01:33 AM
Nope - Santa Rosa won't arrive until March or April, and that's when the next major upgrade will be made.
Which is all the more reason to be fairly sure a C2D update is imminent. And we probably shouldn't expect too much from this update...
I'm expecting Apple to have addressed cooling issues through better heatsinks combined with better fan control software, possibly better fans too. The 160GB HD should be added as a CTO option as it's available for the Mini, but don't expect any change to the overall design or a new HD bay. Possibly faster DVD writers, but don't expect DL support for the 15" MBP or MB. Just about everything else that people keep wishing for is probably out of the question until a major overhaul takes place.
Which is all the more reason to be fairly sure a C2D update is imminent. And we probably shouldn't expect too much from this update...
I'm expecting Apple to have addressed cooling issues through better heatsinks combined with better fan control software, possibly better fans too. The 160GB HD should be added as a CTO option as it's available for the Mini, but don't expect any change to the overall design or a new HD bay. Possibly faster DVD writers, but don't expect DL support for the 15" MBP or MB. Just about everything else that people keep wishing for is probably out of the question until a major overhaul takes place.
SpookTheHamster
Jan 12, 10:45 AM
Love those BMW's..and that colour is awesome!
At least someone likes the colour. Even I'm not sure about it, but it's definitely unique.
At least someone likes the colour. Even I'm not sure about it, but it's definitely unique.
yg17
Mar 22, 11:43 AM
I love how "gays" freak out when non-homosexual people do something. But yet when "gays" want to do something extreme it's because we don't accept them, so when they get in trouble it's a huge ordeal.
To me this is like the people that don't support war. If a veteran was killed in action and a funeral is happening they can picket the funeral all day long (talk about bull ****!) But yet if we don't let them picket they freak out scream free rights free rights. Well guess what those veterans (me included since I serve) gave them that freedom to stand there in picket.
Gays are the same way. I have no issue with gays, I don't agree with it but if your gay, be gay. Just don't expect the world to conform to your way of life, especially a country (United States) founded on Christianity. If anything go to a foreign country and complain then see how bad it really is to come out, unless it's Amsterdam, Iraq or Afghan they'll love your butt over there.
The US was not founded on Christianity, and some 2,000 book written by man about an invisible man in the sky should not be basis for law.
To me this is like the people that don't support war. If a veteran was killed in action and a funeral is happening they can picket the funeral all day long (talk about bull ****!) But yet if we don't let them picket they freak out scream free rights free rights. Well guess what those veterans (me included since I serve) gave them that freedom to stand there in picket.
Gays are the same way. I have no issue with gays, I don't agree with it but if your gay, be gay. Just don't expect the world to conform to your way of life, especially a country (United States) founded on Christianity. If anything go to a foreign country and complain then see how bad it really is to come out, unless it's Amsterdam, Iraq or Afghan they'll love your butt over there.
The US was not founded on Christianity, and some 2,000 book written by man about an invisible man in the sky should not be basis for law.
Surely
Nov 27, 12:34 PM
After being here for 3 years, Surely he's not a troll. ;)
My god, the dog with the goggles is right! I think I like him just as much as the donkey astronaut.
Oh, another set of these:
http://i.imgur.com/1IdVf.jpg
My god, the dog with the goggles is right! I think I like him just as much as the donkey astronaut.
Oh, another set of these:
http://i.imgur.com/1IdVf.jpg
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
PodJack
Oct 29, 08:37 PM
I bought and really like the Griffin Formfit. (http://www.griffintechnology.com/products/formfit-touch4g#)
P.S. It sounds like a good case for you hkim1983!
P.S. It sounds like a good case for you hkim1983!
poppe
Sep 1, 12:43 PM
hopefully this 23 inch one adds something more than just a bigger screen....such as component RGB input which would allow me to hook my my xbox 360 to play. that would RULE.
of course, that is unlikely.
does anyone actually know how to use iMac screen to play xbox 360?
I doubt this will ever happen until they come out with ACD that have component or composite.
I've heard alot of people ask about the 360 being hooked up to it, but what i've heard it wont work with out lagging. I wanted to hook up my gCube and soon to be Wii to my MBP with the elegato(or what ever its called) but all I heard was lag stories....
of course, that is unlikely.
does anyone actually know how to use iMac screen to play xbox 360?
I doubt this will ever happen until they come out with ACD that have component or composite.
I've heard alot of people ask about the 360 being hooked up to it, but what i've heard it wont work with out lagging. I wanted to hook up my gCube and soon to be Wii to my MBP with the elegato(or what ever its called) but all I heard was lag stories....
hansolo669
Mar 1, 10:46 AM
As much as I hate clutter, I'm a bit of a collector as well. Usually, whenever I get a free Mac (and most of the Macs I get are free), I sell them, but whenever I come across a free classic or really old Mac, I figure "eh, it isn't worth anything, might as well keep it..." and the collection builds from there. So far, I've got an SE/30, two PowerBook 180s, an eMac, a PowerMac G4 AGP (I think), an iMac G3, a Performa 5200CD, and an Apple //e. They all boot, but one of the PBs is iffy. I've also owned two 1.25GHz PowerBook G4s, a PowerMac G5 dual 2.0, two 1.83GHz Mac Minis, a 1.66GHz Mac Mini, several iMac G5s, a G4 Quicksilver, a MacBook Pro, an iMac G4, and maybe some others I'm forgetting. Only ones I paid for were some of the iMac G5s, the MBP, and two of the Mac Minis.
And I've only been an Apple user since 2006 :p
impressive! it seems every one can find random old mac easer than me :P , oh well lol.
And I've only been an Apple user since 2006 :p
impressive! it seems every one can find random old mac easer than me :P , oh well lol.
rasmasyean
Mar 21, 02:34 PM
It's really obvious from the very beginning despite what "news unfolds", is that we will be obliterating Quadafi's army killing any leadership that makes a difference where we can. It was never a "protect the innocent ppl weilding AK-47's and RPG's in defenseless pickup trucks" mission. :rolleyes:
The best bet Quadafi has is what was done in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hide (including "important ppl" supporting the current gov), and wage asymetric warfare in the cities and destabilize the new government until "Western forces" call it quits. Which I think the news at one point mentioned that this is what Quadafi vowed too. He will hope to draw "western advisors" into the ground battle and try to kill them because this will make westerners, namely the American ppl sour and create "arab resentment" which if it works, bring others into his cause against the infidels and the usual rhetoric. If the French bring in ground "advisors" too, that would be great because French citizens believe Frenchman are too good to die any other way than while eating wine and cheeze during sex...with multiple partners.
Otherwise, this will just be another "boring paragraph" in the history books. Not too many ppl give a crap about this "war". Just search youtube and Lybia clips has such small hits while Japan ones have like a gazillion. No one gives a crap...unless our "poor 18 year old boys start dying". This is what Quadafi must do because he can't win on a head on battle. No way.
The best bet Quadafi has is what was done in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hide (including "important ppl" supporting the current gov), and wage asymetric warfare in the cities and destabilize the new government until "Western forces" call it quits. Which I think the news at one point mentioned that this is what Quadafi vowed too. He will hope to draw "western advisors" into the ground battle and try to kill them because this will make westerners, namely the American ppl sour and create "arab resentment" which if it works, bring others into his cause against the infidels and the usual rhetoric. If the French bring in ground "advisors" too, that would be great because French citizens believe Frenchman are too good to die any other way than while eating wine and cheeze during sex...with multiple partners.
Otherwise, this will just be another "boring paragraph" in the history books. Not too many ppl give a crap about this "war". Just search youtube and Lybia clips has such small hits while Japan ones have like a gazillion. No one gives a crap...unless our "poor 18 year old boys start dying". This is what Quadafi must do because he can't win on a head on battle. No way.
HecubusPro
Aug 29, 05:21 PM
Quite a few people on this board want Apple to simply announce the next Macbook Pro with Merom, even if it has delayed shipping. That would, however, compel students who need computers now to look elsewhere.
(1000th post - WOOT!)
I agree with you completely on this point, without having heard it put that way before. And congrats on the 1K post. :)
(1000th post - WOOT!)
I agree with you completely on this point, without having heard it put that way before. And congrats on the 1K post. :)
skunk
Mar 27, 01:33 PM
Well some people think that's debatable ;).
It was a trap...:)
It was a trap...:)
Apple OC
Mar 19, 03:45 PM
Is it me, or does war seem kind of rediculous now. :cool:
I mean, I understand the need for "non occupational forces", but this is getting kind of rediculous. It almost seems like it's almost a capitalist motive to demonstrate weapons for sale at every opportunity. :D
I am a bit suprised the Mods let you start such an Anti-American thread title ..."U.S. will use Lybia as aerial target practice"
This is not about the USA ... this is about the UN Security Council deciding to stop a Dictator like Gaddafi from forcing his will on the people of Lybia.
The USA is only one of 10 countries that approved this decision.
Those with knowledge of this situation will agree that sometimes people need protection from thugs like Gaddafi who tell his people "there will be no mercy" and fire weapons upon them for the sole reason of staying in power.
where many others in this thread just want to chirp more "Ridiculous" Anti-American crap.
I mean, I understand the need for "non occupational forces", but this is getting kind of rediculous. It almost seems like it's almost a capitalist motive to demonstrate weapons for sale at every opportunity. :D
I am a bit suprised the Mods let you start such an Anti-American thread title ..."U.S. will use Lybia as aerial target practice"
This is not about the USA ... this is about the UN Security Council deciding to stop a Dictator like Gaddafi from forcing his will on the people of Lybia.
The USA is only one of 10 countries that approved this decision.
Those with knowledge of this situation will agree that sometimes people need protection from thugs like Gaddafi who tell his people "there will be no mercy" and fire weapons upon them for the sole reason of staying in power.
where many others in this thread just want to chirp more "Ridiculous" Anti-American crap.
kelving525
Sep 19, 11:54 PM
I saw some of the pics and the buttons are covered. :)
The volume-rocker and hold buttons are both covered.
The volume-rocker and hold buttons are both covered.
rdlink
May 3, 04:50 AM
Great, but why use "Click and hold" when you can right click? Why implement the limitations of a small touch screen into a full computer that has the ability to do more? I hate things that require a delay. Click and hold sucks.
+1
I hope they leave both options available. I have no problem with adding this functionality to OS X for those who want the IOS experience on their desktop. But please leave the "old" way for those of us who prefer it.
+1
I hope they leave both options available. I have no problem with adding this functionality to OS X for those who want the IOS experience on their desktop. But please leave the "old" way for those of us who prefer it.
stompy
Nov 27, 02:11 PM
I think Apple will specifically NOT make a 17" Monitor as Digitimes are so astonishingly innaccurate :rolleyes:.
LOL, right you are. Anything from Digitimes should automatically go to page 2.
LOL, right you are. Anything from Digitimes should automatically go to page 2.
Perrumpo
Nov 26, 05:39 PM
Picked up a 23" Samsung 1080p display from Best Buy for $139. Loving it!
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c383/agt144/IMGP6687.jpg
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c383/agt144/IMGP6683.jpg
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c383/agt144/IMGP6687.jpg
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c383/agt144/IMGP6683.jpg
%2520pic%252012%2520(MP).JPG "(Seen in Call of Duty 4:")
Carniphage
Nov 30, 03:22 AM
I'll speak loud and clear:
DVR
iTunes Store can't now nor will it likely ever replace Dish Network for me. Just let me record my shows either directly with iTV or via something connected to it. I hope when this is released, HD DVD and Blu-ray make there way into Macs.
No No No No No!
All a DVR is - is a better VHS. A way of watching broadcast TV a little more easily. It's a timeshifter, but it is not revolutionary.
DVRs are popular with the (few) people who have them because they end some of the scheduling tyranny of the broadcasters.
But the problem is not scheduling. The problem is broadcasting itself.
Every modern business has had to face up to the opportunities and challenges of the Internet. One of the most significant is what they call disintermediation. Cutting out the middle men. Buying direct.
TV needs to be disintermediated. The advertisers and the networks get in the way. There needs to be a better pathway between producers and consumers.
Advertisers screw-up television. They influence content. Great shows are pulled, not because they don't have enough enthusiastic viewers, but because they don't attract enough consumers of sanitary towels or tooth whitener.
Lousy shows clog up the airwaves because they attract a large number of bottom-dwelling viewers who might just notice the ad for low-price hemorrhoid cream.
Broadcast TV is a business model from the 50s which needs to die. But if you *really* want your TV content determined by the marketeers of ant-acid remedies then stick with your DVR. Stick with Celebrity Love Spacktard. Cheer it up for American Idle. Wave pom poms like a sixteen year-old for the vacuous, empty spam that the networks churn out, to fill the gaps between revenue-generating advertising.
But while dreaming of Celebutard Love Assault... just for a second, imagine how much better TV could be if we could pay Joss Wheadon for Firefly DIRECTLY, or pay someone to make Star Trek with the same level of integrity as Battlestar.
Hint - if it started to suck, we would stop paying.
I'd prefer my television direct.
Screw the advertisers. Screw the networks. Screw Rupert Murdoch. In fact, pull down your dish and cram it in Rupert Murdoch.
Go iTV
C.
DVR
iTunes Store can't now nor will it likely ever replace Dish Network for me. Just let me record my shows either directly with iTV or via something connected to it. I hope when this is released, HD DVD and Blu-ray make there way into Macs.
No No No No No!
All a DVR is - is a better VHS. A way of watching broadcast TV a little more easily. It's a timeshifter, but it is not revolutionary.
DVRs are popular with the (few) people who have them because they end some of the scheduling tyranny of the broadcasters.
But the problem is not scheduling. The problem is broadcasting itself.
Every modern business has had to face up to the opportunities and challenges of the Internet. One of the most significant is what they call disintermediation. Cutting out the middle men. Buying direct.
TV needs to be disintermediated. The advertisers and the networks get in the way. There needs to be a better pathway between producers and consumers.
Advertisers screw-up television. They influence content. Great shows are pulled, not because they don't have enough enthusiastic viewers, but because they don't attract enough consumers of sanitary towels or tooth whitener.
Lousy shows clog up the airwaves because they attract a large number of bottom-dwelling viewers who might just notice the ad for low-price hemorrhoid cream.
Broadcast TV is a business model from the 50s which needs to die. But if you *really* want your TV content determined by the marketeers of ant-acid remedies then stick with your DVR. Stick with Celebrity Love Spacktard. Cheer it up for American Idle. Wave pom poms like a sixteen year-old for the vacuous, empty spam that the networks churn out, to fill the gaps between revenue-generating advertising.
But while dreaming of Celebutard Love Assault... just for a second, imagine how much better TV could be if we could pay Joss Wheadon for Firefly DIRECTLY, or pay someone to make Star Trek with the same level of integrity as Battlestar.
Hint - if it started to suck, we would stop paying.
I'd prefer my television direct.
Screw the advertisers. Screw the networks. Screw Rupert Murdoch. In fact, pull down your dish and cram it in Rupert Murdoch.
Go iTV
C.
MarcelV
Sep 7, 02:19 AM
Apple was offering 14.50 wholesale for the 14.99 movies and the studio's don't agree. That's more than they receive wholesale from Wal-Mart and Best Buy. Also, collectively it looks like they are not agreeing with those prices. Looks to me as price fixing. The studio's want to set the individual prices for movies to consumers, and to me it looks like they are forcing same prices on Amazon, MovieLink, CinemaNow and iTunes. That's dangerous waters for them......
As for picture quality and HD, the market doesn't seem to be there at all. VOD on cable and satellite has become a huge market, and those aren't HD either. In addition DirecTV and DishNetwork use 'HD-Lite' (1080x1280 in stead of 1080x1920) on most if not all of their HD channels. And SD channels are heavily compressed in the digital line-up on both cable and satellite. Most consumers just don't care....
And every single person asking for 1080p, you maybe out of touch with reality. Official HD standard does not even include 1080p. 720p and 1080i are the only official HD recognized resolutions within the broadcast standards. Broadcasters don't even distribute their signal that high!
Would I love it in HD, of course :D Do I see it happen, nope.
And an additional thought just occured. Currently FrontRow already allows you to watch trailers. What if you have the same interface but you can purchase the movies that way and it will add the purchased movie into Itunes for iPod sync. (Of course, you will be able to buy it dircetly thru iTunes if you like). It would be a very nice integration, with a high degree of simplicity.... Just a thought.
As for picture quality and HD, the market doesn't seem to be there at all. VOD on cable and satellite has become a huge market, and those aren't HD either. In addition DirecTV and DishNetwork use 'HD-Lite' (1080x1280 in stead of 1080x1920) on most if not all of their HD channels. And SD channels are heavily compressed in the digital line-up on both cable and satellite. Most consumers just don't care....
And every single person asking for 1080p, you maybe out of touch with reality. Official HD standard does not even include 1080p. 720p and 1080i are the only official HD recognized resolutions within the broadcast standards. Broadcasters don't even distribute their signal that high!
Would I love it in HD, of course :D Do I see it happen, nope.
And an additional thought just occured. Currently FrontRow already allows you to watch trailers. What if you have the same interface but you can purchase the movies that way and it will add the purchased movie into Itunes for iPod sync. (Of course, you will be able to buy it dircetly thru iTunes if you like). It would be a very nice integration, with a high degree of simplicity.... Just a thought.
kadajawi
Aug 31, 06:55 AM
Aye, now we only need the rest of the computer. Basically, just build a Mac Mini in a mini/midi tower, with a mainboard that allows you to install new hardware. And try to keep the price low.
archer75
Sep 6, 10:03 AM
Not impressed. I could put a Core2duo in my mini myself. I want a better video card in the mini.
reyesmac
Aug 6, 09:29 PM
I will be surprised if Vista comes out with most features in leopard, even if they are hacked wanna be copies. They have done it before and with the preview Apple will just give them one more chance to do it. What I don't think they will be able to copy is the features in the iApps that will come out or core video effects. Well, not without raising the requirements to run vista yet again.
rmwebs
Mar 22, 04:31 PM
Disk space aside, there's nothing wrong with the current iPod Classic. It doesnt need bluetooth, microphones, cameras, etc - the hint is in the name...CLASSIC.
Wany bluetooth? Get a iTouch. You arent going to be listening to your library of 50,000 song on the way to work I'm sure it wouldnt kill you to load 10,000 onto an iTouch for the car. :rolleyes:
Wany bluetooth? Get a iTouch. You arent going to be listening to your library of 50,000 song on the way to work I'm sure it wouldnt kill you to load 10,000 onto an iTouch for the car. :rolleyes: