Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 25, 01:45 PM
Pathetic.
epitaphic
Aug 18, 09:06 PM
Do you think a Conroe iMac will beat a Mac Pro due to lower memory latency alone? Do you have real experience or data regarding how horrendous a problem this is? Extra dual-core processor aside, the Mac Pro has a higher speed FSB, higher memory bus bandwidth, higher RAM capacity, and ability to set up internal RAID amongst other advantages over a Conroe iMac.
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac. But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
the Mac Pro (...) actually takes longer to access main memory than the Core Duo processor in the MacBook Pro. This is much worse than it sounds once you take into account the fact that the MacBook Pro features a 667MHz FSB compared to the 1333MHz FSB (per chip) used in the Mac Pro.
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
It's not Apple's fault, but FB-DIMMs absolutely kill memory latency; even running in quad channel mode, the FB-DIMM equipped Mac Pro takes 45% more time to access memory than our DDR2 equipped test bed at the same memory frequency.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac. But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
the Mac Pro (...) actually takes longer to access main memory than the Core Duo processor in the MacBook Pro. This is much worse than it sounds once you take into account the fact that the MacBook Pro features a 667MHz FSB compared to the 1333MHz FSB (per chip) used in the Mac Pro.
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
It's not Apple's fault, but FB-DIMMs absolutely kill memory latency; even running in quad channel mode, the FB-DIMM equipped Mac Pro takes 45% more time to access memory than our DDR2 equipped test bed at the same memory frequency.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
BJNY
Aug 23, 11:05 AM
If you're willing, you could start up from the Hardware Test disc, and run the test which makes the fans go non-stop except for the rearmost fans.
Temp widget http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/status/istatnano.html
Temp widget http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/status/istatnano.html
dba7dba
Apr 20, 11:47 AM
After reading some of the lawsuit, I had to post this..
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/2010-11-04_174623.jpg
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/pn_20101104170853.jpg
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/2010/11/galaxy-tab-released/
Are you aware that Apple copied the ibooks GUI from another software vendor? I remember seeing it years (like in G4 era) before ipad was out, before iBook. It was for keeping inventory of books on a mac.
I'm not gonna bother going looking for the link/screen shot but trust me, that look was used by another software vendor, BEFORE apple used it. And of course that's one reason this wasn't mentioned in the suit I'm assuming.
Edit:
Actually here it is.
http://www.delicious-monster.com/
http://www.delicious-monster.com/images/librarypage/screenshots/inspector_0_topmatter.png
Won apple design award in 2005. And when was iBooks introduced?
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/2010-11-04_174623.jpg
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/pn_20101104170853.jpg
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/2010/11/galaxy-tab-released/
Are you aware that Apple copied the ibooks GUI from another software vendor? I remember seeing it years (like in G4 era) before ipad was out, before iBook. It was for keeping inventory of books on a mac.
I'm not gonna bother going looking for the link/screen shot but trust me, that look was used by another software vendor, BEFORE apple used it. And of course that's one reason this wasn't mentioned in the suit I'm assuming.
Edit:
Actually here it is.
http://www.delicious-monster.com/
http://www.delicious-monster.com/images/librarypage/screenshots/inspector_0_topmatter.png
Won apple design award in 2005. And when was iBooks introduced?
mc68k
Dec 3, 07:50 PM
well i havent posted a lot at MR recently. i'm a long time fan of the GT series. played GT1, 2, 4. 100% completed all i think (to the extent that you could ie GT4) . memorized every track, every braking point, how to ram cars, how to cut parts of the track off, how to handle all drivetrains, how to race with dpad or analog stick, how to variate braking/accel. never used a race wheel. i'm really a purist, i won't cheat unless i have to get to the front of the pack. i like to race low HP cars or poorer handling cars or compete with a lower HP car. i read all the descriptions. i scour the used car lot for rarities. i spot cars all the time in real life and like to see them well represented in the game. i would've bought a PS3 just for this game, but i ended up getting the PS3 sooner. ive been waiting for this game for years. i like to watch car shows on tv like the spike powerblock shows, 2 guys garage, gearz, top gear (new US one sucks), battle of the supercars, mecum auctions, barrett jackson auctions, my classic car, etc
pre ordered but didnt get any of the special packs. those are pretty cool and have some nice things but i'm more about the game itself. collectors editions of games to me are akin to special editions of DVDs where u don't really get much for the extra $ u are paying.
i havent raced online yet. i read in a review where you dont really get any rewards like points or $ for the RPG part of the game. im a bit hesitant too at the online play because the fact that every other game i've played online there's a ton of ppl who basically just play the game 12+ hrs a day and cheat, or talk **** or memorize everything. if the online thing is fun though i think that'll be the best lasting part of the game after all the solo A-spec and B-spec stuff is done.
right now i'm at L18 A and 8 B. id be WAY higher but have been putting more emphasis on 'leveling up' my social life rather than the game. :) plus itll always be there when i get home! playing on a 52" Sony W Bravia too so that's made the whole experience that much better. just bought/pimped out a F40 and won the ferrari race. a bit dissapointed to get a car i can buy from the dealership. a lot of cars you win you can buy, so i usually just end up selling those. bought a lot of used cars and used most, but that's been slowing down my progress too. ive been following the patterns of availiability in the used car section and some hardly ever come up, so ive been buying so i dont have to wait later on in the game.
in real life i bought a black BMW 2003 540i wagon m-sport. modded the intake to an AFE and the exhaust to a remus, probably due in part to this game and liking cars. now that they have ferrari/lambo i think i'll get better in telling the diff between the models when i see them here in this rich neighborhood where i work. saw a ferrari or lambo at lunch with 3 bunched low tailpipes. be fun to go home and look at the game and see if that car is available in the game!
anyways now that i know this thread exists i'll read the new posts (read all the old today) and chime in from time to time. maybe get some of your online names too so we can race!
pre ordered but didnt get any of the special packs. those are pretty cool and have some nice things but i'm more about the game itself. collectors editions of games to me are akin to special editions of DVDs where u don't really get much for the extra $ u are paying.
i havent raced online yet. i read in a review where you dont really get any rewards like points or $ for the RPG part of the game. im a bit hesitant too at the online play because the fact that every other game i've played online there's a ton of ppl who basically just play the game 12+ hrs a day and cheat, or talk **** or memorize everything. if the online thing is fun though i think that'll be the best lasting part of the game after all the solo A-spec and B-spec stuff is done.
right now i'm at L18 A and 8 B. id be WAY higher but have been putting more emphasis on 'leveling up' my social life rather than the game. :) plus itll always be there when i get home! playing on a 52" Sony W Bravia too so that's made the whole experience that much better. just bought/pimped out a F40 and won the ferrari race. a bit dissapointed to get a car i can buy from the dealership. a lot of cars you win you can buy, so i usually just end up selling those. bought a lot of used cars and used most, but that's been slowing down my progress too. ive been following the patterns of availiability in the used car section and some hardly ever come up, so ive been buying so i dont have to wait later on in the game.
in real life i bought a black BMW 2003 540i wagon m-sport. modded the intake to an AFE and the exhaust to a remus, probably due in part to this game and liking cars. now that they have ferrari/lambo i think i'll get better in telling the diff between the models when i see them here in this rich neighborhood where i work. saw a ferrari or lambo at lunch with 3 bunched low tailpipes. be fun to go home and look at the game and see if that car is available in the game!
anyways now that i know this thread exists i'll read the new posts (read all the old today) and chime in from time to time. maybe get some of your online names too so we can race!
0815
Apr 6, 04:19 PM
Isn't it amazing that so many of these XOOM owners also, coincidentally, "own" an iPad/iPad 2, or their spouse/mom/dog/significant other does?
Either there's a lot of exaggerating (astroturfing) going on, or someone's spouse/mom/dog/significant other has a lot more sense. ;)
Why, I own an iPad and a XOOM and a Galaxy Tab and that HP Windows 7 Slate thingy and a Nook and a prototype PlayBook and I can tell you from personal experience that the iPad is like 100x better than all of those! :rolleyes:
A friend of mine has actually three of each you mentioned in every available configuration (for himself, his wife and his son) - and all of them think the iPads are the best ones ... and he is the only one you should listen to since he truly was able to compare them with different 'user types'.
Either there's a lot of exaggerating (astroturfing) going on, or someone's spouse/mom/dog/significant other has a lot more sense. ;)
Why, I own an iPad and a XOOM and a Galaxy Tab and that HP Windows 7 Slate thingy and a Nook and a prototype PlayBook and I can tell you from personal experience that the iPad is like 100x better than all of those! :rolleyes:
A friend of mine has actually three of each you mentioned in every available configuration (for himself, his wife and his son) - and all of them think the iPads are the best ones ... and he is the only one you should listen to since he truly was able to compare them with different 'user types'.
mmmcheese
Aug 15, 12:18 PM
I did...:D
DIE POWER PC...DIE!!!
(sideshow bob)The Power PC...The!!!(/sideshow bob)
DIE POWER PC...DIE!!!
(sideshow bob)The Power PC...The!!!(/sideshow bob)
shartypants
Apr 25, 02:05 PM
Those two people just want their "15 minutes of fame", be interesting to see how this plays out.
Butters
Aug 6, 01:14 PM
i don't care about see-through windows. I want something that works.
see-through windows are SOOOO jaguar
see-through windows are SOOOO jaguar
dmarcoot
Apr 6, 03:37 PM
I hope that number keeps rising; we need competition to not let Apple rest on it's laurels.
First they need to make a product worthy of rising. A sub par product and user experience will not push Apple.
At any rate, clearly Apple is not resting on laurels with the rest of computing industry as far back as they are in quality, price, experience and their available software ecosystems.
First they need to make a product worthy of rising. A sub par product and user experience will not push Apple.
At any rate, clearly Apple is not resting on laurels with the rest of computing industry as far back as they are in quality, price, experience and their available software ecosystems.
asiayeah
Aug 25, 09:16 PM
It seems like a preponderance of the issues people have are with the notebooks.
Do you think it could be because Apple has the thinnest laptops on the market which means they sacrifice build quality and heat management?
When I looked at the innards of an iBook G3 it was basically "a mess" in there...nothing looked modular like you would see inside the new Mac pro.
Apple doesn't has the thinnest laptops on the market.
Do you think it could be because Apple has the thinnest laptops on the market which means they sacrifice build quality and heat management?
When I looked at the innards of an iBook G3 it was basically "a mess" in there...nothing looked modular like you would see inside the new Mac pro.
Apple doesn't has the thinnest laptops on the market.
.jpg "lack and white wallpaper hd.")
Silentwave
Jul 15, 05:55 PM
Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.
I agree with you whole-heartedly!
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.
You hit the nail right on the head with the processor availability. Core Duo uses the pentium M architecture and was only in two versions: mobile, codename Yonah with its variants, and a pair of low speed ultra low power server chips- Sossaman- only going up to 2GHz with 2MB L2 and 667 FSB. the other Xeons (Paxville/Dempsey) and high end chips like the Pentium D/Pentium Extreme Edition ( Smithfield/Presler) are all using NetBurst architecutre, which is obsolete and very inefficient plus they are extremely power hungry and hot.The top Pentium Extreme Edition Presler dual core at 3.73GHz was easily outperformed by several of the Conroe cores- I recall one test where it was neck and neck with the 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo.
They wanted the fastest chips possible using the best architecture possible- that is Woodcrest and Conroe with the Core microarchitecture.
I have little doubt that the 3GHz Xeon 5160 will be in the Mac Pros, if not standard, then as a BTO option.
I agree with you whole-heartedly!
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.
You hit the nail right on the head with the processor availability. Core Duo uses the pentium M architecture and was only in two versions: mobile, codename Yonah with its variants, and a pair of low speed ultra low power server chips- Sossaman- only going up to 2GHz with 2MB L2 and 667 FSB. the other Xeons (Paxville/Dempsey) and high end chips like the Pentium D/Pentium Extreme Edition ( Smithfield/Presler) are all using NetBurst architecutre, which is obsolete and very inefficient plus they are extremely power hungry and hot.The top Pentium Extreme Edition Presler dual core at 3.73GHz was easily outperformed by several of the Conroe cores- I recall one test where it was neck and neck with the 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo.
They wanted the fastest chips possible using the best architecture possible- that is Woodcrest and Conroe with the Core microarchitecture.
I have little doubt that the 3GHz Xeon 5160 will be in the Mac Pros, if not standard, then as a BTO option.
notjustjay
Apr 27, 10:28 AM
"Calculating a phone's location using just GPS satellite data can take up to several minutes."
Then how is car-navigation working?
The same thing - it can take up to a few minutes to establish a solid GPS lock. I own a Garmin GPSMAP 60csx (a hiking/geocaching GPS) which is getting a bit long in the tooth now (purchased in 2006) but at the time, the SiRFstar III chip that powers it was able to establish a location WAY faster than the previous GPS units I owned -- but even that meant a minute, maybe two. All of the Garmin and TomTom traffic GPS's I've used take a similar amount of time to acquire a signal lock.
Then how is car-navigation working?
The same thing - it can take up to a few minutes to establish a solid GPS lock. I own a Garmin GPSMAP 60csx (a hiking/geocaching GPS) which is getting a bit long in the tooth now (purchased in 2006) but at the time, the SiRFstar III chip that powers it was able to establish a location WAY faster than the previous GPS units I owned -- but even that meant a minute, maybe two. All of the Garmin and TomTom traffic GPS's I've used take a similar amount of time to acquire a signal lock.
Cameront9
Aug 7, 05:48 PM
Also a very good point, so I need a bigger main HD for my MacBookPro (the new Seagate 160GB becomes interesting) for Time Machine, but i still need to back the hole thing up to an external HD in case of a HD crash (I had 2 in the last 8 months!). So Tine Machine doesn't make Backups obsolete, I didn't even think of that up to now. Hmmm..
They way I understand it, Time Machine is SUPPOSED to be used with an external...the page on the Leopard site even has an icon of an iMac connected to an External. I'm sure you can use your Internal drive if you want, but I don't see the point of that.
They way I understand it, Time Machine is SUPPOSED to be used with an external...the page on the Leopard site even has an icon of an iMac connected to an External. I'm sure you can use your Internal drive if you want, but I don't see the point of that.
roadbloc
Apr 25, 04:34 PM
Wait.
1. Android stores the info as well.
2. Unlike Apple, Android sends it back to Google.
lack and white wallpaper hd.
lack and white wallpaper hd. Black and White Wallpaper; Black and White Wallpaper. Reach9. Mar 26, 12:49 AM. Already done eh? Sounds great, can#39;t wait to
hd wallpapers white. lack and
Free HD Desktop wallpaper of
1. Android stores the info as well.
2. Unlike Apple, Android sends it back to Google.
iJohnHenry
Apr 27, 04:39 PM
The difference between me and you is that I'd want an explanation in either account. ;)
Get Dr. Gilbert "Gil" Grissom, (Ph.D.), on the case.
I'm sure he could match the keystrokes to a late 50's/early 60's typewriter.
Get Dr. Gilbert "Gil" Grissom, (Ph.D.), on the case.
I'm sure he could match the keystrokes to a late 50's/early 60's typewriter.
Lailoken
Mar 31, 05:52 PM
I've really loved my experience with Android so far. I've had an iPhone and a iPhone 3G and I am an iPhone developer.... yet I use Android.
Android will always be "open source" and this is not inconsistent with Google applying more control to stem inoperable fragmentation. These two ideas are not at odds.
I cannot wait for Google to do what I think Amazon is currently trying to do with their new App. Store.
That said I really like the new iPad 2, but sadly my next purchase would prolly be a i7 MacBook Pro.
Android will always be "open source" and this is not inconsistent with Google applying more control to stem inoperable fragmentation. These two ideas are not at odds.
I cannot wait for Google to do what I think Amazon is currently trying to do with their new App. Store.
That said I really like the new iPad 2, but sadly my next purchase would prolly be a i7 MacBook Pro.
THX1139
Jul 23, 05:03 PM
..$999 - Dual 2 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.3 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.6 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.3 GHz Two Woodies later One Kentsfield
This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
At those prices, sign me up for a Quad 2.3!!!! I'll buy that along with a newly designed 23" ACD for $699. :D
$1399 - Dual 2.3 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.6 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.3 GHz Two Woodies later One Kentsfield
This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
At those prices, sign me up for a Quad 2.3!!!! I'll buy that along with a newly designed 23" ACD for $699. :D
BoyBach
Nov 29, 12:56 PM
We might hate to admit it as Apple fans, but Apple needs the labels for the iTunes store to work just as much as the label needs Apple.
Not true. Apple doesn't need the iTunes Store since all iPods are full of stolen music! ;)
Not true. Apple doesn't need the iTunes Store since all iPods are full of stolen music! ;)
gugy
Sep 13, 01:47 PM
NBC Nightly News can't be far behind. I'm so excited. Getting my Mom a High Definition Set For Christmas.
Hey Multimedia,
I have a question for you.
Do you record HDTV with EyeTV 500 then encode to H.264 using Handbrake and then do you add it to itunes to manage and organize those shows or movies?
I think this is a neat idea with you have the spare HD room and want to keep shows or events for long time and want to access it fast and easy.
Cheers!
Hey Multimedia,
I have a question for you.
Do you record HDTV with EyeTV 500 then encode to H.264 using Handbrake and then do you add it to itunes to manage and organize those shows or movies?
I think this is a neat idea with you have the spare HD room and want to keep shows or events for long time and want to access it fast and easy.
Cheers!
wizard
Mar 26, 10:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
Unspeaked
Aug 7, 09:39 AM
Hey Guys.
When do you think they'll update their website with the new "Mac Pro's"?
Regards,
George
Assuming they're released, they'd probably bring the Apple Store back online around 2:00pm.
(They traditionally take it down during a keynote...)
When do you think they'll update their website with the new "Mac Pro's"?
Regards,
George
Assuming they're released, they'd probably bring the Apple Store back online around 2:00pm.
(They traditionally take it down during a keynote...)
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 03:02 PM
That's US mobile subscribers marketshare for Jan and Feb '11. My numbers are worldwide smartphone marketshare. Completly different things.
Well if I can understand that:
1. US mobile subscriber marketshare is US smartphone marketshare & Worldwide smartphone marketshare is World wide smartphone marketshare.
2. You never specified which marketshare you were talking about.
Well if I can understand that:
1. US mobile subscriber marketshare is US smartphone marketshare & Worldwide smartphone marketshare is World wide smartphone marketshare.
2. You never specified which marketshare you were talking about.
�algiris
Mar 31, 02:32 PM
Good. I hope they take one of the last strengths of the iPad ecosystem away from it.
One of the last? Oh boy ...
One of the last? Oh boy ...