dscuber9000
Apr 3, 12:54 PM
I saw the ad yesterday on TV and I really liked it. It didn't show a bunch of apps I'll never use, it kind of drove home the point that the future of computing will be something like this.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 05:18 PM
Indeed, I think you've also inadvertently described the perfect engineering challenge that todays manufacturers really should be embracing, but instead seem so reticent to take up. The most remarkable thing about the original Mini, wasn't its size, it wasn't its cost… it was the whole. And in that respect alone, I cannot think of one car today that is really in anyway comparable whatsoever.
I agree. If you look at "small" cars these days, they really aren't that small. Of course, what made the Mini special was packaging, and I don't think we've seen a revolutionary new "package" since the Mini.
The problem is Chevrolet is in a somewhat unique position in many respects here, it's a known brand, but by name only, usually as the carrier of good ol' boys... to a levy of course, when I think of a Chevy it's either something bright pink, with chrome… lots of chrome, or a pickup truck, not the rebadging of dreadful Daewoo cars. I suspect I'm not alone on that one.
And therein lies the problem. That and the Spark of course.
Chevy definitely has a lot of work to do to establish a brand presence in Europe - especially since Opel already covers so much territory with its lineup. Apart from niche vehicles like the Corvette, there isn't much of "American" Chevy that can make the transition to Europe. And in the long run, Chevy can't rely on rebadged Korean cars.
The Cruze is entirely inoffensive, and does the job entirely adequately by all accounts, as it should, after all it does have 4 wheels and an engine. Autocar likened it to the old Mk2 Seat Toledo saloon, and that's probably an apt comparison. Vanilla. Much like the rest of Vauxhall/Opel/Holden/Buick ranges etc actually. And that is a big problem for GM. A very big problem. One that almost sank the ship in the first place in fact. The captain might be different, but there's still no one at the helm.
Damning with faint praise! In the context of this thread I am happy to see a Cruze diesel come to the US, and I think the Cruze will be an improvement over previous GM small cars, but I don't expect the Cruze to be anything other than a cheap-n-cheerful small car - solid but unexceptional. It is true that their biggest problem is coming up with a reason to buy it over other similarly anonymous cars.
In typical Ford U.S. fashion you mean, fortunately, the profit making arm of Ford, i.e. the european division, produced the even better Mk2. ;)
And we never got to see it here. :mad:
While I haven't driven the Insignia over in Europe, the Regal drives solid and is very stable. So I don't think they did any modifications to the suspension.
A SPEED TV show went over to Europe to drive a US Spec Buick Regal and drove it on the autobahn and nurburgring.
I haven't had any experience with the new Regal, but on paper it certainly looks like a substantial improvement over the previous iterations.
I agree. If you look at "small" cars these days, they really aren't that small. Of course, what made the Mini special was packaging, and I don't think we've seen a revolutionary new "package" since the Mini.
The problem is Chevrolet is in a somewhat unique position in many respects here, it's a known brand, but by name only, usually as the carrier of good ol' boys... to a levy of course, when I think of a Chevy it's either something bright pink, with chrome… lots of chrome, or a pickup truck, not the rebadging of dreadful Daewoo cars. I suspect I'm not alone on that one.
And therein lies the problem. That and the Spark of course.
Chevy definitely has a lot of work to do to establish a brand presence in Europe - especially since Opel already covers so much territory with its lineup. Apart from niche vehicles like the Corvette, there isn't much of "American" Chevy that can make the transition to Europe. And in the long run, Chevy can't rely on rebadged Korean cars.
The Cruze is entirely inoffensive, and does the job entirely adequately by all accounts, as it should, after all it does have 4 wheels and an engine. Autocar likened it to the old Mk2 Seat Toledo saloon, and that's probably an apt comparison. Vanilla. Much like the rest of Vauxhall/Opel/Holden/Buick ranges etc actually. And that is a big problem for GM. A very big problem. One that almost sank the ship in the first place in fact. The captain might be different, but there's still no one at the helm.
Damning with faint praise! In the context of this thread I am happy to see a Cruze diesel come to the US, and I think the Cruze will be an improvement over previous GM small cars, but I don't expect the Cruze to be anything other than a cheap-n-cheerful small car - solid but unexceptional. It is true that their biggest problem is coming up with a reason to buy it over other similarly anonymous cars.
In typical Ford U.S. fashion you mean, fortunately, the profit making arm of Ford, i.e. the european division, produced the even better Mk2. ;)
And we never got to see it here. :mad:
While I haven't driven the Insignia over in Europe, the Regal drives solid and is very stable. So I don't think they did any modifications to the suspension.
A SPEED TV show went over to Europe to drive a US Spec Buick Regal and drove it on the autobahn and nurburgring.
I haven't had any experience with the new Regal, but on paper it certainly looks like a substantial improvement over the previous iterations.
Squire
Jul 18, 02:55 AM
Didn't read the article yet, but why on earth would Apple announce an iTunes/Movie rental service at the WWDC? With Leopard and the probability of new hardware announcements, it looks like Jobs is already going to be plenty busy giving that slide clicker of his a workout. So unless there is some sort of special tie-in with yet to be disclosed Leopard whiz bang technologies and the Video service, why WWDC?
It also strikes me that the WWDC isn't really the venue for this sort of announcement. It always gets a lot of media attention, but mostly the kind of attention that appeals mostly to nerds and not the general public per se - the target audience for Apple's video what-have-you wares. One of those hasitly assembled Apple "special events" or Macworld seem more logical for this sort of thing.
I see your point, but if the timing is right, why not?
As others have noted, a rental service for movies is not such a bad idea. For the few movies you'd watch multiple times, buying the DVD-- with all the extras-- is a better option. I can't get too excited about it, though, because it will obviously be a US-only service.
-Squire
It also strikes me that the WWDC isn't really the venue for this sort of announcement. It always gets a lot of media attention, but mostly the kind of attention that appeals mostly to nerds and not the general public per se - the target audience for Apple's video what-have-you wares. One of those hasitly assembled Apple "special events" or Macworld seem more logical for this sort of thing.
I see your point, but if the timing is right, why not?
As others have noted, a rental service for movies is not such a bad idea. For the few movies you'd watch multiple times, buying the DVD-- with all the extras-- is a better option. I can't get too excited about it, though, because it will obviously be a US-only service.
-Squire
tmroper
Mar 24, 01:47 PM
Maybe something to do with the mythical next release of Final Cut Studio?
brianus
Sep 1, 01:05 PM
Most of the posts in this thread are about the 23" screen. Yes, I think it will happen to allow the imac to play 1080i/1080p HD.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
So I would say that the 23" iMac would kill 2 birds - Conroe and HD for the home user. :)
I completely agree with you that using Conroe would make more sense (the casing for the 17" and 20" models was originally designer for a G5, for pete's sake), but I disagree with the assumption that Conroe will *have* to be used in some way in Apple's lineup. Nobody's putting a gun to their head; they may well skip that processor entirely, as AppleInsider has suggested.
They may be responding to positive reviews and customer satisfaction with the relative silence of the Yonah iMacs compared to their G5 predecessors. I don't know how much hotter and louder an iMac would run with Conroe, but if it was noisy it would be a disappointment, as all the other desktop models they've released this year have been noticeably quieter.
Of course they won't offer it in aluminum, sheesh. Aluminum is the "pro" color, white and black are the "consumer" colors. Sheesh! Thought you people followed Apple.. anybody think they'll offer a "premium" black 23", same as they did for the higher-end MacBook? They are after all "siblings" in the product lineup.
Lastly I don't see them getting rid of the "chin" unless they come out with the rumored touch-screen, widescreen video iPods on the 12th too. I think the visual similarity between the iPod and iMac is quite intentional and not something they're likely to change unless the iPod itself changes.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
So I would say that the 23" iMac would kill 2 birds - Conroe and HD for the home user. :)
I completely agree with you that using Conroe would make more sense (the casing for the 17" and 20" models was originally designer for a G5, for pete's sake), but I disagree with the assumption that Conroe will *have* to be used in some way in Apple's lineup. Nobody's putting a gun to their head; they may well skip that processor entirely, as AppleInsider has suggested.
They may be responding to positive reviews and customer satisfaction with the relative silence of the Yonah iMacs compared to their G5 predecessors. I don't know how much hotter and louder an iMac would run with Conroe, but if it was noisy it would be a disappointment, as all the other desktop models they've released this year have been noticeably quieter.
Of course they won't offer it in aluminum, sheesh. Aluminum is the "pro" color, white and black are the "consumer" colors. Sheesh! Thought you people followed Apple.. anybody think they'll offer a "premium" black 23", same as they did for the higher-end MacBook? They are after all "siblings" in the product lineup.
Lastly I don't see them getting rid of the "chin" unless they come out with the rumored touch-screen, widescreen video iPods on the 12th too. I think the visual similarity between the iPod and iMac is quite intentional and not something they're likely to change unless the iPod itself changes.
baryon
Mar 22, 06:54 PM
Glad they don't plan to discontinue it. I'm not the kind of person who would buy one, but I like the way it looks! I like that it's the only mechanical music player Apple makes, it's the only one that doesn't follow the rest with Flash memory, Touch Screens, Cameras, WiFi, etc... It's just the good old iPod Classic and it's designed for music and not much else. It's one of those "Pro" products that only have one function, but they do that one function very well.
twoodcc
Nov 21, 11:18 PM
That sounds like a great machine that could do better than my new mac pro according to the front page here at MacRumors :eek:
i know. that's why i want to see how it does
i know. that's why i want to see how it does
wordoflife
Feb 19, 09:44 PM
crapy iphone pics
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo-1.jpg
Beautiful view!
Holy crap! That is a nice view!
I'm jealous!
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo-1.jpg
Beautiful view!
Holy crap! That is a nice view!
I'm jealous!
AFPoster
Mar 22, 01:05 PM
You opinion may be true of some people- not all. I did not choose to be attracted to guys. I also could never have sex with a woman. It's not physically possible for me, if you get my meaning. Stop telling other people that you know everything about them. You don't. Not everyone is the same.
In any of my comments I never said I new anything about them. I am speculating from pure observation. I am basing everything I know off of my friends experiences and what I've heard from them and what they saw to communities and towns during there speeches. No, I don't get your meaning either. So many ways to guess that meaning that I wouldn't be right if I guessed.
In any of my comments I never said I new anything about them. I am speculating from pure observation. I am basing everything I know off of my friends experiences and what I've heard from them and what they saw to communities and towns during there speeches. No, I don't get your meaning either. So many ways to guess that meaning that I wouldn't be right if I guessed.
MacinDoc
Oct 23, 08:03 PM
if you are gonna wait - macworld 07 will be the big update.
...or that may come when Santa Rosa is introduced, after which the chipset will be able to address more than 3.2 GB of physical RAM, and may have better support for 64 bit APIs...
...or that may come when Santa Rosa is introduced, after which the chipset will be able to address more than 3.2 GB of physical RAM, and may have better support for 64 bit APIs...
BornAgainMac
Jun 23, 10:19 AM
I would have expected future Macs to have conversational speech from you to the OS and from the OS back to you in addition to mouse and keyboard input. If it was like Dashboard for touch access then I wouldn't mind that either.
I would hate to see the traditional Mac go away.
I would hate to see the traditional Mac go away.
spcdust
Apr 20, 08:30 AM
The 6950m and 6970m are also available in 2gb models. That would help with the larger resolution of the 27" display. Let's hope for that as well!
2GB GDDR5 Memory would make me very happy.
2GB GDDR5 Memory would make me very happy.
adhesiv
Jan 11, 05:38 PM
Because its not going to be identical.
Neither will have built in superdrive, but will have the same external model.
Pro machine will have additional stuff like backlit keyboard, FW800, graphics card. Probably be even smaller and lighter. Maybe have a touch screen.
They will be quite clearly different and $ differences as well.
Just like the "professional" iPods are all aluminium, and the "professional" iMac, not to mention the "professional" iPhone.
Apple is going Alumium across the product line, for environmental reasons. The MacBooks will be the last plastic Macs made.
Also, anyone who has paid any attention during physics will know that if you want to make a laptop thinner than the current MacBook, then plastic just won't cut it for build quality. You'll need a stronger material to get the strength.
while your argument is valid, those lines never had a PRO vs. non-PRO line like the notebook segment does. While it is possible that they may go aluminum across the board (makes sense with the aluminum features of the iphone and imac) they still need a way to differentiate their PRO line other than name badging and integrated graphics. this also doesn't take into effect the added cost of the aluminum materials that would cause a non-PRO line increase in cost. so i think this might debunk an all aluminum line.
btw, not everyone had to take physics.
Neither will have built in superdrive, but will have the same external model.
Pro machine will have additional stuff like backlit keyboard, FW800, graphics card. Probably be even smaller and lighter. Maybe have a touch screen.
They will be quite clearly different and $ differences as well.
Just like the "professional" iPods are all aluminium, and the "professional" iMac, not to mention the "professional" iPhone.
Apple is going Alumium across the product line, for environmental reasons. The MacBooks will be the last plastic Macs made.
Also, anyone who has paid any attention during physics will know that if you want to make a laptop thinner than the current MacBook, then plastic just won't cut it for build quality. You'll need a stronger material to get the strength.
while your argument is valid, those lines never had a PRO vs. non-PRO line like the notebook segment does. While it is possible that they may go aluminum across the board (makes sense with the aluminum features of the iphone and imac) they still need a way to differentiate their PRO line other than name badging and integrated graphics. this also doesn't take into effect the added cost of the aluminum materials that would cause a non-PRO line increase in cost. so i think this might debunk an all aluminum line.
btw, not everyone had to take physics.
mrsir2009
Apr 12, 01:26 PM
Maybe they are rare where you live. In the UK and the rest of Europe they are more common that automatics.
Wow, here in New Zealand you never see new manual cars (unless they're some sort of heavy duty utility vehicle or a utility van). Regular road cars are all automatic now...
Wow, here in New Zealand you never see new manual cars (unless they're some sort of heavy duty utility vehicle or a utility van). Regular road cars are all automatic now...
GLS
Mar 23, 02:46 PM
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
Yes, Apple looks bad to have perhaps their most iconic device ever on their website. At the very least, without the iPod, the Apple of today would look quite different...or might not even be around....
Having said that...I do hope there will always be a click wheel iPod of some type offered. I much prefer it to using the touch interface, as far as iPod's are concerned.
I should have bought a spare Nano before they bastardized it last fall....
Yes, Apple looks bad to have perhaps their most iconic device ever on their website. At the very least, without the iPod, the Apple of today would look quite different...or might not even be around....
Having said that...I do hope there will always be a click wheel iPod of some type offered. I much prefer it to using the touch interface, as far as iPod's are concerned.
I should have bought a spare Nano before they bastardized it last fall....
kalsta
Apr 3, 05:06 AM
A bit schmaltzy to be sure, but much, much better than the recent 'you don't have an iPhone' ads. This one is positive, and tries to get to the heart of Apple's design philosophy. Notice how the device itself is hardly even seen � just subtle hints of its outline. All the focus is on the display's content and the fingers interacting with it. It's the principle of 'less is more', or minimalist design � approaching the ideal of a user interface that provides the illusion of direct manipulation of virtual objects as much as possible, without getting in your way.
Surely
Nov 27, 01:59 AM
Fix'd
Replacing my quote with a cliche picture...... how witty.
Oh, I think you missed an 'e'.
/been a member for over three years, never been called that before:rolleyes:
---------
Anyway.....
I bought two more iPad apps. Both are pool games..... I couldn't figure out which to buy, so I bought them both. So far, Pool Bar > Pool Pro Online 3
http://a1.phobos.apple.com/us/r1000/018/Purple/90/60/ab/mzl.qihqavai.480x480-75.jpg http://theportablegamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/photo-13.png
Replacing my quote with a cliche picture...... how witty.
Oh, I think you missed an 'e'.
/been a member for over three years, never been called that before:rolleyes:
---------
Anyway.....
I bought two more iPad apps. Both are pool games..... I couldn't figure out which to buy, so I bought them both. So far, Pool Bar > Pool Pro Online 3
http://a1.phobos.apple.com/us/r1000/018/Purple/90/60/ab/mzl.qihqavai.480x480-75.jpg http://theportablegamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/photo-13.png
kadajawi
Aug 31, 04:40 AM
Are you looking for a Mac for you or your parents? :rolleyes:
Eh... both? :D They need a simple computer... -> Mac Mini. I would love to get a Mac too, but can't be bothered with machines that can't be upgraded (ok, you CAN upgrade a Mac Mini and iMac, but not that much). And a Mac Pro would just be way to expensive. I think there are quite a few users who think the same and would like to see a downgraded Mac Pro for switchers who can then keep some of their hardware.
Eh... both? :D They need a simple computer... -> Mac Mini. I would love to get a Mac too, but can't be bothered with machines that can't be upgraded (ok, you CAN upgrade a Mac Mini and iMac, but not that much). And a Mac Pro would just be way to expensive. I think there are quite a few users who think the same and would like to see a downgraded Mac Pro for switchers who can then keep some of their hardware.
suzerain
Jul 21, 02:22 AM
Then you can't know that many people, I think you're forgetting there are still people outside of the US, and over here there still is a huge unexplored market for movie rentals. There are no companies that provide services like Netflix, and stores rule the market. If Apple uses the iTunes name for Movie Rentals, it will be a succes in Europe, either way.
Does Apple even offer TV downloads in Europe yet?
Does Apple even offer TV downloads in Europe yet?
Sbrocket
Jan 12, 05:38 PM
*sigh* I said it before but I'll say it again...why assume that "MacBook Air" was a name that was simply made up given the posters instead of something that simply wasn't posted by Arn until after the posters were shown. I mean, do you really think everything is posted here as soon as sources spill their info? This stuff has to be confirmed or at least corroborated by other evidence, which is likely what these posters did. I think everyone who says stuff like "There's no way Apple would name a product 'MacBook Air'!!!" is going to be in for a big surprise come MWSF. After all - since when has Arn made a habit of posting completely unconfirmed or unfounded reports? Exactly.
CalBoy
Apr 26, 03:17 PM
I doubt any legal battle between titans is a simple case, even if it appears so to us laypersons.
Certainly there are going to be minutiae that most of us won't ever learn about (and even fewer will understand), but in this case the trademark dispute is going to invariably depend on whether or not "app" is specific enough to trademark or whether it is generic to the point that trademarking it would deprive consumers and companies of a simple ands valuable labeling device.
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
Generic in a legal sense means that the term describes the product or service. For example, "computer" broadly describes any device with a chip, some storage, and an ability to perform calculations or other functions for the user. A person could not trademark "Computer Store" because it would leave other competitors with no way of describing the service they offer.
Amazon is an online retailer; hence "online retailer" cannot be trademarked but "Amazon" can be.
In much the same way "app store" describes what is being sold and how, and any competitor would want to make use of the same basic naming structure in order to clearly inform consumers about what they could expect to find.
The general population never heard the term "App" until Apple released the iPhone.
Nor did the general population ever shop for Apps online until Apple built the App Store.
The abbreviation "App" used in conjunction with "store" to denote an online marketplace in which to buy applications is a unique combination that is not known in generic parlance.
Apple will win this.
This is just not true. App has long been in use since before the 1990s.
Apple is also not the only company to sell software online; many companies had been doing direct downloads for years before iOS came out.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Apple does not actually hold the trademark yet. That is still being decided. They filed their case against Amazon prematurely, hoping to either make Amazon change names or get a leg-up in the trademark hearings (or both).
Certainly there are going to be minutiae that most of us won't ever learn about (and even fewer will understand), but in this case the trademark dispute is going to invariably depend on whether or not "app" is specific enough to trademark or whether it is generic to the point that trademarking it would deprive consumers and companies of a simple ands valuable labeling device.
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
Generic in a legal sense means that the term describes the product or service. For example, "computer" broadly describes any device with a chip, some storage, and an ability to perform calculations or other functions for the user. A person could not trademark "Computer Store" because it would leave other competitors with no way of describing the service they offer.
Amazon is an online retailer; hence "online retailer" cannot be trademarked but "Amazon" can be.
In much the same way "app store" describes what is being sold and how, and any competitor would want to make use of the same basic naming structure in order to clearly inform consumers about what they could expect to find.
The general population never heard the term "App" until Apple released the iPhone.
Nor did the general population ever shop for Apps online until Apple built the App Store.
The abbreviation "App" used in conjunction with "store" to denote an online marketplace in which to buy applications is a unique combination that is not known in generic parlance.
Apple will win this.
This is just not true. App has long been in use since before the 1990s.
Apple is also not the only company to sell software online; many companies had been doing direct downloads for years before iOS came out.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Apple does not actually hold the trademark yet. That is still being decided. They filed their case against Amazon prematurely, hoping to either make Amazon change names or get a leg-up in the trademark hearings (or both).
Philoman
Sep 6, 03:48 PM
The price is slowing going up and up.
PC user who are considering switching is thinking they can buy a whole system for this price.
Apple should offer a $499 Mini for those who are short on money and for those who want to try a Mac for the first time.
PC user who are considering switching is thinking they can buy a whole system for this price.
Apple should offer a $499 Mini for those who are short on money and for those who want to try a Mac for the first time.
anim8or
Sep 6, 08:52 AM
Does anyone think that as we have seen the Mac Mini's update was just a speed bump, that the MacBook will only see a speed bump too.
There has been a debate as to whether the MacBook will see 'merom' this year, i think that the evidence speaks for itself... ...not til next year.
Here is how i see it;
Mac Mini, MacBook White - Consumer models - Core Duo til late this year or early next
iMac, MacBook Black - Bridge between consumer and pro - Core 2 Duo (Possibly not in the BlackBook but perhaps as an option?)
Mac Pro, MacBook Pro - Pro Models - Core 2 Duo
Just my opinion... ...what does everyone else think?
There has been a debate as to whether the MacBook will see 'merom' this year, i think that the evidence speaks for itself... ...not til next year.
Here is how i see it;
Mac Mini, MacBook White - Consumer models - Core Duo til late this year or early next
iMac, MacBook Black - Bridge between consumer and pro - Core 2 Duo (Possibly not in the BlackBook but perhaps as an option?)
Mac Pro, MacBook Pro - Pro Models - Core 2 Duo
Just my opinion... ...what does everyone else think?
jkmakesmusic
Jan 13, 02:44 AM
Bluetooth headphones?
being a bit of an audiophile, bluetooth headphones being my only option would definitely cause me not to buy this. if only for that one reason. i didn't buy $250 in-ears to sit around while i use the junk apple provides with their ipod, only wirelessly.
and knowing that jobs himself is a bit of an audiophile, he'd never sign off on this.
this thing is going to have ports. even the iphone and ipod touch do. sorry guys.
being a bit of an audiophile, bluetooth headphones being my only option would definitely cause me not to buy this. if only for that one reason. i didn't buy $250 in-ears to sit around while i use the junk apple provides with their ipod, only wirelessly.
and knowing that jobs himself is a bit of an audiophile, he'd never sign off on this.
this thing is going to have ports. even the iphone and ipod touch do. sorry guys.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario