ajvizzgamer101
Mar 31, 09:24 PM
I heard iChat got a new UI. Can someone take screenshots?
MattDell
Sep 6, 08:34 PM
I do backup all of my ipod videos on DVD.
That brings up something that has really bugged me for a while. I think it is absurd that if you delete something you bought from Apple, you have to pay to get it back! If I buy a song, I should be buying a license to that song... not just one 'instance' of that particular song.
Apple keeps track of all the songs you buy anyway, so it's my opinion that you should be able to just "get another copy" if you have already purchased a song.
I think this would be especially great for movies. That way you won't have to eat up precious hard drive space. You could purchase your movie, download it, watch it, delete it, and then re-download the movie if you want to view it again.
-Matt
That brings up something that has really bugged me for a while. I think it is absurd that if you delete something you bought from Apple, you have to pay to get it back! If I buy a song, I should be buying a license to that song... not just one 'instance' of that particular song.
Apple keeps track of all the songs you buy anyway, so it's my opinion that you should be able to just "get another copy" if you have already purchased a song.
I think this would be especially great for movies. That way you won't have to eat up precious hard drive space. You could purchase your movie, download it, watch it, delete it, and then re-download the movie if you want to view it again.
-Matt
SockRolid
Jun 22, 07:50 PM
I just remembered why I stopped reading LoopRumors about 2 years ago. They flip-flopped between two states: 1) Weeks and weeks of "We'll have news real soon now" and 2) outrageous claims that were apparently totally made up as clickbait.
I guess things haven't changed over there. I might check again next year.
I guess things haven't changed over there. I might check again next year.
mattcube64
Feb 7, 06:03 PM
For something creeping up on 15 years old, that thing is in fantastic shape. Mustangs are an odd car for me. I never seem to like them each time a new one is released, but then the older they get, the more I start to like them. A buddy of mine has a '93 Cobra with just a couple thousand miles on it, and I absolutely love it.
I read a story a while back about people and their music tastes. Many people never really get out of their 20's with their favorite bands. The stuff you like around that age is what sticks with you forever as your favorite. I think it might be something similar with cars. I see cars from back in the early-mid 90s, when I was in high school and then into college, and I get all nostalgic and stuff. Fox body 5L Mustangs, FC RX7s, C4 Corvettes, Syclone/Typhoon, etc. The older I get, and the older those cars get, the more I love them. New cars are nice, but some things just stick with you. And those cars are permanently stuck with me.
Treat that Stang nice Puma, because it is certainly a keeper.
I completely agree with the whole "liking what you enjoyed as a youngster forever" theory.
Back when I was six or seven, my dad bought a brand new red '95 Camaro Z28. Quite a few mods were added to it, including a 150hp shot of nitrous and more. I was too young to realize why everyone thought the car was "cool." After some family car purchases, my dad eventually traded the Z28 in for a 2002 SS, again, right off the lot. After all the mods, that car pushed out almost 600HP. He's since moved onto cars much nicer than a Camaro; but for as long as I live, the Camaro will probably be my favorite car on the road. I hope to get a new '11 SS here in the next six months or so.
I read a story a while back about people and their music tastes. Many people never really get out of their 20's with their favorite bands. The stuff you like around that age is what sticks with you forever as your favorite. I think it might be something similar with cars. I see cars from back in the early-mid 90s, when I was in high school and then into college, and I get all nostalgic and stuff. Fox body 5L Mustangs, FC RX7s, C4 Corvettes, Syclone/Typhoon, etc. The older I get, and the older those cars get, the more I love them. New cars are nice, but some things just stick with you. And those cars are permanently stuck with me.
Treat that Stang nice Puma, because it is certainly a keeper.
I completely agree with the whole "liking what you enjoyed as a youngster forever" theory.
Back when I was six or seven, my dad bought a brand new red '95 Camaro Z28. Quite a few mods were added to it, including a 150hp shot of nitrous and more. I was too young to realize why everyone thought the car was "cool." After some family car purchases, my dad eventually traded the Z28 in for a 2002 SS, again, right off the lot. After all the mods, that car pushed out almost 600HP. He's since moved onto cars much nicer than a Camaro; but for as long as I live, the Camaro will probably be my favorite car on the road. I hope to get a new '11 SS here in the next six months or so.
SeaFox
Dec 28, 01:52 AM
anything is possible minus 1 thing: the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
amols
Aug 16, 07:26 AM
I think they'll use 802.11 for wireless. That way, I can stream my music from iPod to Airport Express directly. Although Firewire/USB will still be the primary I/O.
Abyssgh0st
Jan 30, 10:00 AM
Best handling car i have ever driven.... have a 5 month old little boy though so i think its days are numbered in favour of a truck!
More pictures please! I lust after Lotus.
More pictures please! I lust after Lotus.
GregA
Mar 22, 10:55 PM
i would not like to see a larger screen, but perhaps higher definition say 360p or 480p instead of the 240p. no real updates on the OS.
I think it depends on what they want to achieve with it. Do they want a HD video unit? A portable login disk? Just a bigger 'classic'? An iPod Touch with a hard disk?
I could almost see an iPod Nano screen plus click wheel, with a 220GB HD.
I think it depends on what they want to achieve with it. Do they want a HD video unit? A portable login disk? Just a bigger 'classic'? An iPod Touch with a hard disk?
I could almost see an iPod Nano screen plus click wheel, with a 220GB HD.
Eorlas
Mar 23, 02:03 AM
Demanding a larger hard drive so that large size songs that are uncompressed and run at a higher bit rate becomes a moot point. A person's ears are only going to be able to tell the difference in quality up to a certain point. And that threshold becomes even more insignificant with more headphone listening time depending on how loud the individual listens to their music.
There will always be people that say that they can tell the difference, but in all honesty, they can't.
There will always be people that say that they can tell the difference, but in all honesty, they can't.
szark
Aug 6, 11:58 PM
Don't be like that, i noticed it.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=2677363#post2677363
But that doesn't mean everyone isnt going nuts, because they are. This is worse than any build up to an Apple event i've ever remembered
I simply meant that, normally, people would be excited because there were covered banners. But this year, they were excited by a bunch of icons. ;)
There are actually 3 covered banners on the ground floor.
I know -- I was specifically referring to the original photo of the icon-filled banner, which only showed two of the three banners.
Kingsly: I'll keep an eye out for you before the Keynote tomorrow. EDIT: Sorry -- just saw your other thread. Have fun visiting Cupertino!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=2677363#post2677363
But that doesn't mean everyone isnt going nuts, because they are. This is worse than any build up to an Apple event i've ever remembered
I simply meant that, normally, people would be excited because there were covered banners. But this year, they were excited by a bunch of icons. ;)
There are actually 3 covered banners on the ground floor.
I know -- I was specifically referring to the original photo of the icon-filled banner, which only showed two of the three banners.
Kingsly: I'll keep an eye out for you before the Keynote tomorrow. EDIT: Sorry -- just saw your other thread. Have fun visiting Cupertino!
koobcamuk
Jan 12, 05:47 AM
Intriguing.
Maybe the �Air� branding is taking a que from the sucess of one of Apple's international partners, O2.
More like Nike, surely? :P
Maybe the �Air� branding is taking a que from the sucess of one of Apple's international partners, O2.
More like Nike, surely? :P
DoFoT9
Mar 21, 04:17 PM
I guess I'm number 1 on the team now :cool:
your electricity bill must be outrageous!
what do you do?
your electricity bill must be outrageous!
what do you do?
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...
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 12:41 AM
Well, personally I would consider "loyalists" part of military assets. And I'm sure most generals do as well because that's the way they talk about killing soldiers. Thus inflicting "material" damage should include the people who operate the weapons via command.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
codymac
Jan 10, 01:37 PM
My JCW is light, at 2600 lbs. :)
That's about 700 pounds too much!
;)
Woke up to this for the commute - decent image from the iPhone, IMHO.
That's about 700 pounds too much!
;)
Woke up to this for the commute - decent image from the iPhone, IMHO.
freebooter
Sep 1, 12:17 PM
Getting rid of the chin would require an external power supply like the ACDs unless you want a power supply sized blank space on the screen :pI don't have any problem with a power supply lurking out of sight on the floor. Why have one heating up the inside of the computer?
yukyuklee
Feb 24, 10:58 PM
nice clean setup.
Thanks man! I got the idea from you lol
Do I see a white iPhone 3G/3GS peeking in there?
LOL good eyes! Yes a 16GB iPhone 3GS but it's gone to my gf... I upgraded to the iPhone4 :)
Thanks man! I got the idea from you lol
Do I see a white iPhone 3G/3GS peeking in there?
LOL good eyes! Yes a 16GB iPhone 3GS but it's gone to my gf... I upgraded to the iPhone4 :)
WyoMac
Mar 22, 05:41 PM
Geez.... what did they do long ago... have a 400-disc CD changer in their trunk?
How did they manage?
:)
Some of us have been on the planet long enough to remember when 8-tracks came to cars that previously only had AM radios. How did we manage? Actually, we got along fined but bringing my own audio along with us just provides more options. Before the iPod, I would typically pick about 15-20 CD's to bring along with me on a road trip. I got along fine, but invariably I would wish that I had made a few different choices, never knowing what mood might strike me. So now I have an 80GB Classic that is about 95% full. Loaded on it are about 11,000 songs, 50-60 podcasts, a couple audiobooks, and maybe a movie or two. Every time the car leaves town, it goes with me. I take it to work every day and plug it into the sound system in my office. I plug it into an old boombox when I am working in the yard or on house projects. I don't need it to surf the web, play games, read email or anything else. It serves my wants perfectly, and though I am not about to claim that I am in the mainstream, I suspect that there are enough of us to keep a device like this profitable for Apple. I've toyed with the idea of selling this one and buying a 160GB but haven't yet. If Apple does choose to make a classic with high capacity, bluetooth, and airplay, I would buy it in a minute.
How did they manage?
:)
Some of us have been on the planet long enough to remember when 8-tracks came to cars that previously only had AM radios. How did we manage? Actually, we got along fined but bringing my own audio along with us just provides more options. Before the iPod, I would typically pick about 15-20 CD's to bring along with me on a road trip. I got along fine, but invariably I would wish that I had made a few different choices, never knowing what mood might strike me. So now I have an 80GB Classic that is about 95% full. Loaded on it are about 11,000 songs, 50-60 podcasts, a couple audiobooks, and maybe a movie or two. Every time the car leaves town, it goes with me. I take it to work every day and plug it into the sound system in my office. I plug it into an old boombox when I am working in the yard or on house projects. I don't need it to surf the web, play games, read email or anything else. It serves my wants perfectly, and though I am not about to claim that I am in the mainstream, I suspect that there are enough of us to keep a device like this profitable for Apple. I've toyed with the idea of selling this one and buying a 160GB but haven't yet. If Apple does choose to make a classic with high capacity, bluetooth, and airplay, I would buy it in a minute.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 02:58 PM
NO... they do not "have it already".
It's still in the opposition phase. No registration has been granted.
Image (http://sites.google.com/site/wjohnstone/appstoretm.jpg)
Learn how to read TESS and understand the coding.
Apple is filing a preemptive lawsuit against Amazon.
This is perfectly normal for anyone who is going through the trademark process.
The lawsuit's merits will be determined by the outcome of the opposition phase from the USPTO.
Now step away from the keyboard.
Yes Apple was given approval to use the trademark but not the final awarding of the trademark. See my other post. I acknowledged this.
And I'm still at my keyboard.
Thank you for saving me the time to post this.
There is NO trademark yet.
Yes I was wrong and discovered the error.
It's still in the opposition phase. No registration has been granted.
Image (http://sites.google.com/site/wjohnstone/appstoretm.jpg)
Learn how to read TESS and understand the coding.
Apple is filing a preemptive lawsuit against Amazon.
This is perfectly normal for anyone who is going through the trademark process.
The lawsuit's merits will be determined by the outcome of the opposition phase from the USPTO.
Now step away from the keyboard.
Yes Apple was given approval to use the trademark but not the final awarding of the trademark. See my other post. I acknowledged this.
And I'm still at my keyboard.
Thank you for saving me the time to post this.
There is NO trademark yet.
Yes I was wrong and discovered the error.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 29, 10:59 AM
Maybe FrontRow 2 (I believe/assume comes with Leopard) is where this will play in. Maybe instead of making a single device and labeling it a media center Apple will allow for any Mac (any new Mac...) to be used as a media center via FrontRow 2.
I really hope you are correct about FR2 in Leopard. However...
I do think you need a TV-card in the computer too. Given Apples philosophy about simplicity, I doubt they will have a stand alone TV-reciever. Furthermore, I just can't see Apple selling MP with a TV-card. So my guess is that they will make a dedicated computer. Still I am most likely wrong... as always...:p
I really hope you are correct about FR2 in Leopard. However...
I do think you need a TV-card in the computer too. Given Apples philosophy about simplicity, I doubt they will have a stand alone TV-reciever. Furthermore, I just can't see Apple selling MP with a TV-card. So my guess is that they will make a dedicated computer. Still I am most likely wrong... as always...:p
razzmatazz
Aug 6, 09:23 PM
ehhhhh? :confused:
I'm thinking he doesn't like Tiger
I'm thinking he doesn't like Tiger
Met
May 3, 12:37 AM
I see myself simply sticking with AppZapper. I prefer to have the control over which of the files get deleted when I'm uninstalling the app. I'm expecting this feature "just works" and doesn't give you this flexibility.
Manic Mouse
Aug 19, 07:24 AM
Except at a lot of Starbucks that internet functionality comes at a cost, which is my point.
May be bliss, but not until we have a sound infrastructure. And I have been on some really shoddy networks, which ends up becoming far more frustrating than worthwhile, to the point where I just slam my PDA into my pocket and curse inaudibly.
I'm already surfing the net in my home on my PSP when I can't be bothered booting up my PC, as are many others. I would much rather be able to read/write emails while on a sofa watching TV (like text messaging) rather than hunched over a computer. It's not just the internet access either: Being able to use a decent version of iCal etc would make the iPod your personal assistant and something you couldn't do without.
Media players have been done to death. Companies are already looking into creating this kind of device (and have with MYLO).
May be bliss, but not until we have a sound infrastructure. And I have been on some really shoddy networks, which ends up becoming far more frustrating than worthwhile, to the point where I just slam my PDA into my pocket and curse inaudibly.
I'm already surfing the net in my home on my PSP when I can't be bothered booting up my PC, as are many others. I would much rather be able to read/write emails while on a sofa watching TV (like text messaging) rather than hunched over a computer. It's not just the internet access either: Being able to use a decent version of iCal etc would make the iPod your personal assistant and something you couldn't do without.
Media players have been done to death. Companies are already looking into creating this kind of device (and have with MYLO).
McRCN
Apr 10, 04:45 PM
I learned to drive a stick when I was about 25. I had no choice, I bought a new car that was a stick. It was rather easy to learn.
Funny memory about the night I picked up my new car that I never forgot. The dealership gave me a coupon for a free tank of gas. There was a steep hill on the way out of the gas station, so the car kept rolling backwards. Luckily it was late in the evening, so no one else was around. I think it took me 3 or 4 tries to figure it out. :D
Funny memory about the night I picked up my new car that I never forgot. The dealership gave me a coupon for a free tank of gas. There was a steep hill on the way out of the gas station, so the car kept rolling backwards. Luckily it was late in the evening, so no one else was around. I think it took me 3 or 4 tries to figure it out. :D
