ChickenSwartz
Aug 2, 12:39 PM
You got it wrong. If you can't have cameras.. you CAN'T HAVE CAMERAS even if they're NOT being used. I work at a place where you can't have cellphones with cameras on the premises (i.e., the parking lot) let alone inside. Many companies with such policies will not buy displays because of such.
I think this is an oversight (we can call it oSight) by Apple. If you want to gain market share, especially for people who want high powered equipment. I worked in a small research for a while, like the above poster, there were NO cameras allowed including camera phones. This was a blanket policy for the whole facillity even if you had no security clearence. In this case it was required becasue they did a lot DoD research.
So, right off these new computers (iMac, MB, MBP) are not options for a facility like this to use. Additionally, anyone who works there and ever wants to bring his/her personal laptop to work is sunk too.
If was still working there I probably would have to opt for a differnt laptop.
Compared to other computer brands Macs give their customers fewer add-on options. I don't know why. I guess it makes it easier for them. But, in this case I think not making the built in iSight an option (even if it is free, like the glossy screen in the MBP) is a mistake.
I think this is an oversight (we can call it oSight) by Apple. If you want to gain market share, especially for people who want high powered equipment. I worked in a small research for a while, like the above poster, there were NO cameras allowed including camera phones. This was a blanket policy for the whole facillity even if you had no security clearence. In this case it was required becasue they did a lot DoD research.
So, right off these new computers (iMac, MB, MBP) are not options for a facility like this to use. Additionally, anyone who works there and ever wants to bring his/her personal laptop to work is sunk too.
If was still working there I probably would have to opt for a differnt laptop.
Compared to other computer brands Macs give their customers fewer add-on options. I don't know why. I guess it makes it easier for them. But, in this case I think not making the built in iSight an option (even if it is free, like the glossy screen in the MBP) is a mistake.
cyberdogl2
Aug 11, 08:21 PM
Merom isn't just bragging rights you should check out the comparison in the link that somebody provided. It's about 10% faster for the same price and power consumption. And the next generation of Front Row might take advtange of the 64-bitness.
Also, I plan on booting Vista with it also, which has a 64-bit version if/when it comes out next year.
Also, I plan on booting Vista with it also, which has a 64-bit version if/when it comes out next year.
chuckles:)
May 7, 10:37 AM
I used to use mobileme for hosting, email, iDisk and photo sharing, but i've outgrown all of them. I won't be renewing this december. Now i just have to make sure i don't lose my iPhone.
anonalidall
May 7, 12:11 PM
Eric Schmidt's comments about privacy are disconcerting to me
This is after the whole Google Buzz fiasco. There's money in trying to convince people to be open. Facebook and Google data mine consumer behavior to make money and consumers need to act like they got a good education and understand where they are being used.
The assumption that those that want privacy are doing something illegal is asinine.
Zuckerberg (Facebook) on privacy (http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebooks_zuckerberg_says_the_age_of_privacy_is_ov.php)
Privacy is a lot like Laws. You give it up it's hard to get back.
Hey it's not a choice for everyone. I'm just at a point in my life where $6 and some change is going to put me out especially when my online data is not being mined for profit. I've been happier than I though I would with my MobileMe account. I'm on the west coast so i'm assuming my data center is in Cali and performance has been fine.
In the interest of winding this down (and allowing this thread to get back on track :-) I'll concede that Google has made more concerning statements about privacy than Apple (and as you note, information is much more directly related to their bottom line than it is to Apple's). However, I think these are only our perceptions about the situation. I think the reality is that regardless of whether you go with Google's for-pay or Apple's for-pay cloud services you're putting yourself in another companies hands. And I think the differences between how these large companies treat their users vs. how that relates to their income is extremely small. I think it's splitting hairs to differentiate between the privacy of their Cloud offerings (Facebook being an exception).
If you want real privacy there are better ways to obtain it. I use GnuPG when I want more privacy and less convenience, otherwise anything that's unencrypted that I send out or store on the Internet I treat (somewhat) as out of my hands. Obviously I have different expectations for Gmail vs my Tweets, but I still understand the hazards of storing any unencrypted information with any company, Google or Apple.
http://www.dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/000000/70000/4000/100/74150/74150.strip.gif
This is after the whole Google Buzz fiasco. There's money in trying to convince people to be open. Facebook and Google data mine consumer behavior to make money and consumers need to act like they got a good education and understand where they are being used.
The assumption that those that want privacy are doing something illegal is asinine.
Zuckerberg (Facebook) on privacy (http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebooks_zuckerberg_says_the_age_of_privacy_is_ov.php)
Privacy is a lot like Laws. You give it up it's hard to get back.
Hey it's not a choice for everyone. I'm just at a point in my life where $6 and some change is going to put me out especially when my online data is not being mined for profit. I've been happier than I though I would with my MobileMe account. I'm on the west coast so i'm assuming my data center is in Cali and performance has been fine.
In the interest of winding this down (and allowing this thread to get back on track :-) I'll concede that Google has made more concerning statements about privacy than Apple (and as you note, information is much more directly related to their bottom line than it is to Apple's). However, I think these are only our perceptions about the situation. I think the reality is that regardless of whether you go with Google's for-pay or Apple's for-pay cloud services you're putting yourself in another companies hands. And I think the differences between how these large companies treat their users vs. how that relates to their income is extremely small. I think it's splitting hairs to differentiate between the privacy of their Cloud offerings (Facebook being an exception).
If you want real privacy there are better ways to obtain it. I use GnuPG when I want more privacy and less convenience, otherwise anything that's unencrypted that I send out or store on the Internet I treat (somewhat) as out of my hands. Obviously I have different expectations for Gmail vs my Tweets, but I still understand the hazards of storing any unencrypted information with any company, Google or Apple.
http://www.dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/000000/70000/4000/100/74150/74150.strip.gif
vand0576
Aug 11, 10:41 AM
so once these are released, what are the chances if my MBP was broken Apple Care would replace it with a new Core 2 Duo one?
Absolutely slim to none. When my 4G monochrome iPod broke down after both the releases to the iPod photo and iPoc 5G, I thought for sure I'd get an upgrade but it's not the case. I'm sure somehow they still have 4G ipods in stock. My guess is they hold them for two years after the last sale of the product, so that the applecare is meant to replace, not upgrade.
No chance your computer will be simply replaced. They would work on it, not upgrade it. Intel still makes the chips, and remember Apple has to buy them in lots of 1,000. They have plenty.
Absolutely slim to none. When my 4G monochrome iPod broke down after both the releases to the iPod photo and iPoc 5G, I thought for sure I'd get an upgrade but it's not the case. I'm sure somehow they still have 4G ipods in stock. My guess is they hold them for two years after the last sale of the product, so that the applecare is meant to replace, not upgrade.
No chance your computer will be simply replaced. They would work on it, not upgrade it. Intel still makes the chips, and remember Apple has to buy them in lots of 1,000. They have plenty.
Moyank24
May 6, 07:54 PM
How about stick with me and we lose the clod you have for a husband? :)
I've been trying to rid myself of him for years. He's obsessed with sandwiches. There's only so much A woman can take.
I've been trying to rid myself of him for years. He's obsessed with sandwiches. There's only so much A woman can take.
snberk103
May 6, 05:07 PM
I didn't say that at all.
Certain things are good for one thing but not as good for another. Basing your metrics off of water and light make a lot of sense when you have to measure a great deal of new items and compare them objectively.
On the other hand when you need metrics to be a guide through daily life and nothing else, the system that's born from daily necessity makes a lot more sense.
...
You are entirely correct. There is really nothing that will make the daily life of an American citizen better 'cause their can of Bud is 331ml, or their corn-beef sandwich has 125gs of beef, and 12ml of mustard on two slices of rye, each 115mm thick.
But don't go around telling the world what a "modern" society you are when you are still stuck measuring things with this quaint system that the rest of the world has modernized away from. it's really kinda cute, you know. :D
Certain things are good for one thing but not as good for another. Basing your metrics off of water and light make a lot of sense when you have to measure a great deal of new items and compare them objectively.
On the other hand when you need metrics to be a guide through daily life and nothing else, the system that's born from daily necessity makes a lot more sense.
...
You are entirely correct. There is really nothing that will make the daily life of an American citizen better 'cause their can of Bud is 331ml, or their corn-beef sandwich has 125gs of beef, and 12ml of mustard on two slices of rye, each 115mm thick.
But don't go around telling the world what a "modern" society you are when you are still stuck measuring things with this quaint system that the rest of the world has modernized away from. it's really kinda cute, you know. :D
Jape
Nov 18, 05:41 AM
The apple store is looking better and better, once again it has been pushed bac to dec 2. I wonder when the Magellan car kit is coming out and how much that will cost.
z3r01
Apr 26, 04:18 PM
This is obvious because iOS is from one company...selling iOS devices. Android is o. Every other device that really isn't any competition if u ask me...every HTC, motorola , are now stocking android that they just got lazy. "oh we just made a quad core with 7 cameras...let's add android...perfect..exactly like an evo"....boring...some say "oh iOS isn't exciting" in earlier posts are wrong...not that I'm a fanboy to iOS..I'm a fanboy to the best I see..and android for a fact isn't...every damn android device has nothing different then just cameras...evo..shift..thunderbolt...droid...it's just stupid...what happened to when cell phones competed for hardware and software?
nuckinfutz
May 7, 03:31 PM
Yes, you're right. Novelty, not nostalgia. My brain is a little fried afta writin my dissertation.
How is it a novelty?
MobileMe doesn't even work right now... how would they ever support way more users?
Works fine here.
How is it a novelty?
MobileMe doesn't even work right now... how would they ever support way more users?
Works fine here.
nanofrog
Apr 29, 01:41 AM
What has me wondering, is how Apple might support the 14 SATA devices that the X79 chipset will natively provide. Presumably, they will determine that their average customer only needs X SATA ports, and the rest will be left unexposed. With TB support, this may not be that big of an issue for those that really need or want 10-12 drives.
They already provide fewer USB ports than the ICH10 actually provides (12 on the chip, but Apple only provides access to 5), so it's certainly possible this sort of thinking could be applied elsewhere.
I also wonder what else they would consider denying access to in the X79 (i.e. RAID functionality in particular).
They already provide fewer USB ports than the ICH10 actually provides (12 on the chip, but Apple only provides access to 5), so it's certainly possible this sort of thinking could be applied elsewhere.
I also wonder what else they would consider denying access to in the X79 (i.e. RAID functionality in particular).
kaneda
Aug 3, 11:46 PM
I guess we are not going to get new casing for Intel MAC...
applexpanther
Mar 29, 11:35 AM
Nobody forces you to store your music there. You can always store it on your computer if you want. Funny how you can see extra feature as a "limitation". I bet that when Apple offers similar service (just more expensive) you'll call it a "revolutionary" feature.
No one forces you now. I was talking in terms of future limitations. I was also speaking in the abstract, meaning any company to offer a service of this nature will "probably" impose some sort of restrictions to gouge money from the consumer. Again, speaking in future terms. Otherwise, what is the point of building some grand service if it has no advantage economically? Companies are out to make money.
No one forces you now. I was talking in terms of future limitations. I was also speaking in the abstract, meaning any company to offer a service of this nature will "probably" impose some sort of restrictions to gouge money from the consumer. Again, speaking in future terms. Otherwise, what is the point of building some grand service if it has no advantage economically? Companies are out to make money.
macfan881
May 7, 08:37 PM
Great news considering you can get 90 percent of the stuff for free online the only feature i would want is find my iPhone when i get the 4th gen iPhone but if i can get my own .me account i would ditch gmail in a second for me
iHotu
Aug 7, 05:00 PM
I bet they will still have a nice selection
shaolindave
May 4, 03:29 PM
two things:
a) Does nobody read?
From TFA:
Granted, I think that the article is a little bit of intentional flamebait because they use wishywashy words like "preferred" to start up a discussion to ratchet up page views.... But come on, people. We all know that every time Macrumors tries to start controversy on a perceived "change" in functionality or standards, nine times out of ten there's more than one option available... '
yes, I'm sure we all read that. it doesn't really answer any questions though.
i have physical versions of iLife and iWork (or did, actually). my family lost our iWork disc. I still have it installed on my hard drive. I COULD buy it from the app store, but it'd cost me full price (again).
what if I buy Lion from the app store, then my computer fails or i replace the hard drive. yes, i do have the option of buying a physical disc, but i'd have to pay full price (again).
if they allow to app store version to be burned to disc or copied to USB drive, awesome, that'll solve the problem. however, so far this is being presented as a digital download, not an alternative means to get a physical copy.
a) Does nobody read?
From TFA:
Granted, I think that the article is a little bit of intentional flamebait because they use wishywashy words like "preferred" to start up a discussion to ratchet up page views.... But come on, people. We all know that every time Macrumors tries to start controversy on a perceived "change" in functionality or standards, nine times out of ten there's more than one option available... '
yes, I'm sure we all read that. it doesn't really answer any questions though.
i have physical versions of iLife and iWork (or did, actually). my family lost our iWork disc. I still have it installed on my hard drive. I COULD buy it from the app store, but it'd cost me full price (again).
what if I buy Lion from the app store, then my computer fails or i replace the hard drive. yes, i do have the option of buying a physical disc, but i'd have to pay full price (again).
if they allow to app store version to be burned to disc or copied to USB drive, awesome, that'll solve the problem. however, so far this is being presented as a digital download, not an alternative means to get a physical copy.
wovel
Apr 18, 04:01 PM
Not at all. They can use those components for producing Galaxy devices. And they can use free Foxconn resources (since they would not be assembling iPhones anymore) for assembling. :D
Lol.
There would still be minuscule demand for the galaxy lines. Just millions of people using old technology while Apple found our bought a new supplier :)
Lol.
There would still be minuscule demand for the galaxy lines. Just millions of people using old technology while Apple found our bought a new supplier :)
regandarcy
Mar 27, 06:52 AM
I'm all for cloud computing as an added feature....but not as a replacement for traditional storage of media and data.
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
mcrain
Apr 15, 09:02 AM
Do you think there are any negative consequences to this? If I were starting a business and seeking investors, it would sure be a lot harder to get investors when the capital gains rate is 35% rather than 15%. That business would never materialize. Nobody's going to complain about it though because no one can see what could have been.
No.
Capital gains do NOT stand in the way of investment in business. Why? Because capital gains ONLY apply to the gains realized upon the SALE of the shares or ownership interest in the company. That sale has ZERO effect on the business' profit, capitalization, available resources, etc... That sale ONLY might have an effect on the value of the shares of the company in the hands of other investors. That's what is called the secondary market.
What you are talking about is the initial offering of the shares by the company in which the company is looking to exchange ownership, and everything that goes with it, for capital investment.
One of the things that goes with ownership, and one of the two primary reasons people invest, is a share of profits. If a potential business has a good business plan, a good product and will make money, people will invest in it. When it makes money, that income is taxed as ordinary income when distributed, or if kept without re-investment, as business income. This money is NOT taxed as capital gain!
The second profit motive for investment is the idea that the success of the business will generate demand for ownership, thus increasing the value of ownership on the secondary market. This could lead to capital gains if you choose to sell your ownership interest.
Higher taxes result in businesses that choose to reinvest and increase their operations rather than distributing money to its owners. This causes increases in value, increases in operations, increases in hiring, increases in economic impact, etc...
Higher taxes result in investors choosing businesses that are increasing in value, generating higher income rates, operating in riskier, but higher yield, fields, etc...
Capital gains don't prevent investment, they merely affect how much tax is paid on the sale of an investment you have held for over one year.
No.
Capital gains do NOT stand in the way of investment in business. Why? Because capital gains ONLY apply to the gains realized upon the SALE of the shares or ownership interest in the company. That sale has ZERO effect on the business' profit, capitalization, available resources, etc... That sale ONLY might have an effect on the value of the shares of the company in the hands of other investors. That's what is called the secondary market.
What you are talking about is the initial offering of the shares by the company in which the company is looking to exchange ownership, and everything that goes with it, for capital investment.
One of the things that goes with ownership, and one of the two primary reasons people invest, is a share of profits. If a potential business has a good business plan, a good product and will make money, people will invest in it. When it makes money, that income is taxed as ordinary income when distributed, or if kept without re-investment, as business income. This money is NOT taxed as capital gain!
The second profit motive for investment is the idea that the success of the business will generate demand for ownership, thus increasing the value of ownership on the secondary market. This could lead to capital gains if you choose to sell your ownership interest.
Higher taxes result in businesses that choose to reinvest and increase their operations rather than distributing money to its owners. This causes increases in value, increases in operations, increases in hiring, increases in economic impact, etc...
Higher taxes result in investors choosing businesses that are increasing in value, generating higher income rates, operating in riskier, but higher yield, fields, etc...
Capital gains don't prevent investment, they merely affect how much tax is paid on the sale of an investment you have held for over one year.
clank72
Mar 29, 04:20 PM
Hard for me, even as an Apple fan, to weep too much for a company that chooses to do business overseas isntead of here in America, employing Americans.
No way. With the cost of employment here in America these Apple products would not be possible. We should be thankful.
No way. With the cost of employment here in America these Apple products would not be possible. We should be thankful.
blow45
Mar 29, 03:07 PM
Things are only getting worse in Japan...
Hopefully everything gets under control
Yeah after they radiate themselves to mutation, and then the rest of the world, they 'll get it under control.
At some point the global community should hold the nuclear manufacturers responsible for crimes against humanity. This is not only a Japanese issue that they 've been handling with half truths and botching it up. This concerns the world. When Chernobyl hit we where blaming the "bad" commies for concealing the truth, and it's the same and worse from Japan twenty five or so years after...
Anyway best of luck to the Japanese people, I wish them courage, but I think the japanese government has a lot to answer for to the rest of the world. Had this happened in some other supposedly authoritarian regime, say Libya, you 'd have had foreign occupation to resolve the dreaded nuclear threat. Alas it's not, and the rest of the world is focusing on their oil in Libya. Billions of dollars for arms are spent against Libya, surely, some global task force with the same amount of money would have handled the nuclear threat much much better in Japan as well as helping people out who 've suffered as a result of the earthquake and tsunami... but it seems people are not evolved enough to care for the future of humanity, but for the short term future of their oil investments they act faster than lightning.
Really disappointing.
Hopefully everything gets under control
Yeah after they radiate themselves to mutation, and then the rest of the world, they 'll get it under control.
At some point the global community should hold the nuclear manufacturers responsible for crimes against humanity. This is not only a Japanese issue that they 've been handling with half truths and botching it up. This concerns the world. When Chernobyl hit we where blaming the "bad" commies for concealing the truth, and it's the same and worse from Japan twenty five or so years after...
Anyway best of luck to the Japanese people, I wish them courage, but I think the japanese government has a lot to answer for to the rest of the world. Had this happened in some other supposedly authoritarian regime, say Libya, you 'd have had foreign occupation to resolve the dreaded nuclear threat. Alas it's not, and the rest of the world is focusing on their oil in Libya. Billions of dollars for arms are spent against Libya, surely, some global task force with the same amount of money would have handled the nuclear threat much much better in Japan as well as helping people out who 've suffered as a result of the earthquake and tsunami... but it seems people are not evolved enough to care for the future of humanity, but for the short term future of their oil investments they act faster than lightning.
Really disappointing.
flottenheimer
May 9, 10:46 AM
Have Apple ever posted any MobileMe numbers?
Number of users? Revenue? Gigabytes stored? Growth?
Anything...
Number of users? Revenue? Gigabytes stored? Growth?
Anything...
tokevino
Aug 7, 03:46 PM
That's what I'm saying, $400x2=$800-$300=$500 profit for Apple, That's wonderful for Apple.
On the other hand, internal pricing from Intel can be VERY different. So don't let it get too much into your head.
Bottom line, these quads are truly wonderful machines to buy.
On the other hand, internal pricing from Intel can be VERY different. So don't let it get too much into your head.
Bottom line, these quads are truly wonderful machines to buy.
xfiftyfour
Sep 11, 10:40 AM
i'm trying to not get my hopes up on this one.. mostly because I expect that it'll just be the movie store, and that really doesn't excite me very much. I'm not the type to buy DVDs, or watch a movie more than once unless I have to.. so paying $15 for a DVD to watch on a small screen isn't as appealing as heading to my blockbuster and paying $4 to watch it once on my TV and then move on.
But boy.. if a new iPod comes out.. I'm gunna have to go work the streets tomorrow night so I can afford one.. er. ;)
But boy.. if a new iPod comes out.. I'm gunna have to go work the streets tomorrow night so I can afford one.. er. ;)