Cougarcat
Mar 26, 06:12 PM
The new Launcher is just one of those eye-candy apps. It'll be the first thing I delete.
Except that you can't delete it. In the beta, at least. It's hard-coded in the dock.
Except that you can't delete it. In the beta, at least. It's hard-coded in the dock.
*LTD*
Apr 10, 09:50 PM
Oh, we are totally getting an iPad app to go along with this program. I can feel it.
Impossible.
The iPad is not a serious computer. This will never happen.
It's just a fad.
Ignore the big-name game titles for iOS. Ignore the upcoming Photoshop app. Ignore the millions of sales. Ignore the copycats in the market.
It'll all go away very soon.
Impossible.
The iPad is not a serious computer. This will never happen.
It's just a fad.
Ignore the big-name game titles for iOS. Ignore the upcoming Photoshop app. Ignore the millions of sales. Ignore the copycats in the market.
It'll all go away very soon.
MacsRgr8
Aug 5, 04:02 PM
Me excited too! :)
I've made plans with some ex-colleagues to follow the event live using the text-based coverage made available.
Let me thank MacRumors : Live already!
It'll be 6 pm over here, so we'll be ready with some pizzas and cokes! ;)
Then once I get home a couple of hours later, I can watch the stream! :cool:
I've made plans with some ex-colleagues to follow the event live using the text-based coverage made available.
Let me thank MacRumors : Live already!
It'll be 6 pm over here, so we'll be ready with some pizzas and cokes! ;)
Then once I get home a couple of hours later, I can watch the stream! :cool:
CaoCao
Feb 28, 09:14 PM
Yeah, I know what default means. Your explanation has to be one of the most ridiculous I have encountered. Thanks for the laugh.
Though, i do have to wonder. What do you think "influcenes" the brain that may cause homosexuality?
I copy and pasted from the dictionary application that comes default installed with Macs, thank Apple for the laugh.
You have just introduced this new word "influcenes" which I can't memory match with an word I know. Assuming you mean influences which appears to match contextually, I do not know the answer, scientist do not appear to know either.
Well, it's certainly sweeping drama based on fiction. Like so many Oscar winners, it's also a bit of vapid fluff that people will view and quickly forget. Frankly, I didn't mean to imply any excellence other than at making completely unfounded generalizations.
Are you saying you think people program themselves to be gay? Or is it based on what cartoons they watch as a kid? Maybe lack of a father figure? Tell us more, Doc!
I do not know the cause, it appears scientists do not either. Since no one appears to know, what could you possibly have expected from me?
Though, i do have to wonder. What do you think "influcenes" the brain that may cause homosexuality?
I copy and pasted from the dictionary application that comes default installed with Macs, thank Apple for the laugh.
You have just introduced this new word "influcenes" which I can't memory match with an word I know. Assuming you mean influences which appears to match contextually, I do not know the answer, scientist do not appear to know either.
Well, it's certainly sweeping drama based on fiction. Like so many Oscar winners, it's also a bit of vapid fluff that people will view and quickly forget. Frankly, I didn't mean to imply any excellence other than at making completely unfounded generalizations.
Are you saying you think people program themselves to be gay? Or is it based on what cartoons they watch as a kid? Maybe lack of a father figure? Tell us more, Doc!
I do not know the cause, it appears scientists do not either. Since no one appears to know, what could you possibly have expected from me?
NJRonbo
Jun 23, 05:32 PM
Good luck with that one as that is not going to happen. They did not advertise Pre-Orders. They said reserves only. They told no money from you nor did they hold credit card information on file like Apple does.
No...
...but what they did do was waste people's time.
How can you ask customers to stand in line last
week -- in my case (and certainly others) arriving
to the store early to be first in line and then wait
an additional 90 minutes for the store to attempt
to generate a PIN --- and be told that none of
what you just did will guarantee you a phone?
Imagine only 9,000 pins available and every Radio
Shack Store online at the same time trying to get
one for their customers on line. It's like a
Beatles Reunion concert going on sale nationwide
through Ticketmaster and everyone is trying to get
their ticket at the same time.
All the inconvenience and wasted time that RS
put their customers through last week all in the
name of asking for a phone that is not officially
being called a "preorder."
Now, all those people that stood in line and
had to go through the hassle of wasting their
afternoon to not officially preorder an iPhone
aren't seemingly going to get one at all.
Radio Shack really screwed this one up.
At least people who lined up at AT&T to
preorder a phone weren't told that they
were doing so just to gauge a number of
requests and none of them would be
guaranteed a phone.
It's really sad that all of us that spent
an hour, two or three in the stores last
week did it all for naught.
No...
...but what they did do was waste people's time.
How can you ask customers to stand in line last
week -- in my case (and certainly others) arriving
to the store early to be first in line and then wait
an additional 90 minutes for the store to attempt
to generate a PIN --- and be told that none of
what you just did will guarantee you a phone?
Imagine only 9,000 pins available and every Radio
Shack Store online at the same time trying to get
one for their customers on line. It's like a
Beatles Reunion concert going on sale nationwide
through Ticketmaster and everyone is trying to get
their ticket at the same time.
All the inconvenience and wasted time that RS
put their customers through last week all in the
name of asking for a phone that is not officially
being called a "preorder."
Now, all those people that stood in line and
had to go through the hassle of wasting their
afternoon to not officially preorder an iPhone
aren't seemingly going to get one at all.
Radio Shack really screwed this one up.
At least people who lined up at AT&T to
preorder a phone weren't told that they
were doing so just to gauge a number of
requests and none of them would be
guaranteed a phone.
It's really sad that all of us that spent
an hour, two or three in the stores last
week did it all for naught.
milo
Jul 27, 02:21 PM
Those aren't next generation version of the Core 2 just MCM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Chip_Module) of the existing Core 2.
Still, they are the successors to conroe and woodcrest. As long as they are socket compatible, they're the next generation for these machines, whether you consider them a new chip or not.
Am i the only one that seems to think that WWDC is getting clogged up with TOO many things? I mean sure the more Apple products released/updated the better, but this keynote seems to be taking a lot of emphasis off of Leopard previews (according to the rumors)
It's all just rumor at this point. More than 2 computer announcments would be very unlikely, and the idea that all macs would get updated at once is ridiculous.
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more thanthree years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
The only mac that took a step back was the iMac, and it never took advantage of any of the 64 bit advantages in the first place.
I can't figure out why it wouldn't have a 2nd slot or FW800. They're both cheap enough to add. The only problem is the 2nd slot adds some height, but not that much. This unit would be less than 5" tall. And anyway, how do you backup your CD's?
A second slot is overkill for a midline model. And Apple has obviously made the decision that FW800 is a pro feature only, if it's not in the 15 inch MBP. Not to mention that it's not included in the standard intel chipsets, so adding it is extra work for Apple.
Remember that the G5 is 64 bit. While the consumer apps may not be too directly affected at first, (speed increases, but nothing else), as more memory is required, 32 bit will hit a brick wall at 4GiB, whereas 64 bit can go along happily to 2,305,843,009,200,000,000GiB.
And since the iMacs have never supported more than 2 gigs of ram, how is that a step back by switching them to Yonah?
Still, they are the successors to conroe and woodcrest. As long as they are socket compatible, they're the next generation for these machines, whether you consider them a new chip or not.
Am i the only one that seems to think that WWDC is getting clogged up with TOO many things? I mean sure the more Apple products released/updated the better, but this keynote seems to be taking a lot of emphasis off of Leopard previews (according to the rumors)
It's all just rumor at this point. More than 2 computer announcments would be very unlikely, and the idea that all macs would get updated at once is ridiculous.
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more thanthree years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
The only mac that took a step back was the iMac, and it never took advantage of any of the 64 bit advantages in the first place.
I can't figure out why it wouldn't have a 2nd slot or FW800. They're both cheap enough to add. The only problem is the 2nd slot adds some height, but not that much. This unit would be less than 5" tall. And anyway, how do you backup your CD's?
A second slot is overkill for a midline model. And Apple has obviously made the decision that FW800 is a pro feature only, if it's not in the 15 inch MBP. Not to mention that it's not included in the standard intel chipsets, so adding it is extra work for Apple.
Remember that the G5 is 64 bit. While the consumer apps may not be too directly affected at first, (speed increases, but nothing else), as more memory is required, 32 bit will hit a brick wall at 4GiB, whereas 64 bit can go along happily to 2,305,843,009,200,000,000GiB.
And since the iMacs have never supported more than 2 gigs of ram, how is that a step back by switching them to Yonah?
zin
Mar 22, 12:52 PM
A 5 gram drop in weight? And people said Apple's effort at reducing weight was bad. :rolleyes:
~Shard~
Jul 14, 03:05 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.
I've never thought much of the relevance of its placement myself - why do you say that? Care to elaborate on why it is "REALLY stupid"?
I've never thought much of the relevance of its placement myself - why do you say that? Care to elaborate on why it is "REALLY stupid"?
ten-oak-druid
Apr 25, 01:59 PM
Good. Hopefully Apple takes action to change this and set up an open process for monitoring what is tracked. The lawsuit would hopefully be dropped at that point.
This isn't good and has to stop.
This isn't good and has to stop.
bigwig
Aug 8, 01:54 AM
I wonder if Time Machine will work correctly with FileVault? Saving file alterations to an unencrypted backup defeats the purpose of using FileVault in the first place.
wtmcgee
Mar 26, 03:46 PM
Wouldn't surprise me if Lion and iOS 5 are one and the same... if that's the case, and since Apple really needs to get iOS in the 21st century, I can believe this...
So much hilarity in this comment.
So much hilarity in this comment.
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:49 AM
And if you beleive that, you are misinformed.
"Apple is planning on releasing a free iOS update in the next few weeks that performs the following:
- reduces the size of the crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower database cached on the iPhone,
- ceases backing up this cache, and
- deletes this cache entirely when Location Services is turned off."
Does not say anything about not tracking when you turn Location Services off, it just says that it will delete the log. This suggests that it did NOT track before when the option was off, otherwise Apple would also address that.
Show me where any article explicitly says that they still track when it is disabled.
"Apple is planning on releasing a free iOS update in the next few weeks that performs the following:
- reduces the size of the crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower database cached on the iPhone,
- ceases backing up this cache, and
- deletes this cache entirely when Location Services is turned off."
Does not say anything about not tracking when you turn Location Services off, it just says that it will delete the log. This suggests that it did NOT track before when the option was off, otherwise Apple would also address that.
Show me where any article explicitly says that they still track when it is disabled.
JAT
Apr 6, 03:51 PM
I guess it wouldn't hurt their future sales to announce international release dates. Several people I know have ordered or bought an iPad 2 simply because it is available (even with order backlogs) compared to Honeycomb tablets.
Here in continental Europe, all I saw so far was an announcement for the second quarter, which can slip to whenever...
Those of you who already got it - is it worth the wait?
Every Costco here has had Xooms in abundance since the first shipment. I'd say availability is good, interest...not so much.
Costco probably shouldn't have dropped Apple, wonder if they think about that.
Here in continental Europe, all I saw so far was an announcement for the second quarter, which can slip to whenever...
Those of you who already got it - is it worth the wait?
Every Costco here has had Xooms in abundance since the first shipment. I'd say availability is good, interest...not so much.
Costco probably shouldn't have dropped Apple, wonder if they think about that.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
addicted44
Mar 26, 01:15 AM
About the only thing that I find disappointing about this release is the lack of a new filesystem.
I am disappointed about this too. But I am not surprised. Apple's next filesystem was going to be ZFS. But Sun being purchased by Oracle has probably killed any chance of that happening.
The newer Linux FS'es are just not stable enough at the point (or don't do things Apple has somehow managed to bake into HFS+, like the snapshots, and things like directory Hard Links, etc). I don't see Apple moving to any version of ReiserFS or ext#, so I think we are stuck with HFS+ and extensions/improvements of it, until the ZFS situation gets clearer.
I am disappointed about this too. But I am not surprised. Apple's next filesystem was going to be ZFS. But Sun being purchased by Oracle has probably killed any chance of that happening.
The newer Linux FS'es are just not stable enough at the point (or don't do things Apple has somehow managed to bake into HFS+, like the snapshots, and things like directory Hard Links, etc). I don't see Apple moving to any version of ReiserFS or ext#, so I think we are stuck with HFS+ and extensions/improvements of it, until the ZFS situation gets clearer.
whatever
Aug 25, 03:53 PM
I've called Apple twice in the past week (on Saturday morning and this morning) and I received excellent support both times!
They answered my questions in a very timely manner.
I'm very hard on Support people because I did Technical Support for years and expect the highest level of support, which I've always received from Apple.
I've also been a .Mac subscriber since it was released and I've never had a problem with it. Yes, I'm currently getting those stupid stock SPAMS, but so is everyone else. I always check to see the address of where the e-mail is coming from, waiting for that day that my addresss is there and I've never see a .mac.com address in the "From" column. It's a great service and much better than the other e-mail services that I use.
They answered my questions in a very timely manner.
I'm very hard on Support people because I did Technical Support for years and expect the highest level of support, which I've always received from Apple.
I've also been a .Mac subscriber since it was released and I've never had a problem with it. Yes, I'm currently getting those stupid stock SPAMS, but so is everyone else. I always check to see the address of where the e-mail is coming from, waiting for that day that my addresss is there and I've never see a .mac.com address in the "From" column. It's a great service and much better than the other e-mail services that I use.
pkson
Apr 19, 11:37 PM
lol... thanks! Dunno how I missed that.
--
Silly thought for the evening: Apple should be glad that Samsung is copying their old 3GS instead of the new iPhone 4.
After all, only one company at a time should be paying style homage to old Leicas, right?
I remember Steve mentioning that at the iP4 keynote. ... (I'm not sure if you were being sarcastic, or just mentioning something that popped up in your mind.. whatever it is, I'll just take it at face value..) Yeah, I don't think Samsung can do something like that yet.. They haven't done much work with aluminum.. Plus, I doubt they'll even remotely copy anything by Apple in the future.
--
Silly thought for the evening: Apple should be glad that Samsung is copying their old 3GS instead of the new iPhone 4.
After all, only one company at a time should be paying style homage to old Leicas, right?
I remember Steve mentioning that at the iP4 keynote. ... (I'm not sure if you were being sarcastic, or just mentioning something that popped up in your mind.. whatever it is, I'll just take it at face value..) Yeah, I don't think Samsung can do something like that yet.. They haven't done much work with aluminum.. Plus, I doubt they'll even remotely copy anything by Apple in the future.
Moyank24
Mar 3, 10:28 PM
Being gay is not a sin, homosexual actions are a sin.
Eh...this is so 2000 years ago...
Luckily most of us that live in this century know better.
Eh...this is so 2000 years ago...
Luckily most of us that live in this century know better.
ChickenSwartz
Aug 27, 08:24 AM
Not true.
Recent years, updates came right before the end of the promotion.
There is a strategic reason for this. Since there have been some issues with new Macs, this promotion will motivate some buyers not to wait. In the retail world waiting means there is a bigger chance the buyer will go else where (like to Dell or something). I am sure if you look at the profit on a Nano vs. a Mac you will see that if this promotion sells 1 Mac that wouldn't be sold without the promotion makes up for 5 or so Nanos that went with Macs that would have been sold anyway. This promotion is not cutting into Apple's profits; they are making more money off this.
Recent years, updates came right before the end of the promotion.
There is a strategic reason for this. Since there have been some issues with new Macs, this promotion will motivate some buyers not to wait. In the retail world waiting means there is a bigger chance the buyer will go else where (like to Dell or something). I am sure if you look at the profit on a Nano vs. a Mac you will see that if this promotion sells 1 Mac that wouldn't be sold without the promotion makes up for 5 or so Nanos that went with Macs that would have been sold anyway. This promotion is not cutting into Apple's profits; they are making more money off this.
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 08:27 AM
Anyone else think this is getting out of hand? Two cores, great improvement. Four cores, ehh it's faster but Joe can't tell. Eight cores, now thats just stupid.
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
It's the future, you know, soon the clock speed will be irrelevant and we'll be expressing processor speed in number of cores octocore, hexacore, tricontradicore, hexacontetracore, hecticosoctocore, and such and such
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
It's the future, you know, soon the clock speed will be irrelevant and we'll be expressing processor speed in number of cores octocore, hexacore, tricontradicore, hexacontetracore, hecticosoctocore, and such and such
danz1123
Jun 11, 11:21 AM
Anyone know if I place a preorder on the 19th what the chances are I'll be able to make a reservation for the 24th?
Swift
Mar 26, 10:10 PM
This is too fast a release. The copy I got my hands on did seem to be very polished, but there's got to be a time for the devs to find unexpected bugs, and then there's the presumed surprise near the end... some killer appearance and/or feature. Where's Quicktime X as a truly functioning replacement for Quicktime 7? And then, when everything's near gold master, it needs to be looked over by the bigger software developers, to make final adjustments to major upgrades.
I think Lion will get attention, but no release until late summer. iOS 5 will be announced with the announcement of the iPhone 5. Out in July.
The Oracle Saith.
I think Lion will get attention, but no release until late summer. iOS 5 will be announced with the announcement of the iPhone 5. Out in July.
The Oracle Saith.
DakotaGuy
Aug 11, 02:05 PM
The only way this iPhone or whatever it is called will be successful is if they team up with a carrier or carriers and offer promotions on it like all the other cell phone manufactures do. I am not sure about Europe or other parts of the world, but people are used to getting a decent phone for not much money either at their initial contract or every 2 years when the contract is up. Selling an unlocked phone at some outrageous price ($200-300) is not going to cut it when I can go down and get a decent phone for around $50 with rebates from the cell provider and whoever made the phone.
Now I know there are plenty of people who would buy an Apple phone no matter the price, but if you are going to compete with companies like Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, etc. you have to work with carriers and provide great contract prices.
The whole CDMA v. GSM debate is kind of like the PowerPC v. x86 debate.lol Actually from everything I have read CDMA is actually the newer of the 2 technologies and actually has a lot of benefits over GSM. In then end however, both work fine. I think in the US you will find CDMA has a lot better coverage if you look at the coverage maps on the providers websites. With GSM you hit a lot of dead space especially in the rural areas. CDMA pretty much covers the entire US. Now in Europe I know it is different and that GSM is the standard.
Now I know there are plenty of people who would buy an Apple phone no matter the price, but if you are going to compete with companies like Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, etc. you have to work with carriers and provide great contract prices.
The whole CDMA v. GSM debate is kind of like the PowerPC v. x86 debate.lol Actually from everything I have read CDMA is actually the newer of the 2 technologies and actually has a lot of benefits over GSM. In then end however, both work fine. I think in the US you will find CDMA has a lot better coverage if you look at the coverage maps on the providers websites. With GSM you hit a lot of dead space especially in the rural areas. CDMA pretty much covers the entire US. Now in Europe I know it is different and that GSM is the standard.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 12:18 AM
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Indeed. The last presidency drew me here as well.
Indeed. The last presidency drew me here as well.
