antic
Mar 22, 01:18 PM
Why are you even giving these product the time of day. I come on here to read about apple products. If I were interested in samsung or blackberry products I'd be looking elsewhere. Your just giving them free advertising.
Morpheus_
Jul 14, 04:54 PM
Dear Steve,
The iMac might be fine, but I don't need to pay for another monitor - I have a 20" and maybe I'll update that someday. I like expandability/flexibility in my displays, as well as my hard drives and hopefully my CPU.
The Mac Mini is not powerful enough.
The Mac Pro is too expensive, too top-end.
So Steve, will there be a "Mac" (not Pro) line? (How about "Big Mac"? Oh, that's taken...)
I basically want something that is good for gaming (in OS X and hence also in Windows, if necessary), but not ludicrously expensive. Something like I would have built myself in the years past - a good but not ridiculous CPU, a good but not ridiculous graphics card, and a nice amount of memory and storage -- then just throw it in a tower.
Maybe there will be a lower-end "Mac Pro", but it just doesn't make sense following the "Pro" nomenclature.
The iMac might be fine, but I don't need to pay for another monitor - I have a 20" and maybe I'll update that someday. I like expandability/flexibility in my displays, as well as my hard drives and hopefully my CPU.
The Mac Mini is not powerful enough.
The Mac Pro is too expensive, too top-end.
So Steve, will there be a "Mac" (not Pro) line? (How about "Big Mac"? Oh, that's taken...)
I basically want something that is good for gaming (in OS X and hence also in Windows, if necessary), but not ludicrously expensive. Something like I would have built myself in the years past - a good but not ridiculous CPU, a good but not ridiculous graphics card, and a nice amount of memory and storage -- then just throw it in a tower.
Maybe there will be a lower-end "Mac Pro", but it just doesn't make sense following the "Pro" nomenclature.
-SD-
Aug 4, 03:34 PM
Sony has revealed the European GT5 Signature and Collector's Editions (http://blog.eu.playstation.com/2010/08/04/gran-turismo-5-%E2%80%93-something-special/).
The Signature Edition will retail for €179.99 :eek:, and includes:
good quotes for tattoos for
good quotes for tattoos for
good quotes for tattoos for
good quotes for tattoos for
good quotes for tattoos for
good quotes for tattoos for
good quotes for tattoos for
Lower-Back Tattoo Lower-Back
good quotes for tattoos for
good quotes for tattoos for
good quotes for tattoos for
good quotes for tattoos for
good quotes for tattoos for
The Signature Edition will retail for €179.99 :eek:, and includes:
brianus
Sep 20, 04:07 PM
So - are you inferring that Windows 2000 or Windows XP never blue screen? Because (if you are) that's a load of crap. I've seen blue screens in both OS's. Granted it's usually tied to hardware only, but it still happens. I've had an external USB drive blue screen in XP every time I turned it on, tried on 3 XP computers. Hardware fault, no doubt. Lately my HP Laptop dvd drive has been causing XP Pro to blue screen every other time I insert a dvd-r. Again - hardware fault.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
Huh? When did I say they never, ever experience any crashes whatsoever? Good god, I have never seen such a collection of mind-bendingly literal-minded people in one thread. Yikes. No idiot would ever say they never ever crash. As was painfully obvious, I was comparing Mac users' perceptions of older Windows OS's to the more recent ones and saying their impressions were inaccurate. I've been dealing with OS X kernel panics and CarbonLib issues all day, but I would never suggest things are as bad as in the OS 8 days when you'd get that little "bomb" at the system would shut down.
It's already happened, just not in as a melodramatic way as you suggest (back to 1GHz? geez). AMD took a small step back, Hz wise when they introduced dual core, though it still advanced their "+" processor ratings I suppose that few noticed the actual clock reduction. Intel took a major step back Hz wise between Netburst and Core 2. The 5000 and 5100 series Xeon CPUs demonstrate this, you can get a Dell precision 690 with 3.73GHz Netburst based chips or the same 690 with 3.0GHz Core2 based chips.
One thing I've noticed is that store ads no longer quote GHz like they used to, but rather processor model numbers. Makes sense: most people will not bother to investigate further, but if they did see the GHz numbers of Pentiums on the same sale ad as those of Core 2's, they might not be so hot on the latter. And please, everyone for the love of god, do not treat me to 5 replies in which you remonstrate me for not getting that the Core 2's are actually faster - I GET IT.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
Huh? When did I say they never, ever experience any crashes whatsoever? Good god, I have never seen such a collection of mind-bendingly literal-minded people in one thread. Yikes. No idiot would ever say they never ever crash. As was painfully obvious, I was comparing Mac users' perceptions of older Windows OS's to the more recent ones and saying their impressions were inaccurate. I've been dealing with OS X kernel panics and CarbonLib issues all day, but I would never suggest things are as bad as in the OS 8 days when you'd get that little "bomb" at the system would shut down.
It's already happened, just not in as a melodramatic way as you suggest (back to 1GHz? geez). AMD took a small step back, Hz wise when they introduced dual core, though it still advanced their "+" processor ratings I suppose that few noticed the actual clock reduction. Intel took a major step back Hz wise between Netburst and Core 2. The 5000 and 5100 series Xeon CPUs demonstrate this, you can get a Dell precision 690 with 3.73GHz Netburst based chips or the same 690 with 3.0GHz Core2 based chips.
One thing I've noticed is that store ads no longer quote GHz like they used to, but rather processor model numbers. Makes sense: most people will not bother to investigate further, but if they did see the GHz numbers of Pentiums on the same sale ad as those of Core 2's, they might not be so hot on the latter. And please, everyone for the love of god, do not treat me to 5 replies in which you remonstrate me for not getting that the Core 2's are actually faster - I GET IT.
Half Glass
Sep 14, 12:49 PM
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Agreed.
Don't forget the new MacPros where XP runs very well (minus the MB chipset/SATA issue where there is a workaround.) It recognizes all four cores and seems very stable.
--HG
Agreed.
Don't forget the new MacPros where XP runs very well (minus the MB chipset/SATA issue where there is a workaround.) It recognizes all four cores and seems very stable.
--HG
Dan==
Jul 31, 09:35 AM
I think that the bigger issue with Dan=='s design (full credit and kudos for the idea!) is that the Mac Mini is so small that it only uses laptop components. If you want to have a full-size optical drive or a full-size hard drive, you need to use a larger form factor. This is part of the reason for the size of my design.
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
Machead III
Sep 19, 08:05 AM
Engadget have the situation nailed. (http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/19/so-where-the-hell-are-our-core-2-duo-macbooks/)
azentropy
Apr 5, 05:31 PM
Not again..
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
Probably not at NAB, but many of the lines are due or overdue and they have made plenty of releases around NAB before (pretty much every year they have released something).
4/2010 - Macbook Pro
4/2008 - iMacs
4/2007 - Mac Pros
4/2006 - Macbook Pro
4/2005 - Power Macs
4/2004 - iBooks/iMacs
4/2003 - iBooks
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
Probably not at NAB, but many of the lines are due or overdue and they have made plenty of releases around NAB before (pretty much every year they have released something).
4/2010 - Macbook Pro
4/2008 - iMacs
4/2007 - Mac Pros
4/2006 - Macbook Pro
4/2005 - Power Macs
4/2004 - iBooks/iMacs
4/2003 - iBooks
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.
mdntcallr
Sep 19, 10:00 AM
Well, I've been on MacRumors since last week and I'm already tired of posts telling me what I really need. I don't recall seeing posts saying Yonah was crap. Most people just want to feel like they are making a good investment on an expensive piece of equipment that may be around for 3-4+ years. I would like a laptop with a 64-bit processor. Period. I don't care what you think I need. The problem with posts like this are that they waste my time, and the time of other users who are looking for information on the release of the new MBP models.
I agree with your sentiments. While it is great to get steady advancements in the amount of say, 2x year refreshes. The performance difference between merom and yonah is an incremental upgrade. not a major big deal.
you should be happy with the laptop you have. The chip has the power you need for now and the next several years.
Personally for me though, I am still on my PB 1.25 alum, so i am very interested in good progress for the new MBP's, such as... larger hard drives 160 gb as BTO option, better ram pricing, better graphics cards, and options for killer graphics card, and... finally Blu-Ray drives.
that and a Airplane/Auto Magsafe power adapter. dont you think that would be nice. it's been to long without it! cmon apple. build it!
I agree with your sentiments. While it is great to get steady advancements in the amount of say, 2x year refreshes. The performance difference between merom and yonah is an incremental upgrade. not a major big deal.
you should be happy with the laptop you have. The chip has the power you need for now and the next several years.
Personally for me though, I am still on my PB 1.25 alum, so i am very interested in good progress for the new MBP's, such as... larger hard drives 160 gb as BTO option, better ram pricing, better graphics cards, and options for killer graphics card, and... finally Blu-Ray drives.
that and a Airplane/Auto Magsafe power adapter. dont you think that would be nice. it's been to long without it! cmon apple. build it!
afrowq
Apr 9, 08:01 PM
Of course not.
Glad you realize it was wrong to put those words in my mouth "lots of professionals I know".
Glad you realize it was wrong to put those words in my mouth "lots of professionals I know".
63dot
Apr 25, 02:21 PM
Prove it.
It may be hard to prove and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, but the mere appearance of the technology allowing the possibility to be tracked is enough for the feds to get something out of Apple.
It may be hard to prove and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, but the mere appearance of the technology allowing the possibility to be tracked is enough for the feds to get something out of Apple.
fatfish
Aug 7, 09:06 PM
When I first saw this feature I thought great. I do regular back ups, but some of my AW docs keep corrupting (probably something to do with keep duplicating the same old document and modifying rather than starting anew). Time Machine will help me no end. I was also thrilled that windows had nothing like this........ until I read through these posts.
Then it seemed very similar to what was coming in Vista and I felt a bit dissapointed that Apple had made such a point about M$ copying them, but seemed to do the same themselves with Time Machine.
However on closer examination this is not the case and my confidence in Apple's innovative skills is restored.
Firstly, there has always been back up and restore apps, so if you want to take this copying thing to a ridiculous level, of course you can do. Copying in my book is when an app does and looks the same (just like the screenshots in the presentation, safari RSS/IE7 RSS, ical/M$ calender etc). It appears to me Time Machine does much more than anything before it and has it's own unique UI to boot.
Secondly, I would imagine work on Time machine started long before a beta of Vista was released, even if the two utilities were more or less identical it would be coincidence not copying.
Thirdly, it seems quite clear that Vista's restore (whatever it's called) will not do what Time machine will do. Ultimately you may well be able to restore any deleted or modified file in Vista, but it doesn't appear to occur with the same ease or functionality.
If I create a file, modify it and move it several times, rename it, convert it, modify it some more, move it several times and finally delete it, I rather suspect it would be an absolute nightmare to recover in Vista, whereas it seems that Time Machine would have little problem.
I don't see how it is possible in Vista to perform the recovery with either the same simplicity or pizzaz as Time Machine. Perhaps if M$ had not abandoned their intended file system for Vista it might have been possible, but as it is I doubt it.
Finally it does not appear that Vista has the option to restore within a database application (i.e. iphoto, mail, address book), no doubt if you understand how a particular database works, the possibility exists to restore a particular photo, but let's not pretend it will be easy or anywhere near the experience of time machine.
And finally, finally, although I agree the UI may appear a little childish, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes it so easy to use.
Then it seemed very similar to what was coming in Vista and I felt a bit dissapointed that Apple had made such a point about M$ copying them, but seemed to do the same themselves with Time Machine.
However on closer examination this is not the case and my confidence in Apple's innovative skills is restored.
Firstly, there has always been back up and restore apps, so if you want to take this copying thing to a ridiculous level, of course you can do. Copying in my book is when an app does and looks the same (just like the screenshots in the presentation, safari RSS/IE7 RSS, ical/M$ calender etc). It appears to me Time Machine does much more than anything before it and has it's own unique UI to boot.
Secondly, I would imagine work on Time machine started long before a beta of Vista was released, even if the two utilities were more or less identical it would be coincidence not copying.
Thirdly, it seems quite clear that Vista's restore (whatever it's called) will not do what Time machine will do. Ultimately you may well be able to restore any deleted or modified file in Vista, but it doesn't appear to occur with the same ease or functionality.
If I create a file, modify it and move it several times, rename it, convert it, modify it some more, move it several times and finally delete it, I rather suspect it would be an absolute nightmare to recover in Vista, whereas it seems that Time Machine would have little problem.
I don't see how it is possible in Vista to perform the recovery with either the same simplicity or pizzaz as Time Machine. Perhaps if M$ had not abandoned their intended file system for Vista it might have been possible, but as it is I doubt it.
Finally it does not appear that Vista has the option to restore within a database application (i.e. iphoto, mail, address book), no doubt if you understand how a particular database works, the possibility exists to restore a particular photo, but let's not pretend it will be easy or anywhere near the experience of time machine.
And finally, finally, although I agree the UI may appear a little childish, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes it so easy to use.
guzhogi
Jul 15, 10:03 AM
I also wish Apple used standard ATX power supplies. That way, if you need a new power suply, you can get one from your local electronics store. I don't know if Apple already uses them, but I have a beige desktop G3 and the power supply on it is getting old and I have a bunch of extra stuff in it and the power supply can't handle it all. I've been told I can get one from a b&w G3, but going to a best buy or where ever and getting a new one I think would be a lot easier.
CFreymarc
Apr 6, 03:33 PM
I'd rather buy like a tablet running a modified version of Windows 7 or something similar. Not an Android tablet. Unfortunately I don't think I've seen anything like that released :(
What you are talking about are these "tablet netbooks" running on the Intel Atom. You can swing the display so it closes to hide the keyboard while still showing the screen. Models like ASUS Eee PC T101MT-EU17-B and Lenovo Ideapad Tablet are what you are talking about.
IMO these "tablet netbooks" are the biggest sleeper product out there. Cheaper than you typical iPad, runs Windows apps and are quite compatible. I have one myself alongside with my iPad for development and IT issues since this is what most whom I work with use. I'm impressed by both.
What you are talking about are these "tablet netbooks" running on the Intel Atom. You can swing the display so it closes to hide the keyboard while still showing the screen. Models like ASUS Eee PC T101MT-EU17-B and Lenovo Ideapad Tablet are what you are talking about.
IMO these "tablet netbooks" are the biggest sleeper product out there. Cheaper than you typical iPad, runs Windows apps and are quite compatible. I have one myself alongside with my iPad for development and IT issues since this is what most whom I work with use. I'm impressed by both.
simie
Aug 17, 05:22 AM
I think that these tests are poor regardless of the results. Testing is all based on evidence and I see none, just what they say are the results.
When you run a test you normally document the process for the test conditions. You don't just say Photoshop CS2 - MP aware actions, but which ones - why didn't they use the Photoshop test.
"For FCP 5, we rendered a 20 second HD clip we had imported and dropped into a sequence."
Does this mean they imported a 20 second clip into a sequence and had to render the clip before it would play with the rest of the sequence.
They basically used the render tools in the sequence menu. Why measure something like that.
good quotes for tattoos for
Anyone know a good tattoo
quotes for tattoos for girls.
When you run a test you normally document the process for the test conditions. You don't just say Photoshop CS2 - MP aware actions, but which ones - why didn't they use the Photoshop test.
"For FCP 5, we rendered a 20 second HD clip we had imported and dropped into a sequence."
Does this mean they imported a 20 second clip into a sequence and had to render the clip before it would play with the rest of the sequence.
They basically used the render tools in the sequence menu. Why measure something like that.
bendejo
Jul 27, 10:57 AM
Since the WWDC is focused on developers, wouldn't it make the most sense for Apple to do all of the chip transition announcements plus the Leopard preview at WWDC and wait until MW SanFran or hold a special event for the video iPod/iTunes movie announcements? After all, developers want to know what to expect in the forthcoming OS and what the processing abilities for the full range of hardware will be so they can devise applications to fully exploit the specs on the OS and the various hardware configs. iPod and iTunes announcements may be neat, but they would seem to be less relevant to the WWDC audience.
jclardy
Mar 26, 11:14 AM
This. Until this happens displays won't advance any further for actual computers (non-tablet) because there are so many form factors.
Apple can spend the time to make graphics for each flavor of iPhone or iPad because there aren't that many to deal with. It becomes a lot more difficult to do this across a large range of products. Besides, computers are getting to the point where they are too powerful for most users (hence the popularity of the iPad). A retina display option would give people more incentive to upgrade their desktops, laptops, etc. I think?
As a designer, I'd love a retina 27" ACD. 300dpi right on my screen, almost perfect. Now if we could just get the color/brightness a little more accurate...
I really don't see the point of a display anywhere near 300DPI for a desktop or laptop. My MBP 15" with the 1680x1050 display has a DPI of 128, and with this I can only see the pixels of the fonts if my face is 6" away from the screen, which is above the keyboard. If you have a monitor on a desk it is going to be at least a foot away, but probably more like 1.5-2 feet.
Some of Apples displays are still around 90-100 DPI which I could see upgrading from those to around 150 or so. The main reason they aren't doing it right now is because the menu bar and all other interface elements would be tiny. On my MBP they are already pretty small along with all the default fonts and that is only at 128DPI.
So some kind of resolution independence is necessary, I am hoping for a general fix and not just a retina display fix (2x) because there will be no in between. With a general fix they could implement a slider that allows you to resize everything to fit any resolution.
But back on topic, I am pretty surprised if this is true. I guess they are pushing for a summer release, but I guess they could be pretty much feature complete by now and just need to work out bugs.
Apple can spend the time to make graphics for each flavor of iPhone or iPad because there aren't that many to deal with. It becomes a lot more difficult to do this across a large range of products. Besides, computers are getting to the point where they are too powerful for most users (hence the popularity of the iPad). A retina display option would give people more incentive to upgrade their desktops, laptops, etc. I think?
As a designer, I'd love a retina 27" ACD. 300dpi right on my screen, almost perfect. Now if we could just get the color/brightness a little more accurate...
I really don't see the point of a display anywhere near 300DPI for a desktop or laptop. My MBP 15" with the 1680x1050 display has a DPI of 128, and with this I can only see the pixels of the fonts if my face is 6" away from the screen, which is above the keyboard. If you have a monitor on a desk it is going to be at least a foot away, but probably more like 1.5-2 feet.
Some of Apples displays are still around 90-100 DPI which I could see upgrading from those to around 150 or so. The main reason they aren't doing it right now is because the menu bar and all other interface elements would be tiny. On my MBP they are already pretty small along with all the default fonts and that is only at 128DPI.
So some kind of resolution independence is necessary, I am hoping for a general fix and not just a retina display fix (2x) because there will be no in between. With a general fix they could implement a slider that allows you to resize everything to fit any resolution.
But back on topic, I am pretty surprised if this is true. I guess they are pushing for a summer release, but I guess they could be pretty much feature complete by now and just need to work out bugs.
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 07:47 AM
However the Galaxy devices are so close to Apple's products in appearance and design, it's very hard to tell them apart. THAT is the problem.
Don't let a few cherry picked pictures trick you, most Galaxy models don't look at all like an iPhone :
http://www.rogers.com/cms/images/en/Wireless/CellPhoneDetail/Banners/banner01_i896blkr.png
This one can go either way. Of course the Apple biased media are cherry picking their pictures. I'd doubt you'd have a hard time telling both devices apart in the real world with both in front of you.
Especially consdiring the Samsung doesn't use the icon grid on its homescreen at all, contrary to what the pictures are trying to show.
Don't let a few cherry picked pictures trick you, most Galaxy models don't look at all like an iPhone :
http://www.rogers.com/cms/images/en/Wireless/CellPhoneDetail/Banners/banner01_i896blkr.png
This one can go either way. Of course the Apple biased media are cherry picking their pictures. I'd doubt you'd have a hard time telling both devices apart in the real world with both in front of you.
Especially consdiring the Samsung doesn't use the icon grid on its homescreen at all, contrary to what the pictures are trying to show.
zacman
Apr 6, 04:11 PM
That didn't actually happen.
Yeah, like the "bogus numbers" that indicated that back in Q2(?)/2010 Android outsold iOS in the US. Steve is it you? :D
Yeah, like the "bogus numbers" that indicated that back in Q2(?)/2010 Android outsold iOS in the US. Steve is it you? :D
osx11
Mar 22, 12:58 PM
.2 mm thinner?
let the war begin.
let the war begin.
rezenclowd3
Dec 9, 12:03 PM
This is hilarious:
GT5 physics are completely realistic (http://i.autoblog.com/2010/12/09/video-gt5-physics-are-completely-realistic/)
GT5 physics are completely realistic (http://i.autoblog.com/2010/12/09/video-gt5-physics-are-completely-realistic/)
FleurDuMal
Sep 12, 11:28 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
digitalbiker
Aug 25, 07:51 PM
I'm not trying to be a wise a@@, but when did Apple make a Pismo. I do remember them, but not being made by Apple. I am sorry, I don't recall the manufactuer for them at this time.:confused:
Apple always made the Pismo. I don't know the exact years but it was a black G3 PowerBook.
Apple always made the Pismo. I don't know the exact years but it was a black G3 PowerBook.
No comments:
Post a Comment