curmi
Nov 24, 04:09 AM
Huge saving on airport express. New Airport Ultra Express (802.11n) at Macworld!
Confirmed! :)
Confirmed! :)
timerollson
Apr 10, 02:09 PM
Needed some spring inspiration and contact lens solution....
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5150/5607236476_4b01b5ba70.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5150/5607236476_4b01b5ba70.jpg
twoodcc
May 10, 06:04 PM
Seing your "adventures", no way I would ever try to do anything on a custom rig...
well i wouldn't say that. it wouldn't be as big of a deal if i was at the machine everyday, then a quick change of a few settings and it's back up. but being away, this is not fun.
well i wouldn't say that. it wouldn't be as big of a deal if i was at the machine everyday, then a quick change of a few settings and it's back up. but being away, this is not fun.
chukronos
Nov 16, 04:14 PM
I will never buy an AMD computer again, especially in a laptop. AMDs are very hot processors and they require big fans(I learn that from my bro's Compaq), which make them thick and heavy.
It would be best for me if we could of kept PowerPC, developed a lower powerconsuming but stil powerful G5, or Xenon(chip in XBOX 360). But intel is still got...PPC for LIFE
Free Animated Wallpapers for
download animated wallpaper
free animated wallpapers for
mobile phone wallpapers,
1000 Animated wallpaper for
cellular phone wallpaper.
Free Mobile Phone Wallpapers,
Free Cell Phone Wallpaper
animated wallpapers mobile
wallpapers for mobile
Replace your Wallpaper with a.
nokia animated wallpapers for
It would be best for me if we could of kept PowerPC, developed a lower powerconsuming but stil powerful G5, or Xenon(chip in XBOX 360). But intel is still got...PPC for LIFE
ifjake
Oct 17, 11:38 AM
no but the risk is marginal that a disk dies in 10 years.
of course you shouldn't play frisbee with them ;)
I was always under the impression that if you wanted to save something for that long your best bet would be to use some kind of tape archival system.
Anyone who owns a video camera and uses it will have way more then 30 to 50 GB of data. Mini DV camera make 12Gb of data per hour. If you own a DSLR and shoot in RAW format the image files are on order of 10MB each. My music colection is 50GB.
This is the kind of user I'm interested in hearing the opinion of, the professional creative user. What do people do now that HD-DVDs and Blu-ray discs would so graciously replace?
I've always thought external hard drives would work fine, especially now that you can make SATA connections externally. You work from the external drive, when you're done you take it with you, no need to wait to burn. As far as backing up goes, that's just going to take a long time no matter which way you do it (unless it's like that Time Machine stuff, which is always going on, and uses a hard drive), and for me, I'd rather back up a whole drive at a time, which would require more space than a disc would provide.
of course you shouldn't play frisbee with them ;)
I was always under the impression that if you wanted to save something for that long your best bet would be to use some kind of tape archival system.
Anyone who owns a video camera and uses it will have way more then 30 to 50 GB of data. Mini DV camera make 12Gb of data per hour. If you own a DSLR and shoot in RAW format the image files are on order of 10MB each. My music colection is 50GB.
This is the kind of user I'm interested in hearing the opinion of, the professional creative user. What do people do now that HD-DVDs and Blu-ray discs would so graciously replace?
I've always thought external hard drives would work fine, especially now that you can make SATA connections externally. You work from the external drive, when you're done you take it with you, no need to wait to burn. As far as backing up goes, that's just going to take a long time no matter which way you do it (unless it's like that Time Machine stuff, which is always going on, and uses a hard drive), and for me, I'd rather back up a whole drive at a time, which would require more space than a disc would provide.
arkitect
Apr 18, 12:42 PM
Left handed people have always been persecuted and represent a significantly larger portion of society than homosexuals, plus they tend to do well in society regardless of the persecution.
So you're cool with left-handers but not left-footers (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=left%20footer)?
:confused:
So you're cool with left-handers but not left-footers (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=left%20footer)?
:confused:
zephxiii
Jan 2, 10:35 AM
I for one will be staying with AT&T if and when Verizon gets the iPhone. I'll also be laughing while Verizon suffers the same fate that AT&T did as millions of users hit their network at once. I don't care how "strong" Verizon's network is, I don't think they're ready for the heavy hit they're going to take.
The situation is completely different for VZW than it was for ATT.
Firstly AT&T was the only network provider for the iPhone, this won't be the case for VZW. Secondly AT&T was at the very initial stages of 3G deployment with only a single channel deployed on 1900mhz compared to VZW using their entire spectrum for one network set. AT&T at the time was only using (and still is for the most part) a fraction of their spectrum for 3G.
Though this is Apple's first time messing with a CDMA radio, I wonder how bad they will screw it up? lol.
The situation is completely different for VZW than it was for ATT.
Firstly AT&T was the only network provider for the iPhone, this won't be the case for VZW. Secondly AT&T was at the very initial stages of 3G deployment with only a single channel deployed on 1900mhz compared to VZW using their entire spectrum for one network set. AT&T at the time was only using (and still is for the most part) a fraction of their spectrum for 3G.
Though this is Apple's first time messing with a CDMA radio, I wonder how bad they will screw it up? lol.
grmatt
Apr 5, 03:11 PM
I knew there'd be a lot of "wuts" but this makes sense. If you don't like it, don't download it. I'm sure plenty of people will and it only adds value to their advertisers.
Honestly though, some of the ads are really well done. Maybe I just appreciate them more than some others being that I am kind of in the industry.
Honestly though, some of the ads are really well done. Maybe I just appreciate them more than some others being that I am kind of in the industry.
JPyre
Apr 15, 12:29 PM
I call BS on this, Johnnie Ive wouldn't make a non rounded design like that, the lines are too harsh.
rnelan7
Apr 10, 02:39 PM
Samsung PN50C8000 x3.
Continuing to build my ultimate theater room - just need to paint the in wall speakers that were installed.
Just curious, why three televisions instead of just one big projector?
Continuing to build my ultimate theater room - just need to paint the in wall speakers that were installed.
Just curious, why three televisions instead of just one big projector?
wtfk
Oct 2, 08:30 PM
Jobs apparently warned that while Apple was not a litigious company, other tech firms might not take kindly to whatever DVD Jon might be up to.
LMFAO. In case there is any doubt--Apple is a litigious company.
LMFAO. In case there is any doubt--Apple is a litigious company.
MacRumors
Oct 6, 10:15 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/10/06/verizon-targets-atandts-network-with-theres-a-map-for-that-campaign/)
TechFlash noted (http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2009/10/verizon_goes_right_after_att_with_new_ad_campaign.html) yesterday that Verizon is rolling out a new advertising campaign targeting AT&T's network by focusing on the geographic coverage of the competing companies' networks. The campaign also employs a twist on Apple's "There's an app for that" iPhone slogan with its own tagline of "There's a map for that."The fine print also is worth checking out. It reads: "Browse the Web and download music and apps, at 3G speed, in five times more places than the nation's number two wireless carrier. Before you pick a phone, pick a network."A television commercial featuring the new campaign also debuted yesterday.
Article Link: Verizon Targets AT&T's Network With 'There's a Map For That' Campaign (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/10/06/verizon-targets-atandts-network-with-theres-a-map-for-that-campaign/)
TechFlash noted (http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2009/10/verizon_goes_right_after_att_with_new_ad_campaign.html) yesterday that Verizon is rolling out a new advertising campaign targeting AT&T's network by focusing on the geographic coverage of the competing companies' networks. The campaign also employs a twist on Apple's "There's an app for that" iPhone slogan with its own tagline of "There's a map for that."The fine print also is worth checking out. It reads: "Browse the Web and download music and apps, at 3G speed, in five times more places than the nation's number two wireless carrier. Before you pick a phone, pick a network."A television commercial featuring the new campaign also debuted yesterday.
Article Link: Verizon Targets AT&T's Network With 'There's a Map For That' Campaign (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/10/06/verizon-targets-atandts-network-with-theres-a-map-for-that-campaign/)
twoodcc
May 14, 06:09 AM
oh thats not very hot! might be the PSU struggling maybe?
i'm really not sure. it's a 1200 watt PSU, so it should be good
i'm really not sure. it's a 1200 watt PSU, so it should be good
redAPPLE
Sep 12, 08:01 AM
I was going to receive a (female) friend tonight, but she postponed for tomorrow...so this means I will have instead a big "yawning" session tonight at Apple news/rumor sites, with few things applicable to people outside of the US...move along, citizens... :(
why would a female friend postpone?
why would a female friend postpone?
twoodcc
Apr 27, 09:22 PM
:p
Cool, glad you had them.
I know what you mean about OC'ing waiting to see if it will stay up or crash each time you change something. I was looking at CPUZ on my i7 and I guess I did get it to stay at 3.2Ghz but with 3 gpu's on it I'm not going to try bigadv on it.
I still have 4 boards not in cases - in the basement - getin' kind of dusty too :D but they were cheap and don't need any special cooling, they do fine like that. However I may retire them before too long as I decided to go ahead and get an i7 980x to do some bigadv units on. :rolleyes: I think it should do better than my Mac Pro. I hope. The board has 2 x16 slots for gpu's - when I can afford a pair of GTX 480's :p
thanks. so i have a total of 9 GPUs, and i've got 7 of them running now. maybe one day i'll have them all up and running
well, once you get the OC setting right, then you don't really have to worry about it. like the 2 i7s that i have running now, are both OCed. (3.5 and 3.7)
now i thought about getting an i7 980x, but wasn't ready to spend that kind of money. i think i might just buy a pre-made system if i ever get one (feel more comfortable that way). but that would be sweet if you got one. heck, you know there's a motherboard out there that can hold 2 x i7 980x for $600 i think. now that would be awesome - but just 2 processors and motherboard would cost over $2600
Cool, glad you had them.
I know what you mean about OC'ing waiting to see if it will stay up or crash each time you change something. I was looking at CPUZ on my i7 and I guess I did get it to stay at 3.2Ghz but with 3 gpu's on it I'm not going to try bigadv on it.
I still have 4 boards not in cases - in the basement - getin' kind of dusty too :D but they were cheap and don't need any special cooling, they do fine like that. However I may retire them before too long as I decided to go ahead and get an i7 980x to do some bigadv units on. :rolleyes: I think it should do better than my Mac Pro. I hope. The board has 2 x16 slots for gpu's - when I can afford a pair of GTX 480's :p
thanks. so i have a total of 9 GPUs, and i've got 7 of them running now. maybe one day i'll have them all up and running
well, once you get the OC setting right, then you don't really have to worry about it. like the 2 i7s that i have running now, are both OCed. (3.5 and 3.7)
now i thought about getting an i7 980x, but wasn't ready to spend that kind of money. i think i might just buy a pre-made system if i ever get one (feel more comfortable that way). but that would be sweet if you got one. heck, you know there's a motherboard out there that can hold 2 x i7 980x for $600 i think. now that would be awesome - but just 2 processors and motherboard would cost over $2600
CalBoy
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
Animated Campfire Wallpaper
wallpaper animated phone
animated wallpapers. animated
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
AmbitiousLemon
Nov 16, 02:15 PM
Any rumor published by DT deserves, at most, that special commemorative page with totally fake rumors that MR created some time ago...********!
It is posted on page one because it is of particular interest to the community and was already spawning multiple threads here. Not all page 1 rumors as there due to legitimacy.
So lets stop beating the dead horse of page 1 vs page 2 that we already requested no comments on.
It is posted on page one because it is of particular interest to the community and was already spawning multiple threads here. Not all page 1 rumors as there due to legitimacy.
So lets stop beating the dead horse of page 1 vs page 2 that we already requested no comments on.
macintel4me
Oct 28, 03:34 PM
You have no idea what "free" means, do you? Free software has absolutely nothing to do with the money you pay to obtain it. Commercial software that you would pay thousands of dollars for can be a perfectly good example of "free" software.
huh??
huh??
dethmaShine
Apr 17, 06:21 PM
uh ok... "built in pdf reader... windows marketplace - providing users easy access to Windows applications." - never seen that in an operating system before...
True but that's a very very very early build; not even a win8 build; looks like Windows 7 SP.
I think we should wait for a while to see what win8 brings to us.
As of now, it's got the pathetic ribbon UI. :rolleyes:
True but that's a very very very early build; not even a win8 build; looks like Windows 7 SP.
I think we should wait for a while to see what win8 brings to us.
As of now, it's got the pathetic ribbon UI. :rolleyes:
SRSound
Oct 3, 11:11 PM
Two things I would love:
1: Smartphone/mini computer (blackberry style or even as advanced as the Sony UX180P (http://www.mobiletechreview.com/sony_ux180/Sony-Vaio-UX180P.htm)) that operates on a lite version of OS X.
2: Octo-core Mac Pros BEFORE this happens! Like, you know, late october, early novemberish...
I'm a dreamer :)
1: Smartphone/mini computer (blackberry style or even as advanced as the Sony UX180P (http://www.mobiletechreview.com/sony_ux180/Sony-Vaio-UX180P.htm)) that operates on a lite version of OS X.
2: Octo-core Mac Pros BEFORE this happens! Like, you know, late october, early novemberish...
I'm a dreamer :)
neilmacd
Apr 25, 12:45 PM
First image is a good mockup but is most probably a fake.
The gap between the screen in the top right hand corner is wider than the gap in the middle and bottom. Or is it just my eyes?
The gap between the screen in the top right hand corner is wider than the gap in the middle and bottom. Or is it just my eyes?
goober1223
Apr 6, 09:38 AM
And what was the motivation of the third party app makers? To make a fast buck out of serving ads to people more interested in the ad than the product. That is bad for advertisers and probably the real reason the app was rejected.
Who know whether clicks inside this app count as regular impressions? Unlike any third party, Apple is in a position to refund any advertisers for clicks on these ads. If they are doing that then I don't see anything wrong with them releasing this niche product.
I see your point, but I think that it's quite uncharitable to question the motives of individuals but let apple have a pass. They are in the position to do whatever they want, and there's no way that they WOULD reimburse those whose apps were rejected for the same function, but my point is that they shouldn't have rejected those apps at all. It's hypocritical of them to reject an app for a reason, and then when they get desperate for their iAd program to catch on more with advertisers (which apparently aren't as excited for the platform as Apple had hoped) they change their mind and create their own app.
And besides, an ad impression is an ad impression. The only iAds that I click on are accidental. If people want to download an app to see what an iAd looks like, they are also getting the best of what the advertisers had hoped for: the chance to make somebody want to use their product. They pay for the option of changing somebody's mind, not to actually do it. They pay to put the advertisement in partial view. Not to actually sell products directly.
It doesn't matter who makes the app, if they are putting the ads in front of people, they deserve the money. That goes for Apple or any of the several individuals that have already created such apps.
Who know whether clicks inside this app count as regular impressions? Unlike any third party, Apple is in a position to refund any advertisers for clicks on these ads. If they are doing that then I don't see anything wrong with them releasing this niche product.
I see your point, but I think that it's quite uncharitable to question the motives of individuals but let apple have a pass. They are in the position to do whatever they want, and there's no way that they WOULD reimburse those whose apps were rejected for the same function, but my point is that they shouldn't have rejected those apps at all. It's hypocritical of them to reject an app for a reason, and then when they get desperate for their iAd program to catch on more with advertisers (which apparently aren't as excited for the platform as Apple had hoped) they change their mind and create their own app.
And besides, an ad impression is an ad impression. The only iAds that I click on are accidental. If people want to download an app to see what an iAd looks like, they are also getting the best of what the advertisers had hoped for: the chance to make somebody want to use their product. They pay for the option of changing somebody's mind, not to actually do it. They pay to put the advertisement in partial view. Not to actually sell products directly.
It doesn't matter who makes the app, if they are putting the ads in front of people, they deserve the money. That goes for Apple or any of the several individuals that have already created such apps.
mdntcallr
Oct 18, 03:24 PM
Please, this conversation is so 2005...
Optware also plans to release a holographic disk product for streaming video that's targeted at the film and broadcast industries, and a consumer disk product that is about the size of a credit card with 30GB of capacity.
hah, so funny, but then again, it has taken alot of time to make blu-ray hope this could come faster.
but.... it all depends on pricing. will holographic storage be cheaper? more reliable.
if so... sign me up. alot of us just want reliable storage.
but... with turner movies using it. sounds like a professional tier product, not consumer yet
Optware also plans to release a holographic disk product for streaming video that's targeted at the film and broadcast industries, and a consumer disk product that is about the size of a credit card with 30GB of capacity.
hah, so funny, but then again, it has taken alot of time to make blu-ray hope this could come faster.
but.... it all depends on pricing. will holographic storage be cheaper? more reliable.
if so... sign me up. alot of us just want reliable storage.
but... with turner movies using it. sounds like a professional tier product, not consumer yet
baryon
Apr 15, 02:14 PM
Agreed.
No, guys, this is simply because of the effect of perspective. Parallel lines draw towards a single point at infinity, so the two parallel top and bottom edges of the phone are not parallel on the photo, this is normal!
However, that doesn't mean the image isn't fake. Any 3D program will produce a correct rendering of perspective, that isn't the problem.
Why do these images always come in such low quality? I imagine someone with enough interest in new technology, having photographed a claimed future iPhone back, owns a decent camera that doesn't produce images of such bad quality! It's easy to fake an image if the quality is deliberately made worse, preventing us from seeing important details...
I don't know whether this is fake or not, I can't tell just by the photos, but it could easily be fake. Apple got away with not putting a plastic "antenna patch" on the WiFi-only iPad, but they're not doing that for the 3G iPad.
No, guys, this is simply because of the effect of perspective. Parallel lines draw towards a single point at infinity, so the two parallel top and bottom edges of the phone are not parallel on the photo, this is normal!
However, that doesn't mean the image isn't fake. Any 3D program will produce a correct rendering of perspective, that isn't the problem.
Why do these images always come in such low quality? I imagine someone with enough interest in new technology, having photographed a claimed future iPhone back, owns a decent camera that doesn't produce images of such bad quality! It's easy to fake an image if the quality is deliberately made worse, preventing us from seeing important details...
I don't know whether this is fake or not, I can't tell just by the photos, but it could easily be fake. Apple got away with not putting a plastic "antenna patch" on the WiFi-only iPad, but they're not doing that for the 3G iPad.
No comments:
Post a Comment