Search results

That's amazing! I get 18.75 iPods and I'm one of the tallest people I know. :D

Uhuh, she was mocking the insanely elitist mac user. my bet is that she does not even own a mac. She's a real comedian.

Thank you all for the replies so far, I have no doubt you will be able to see the changes pretty soon. I have two remarks right now though: 1) You are all right about the inconsistency, it might have been what was bugging me (but in that strange way, when you can't really see it because...

Heh, don't shoot the pianist. I only made the site, I have nothing to do with how the business is run.

[FYI, this is posted at MacNN as well. I'm aware of this, I'm not trying to spam though, just trying to combine the knowledge of more people]. I've redesigned this site I've worked on from the ground up, and I think the result is much better than before. The only page I'm not too fond of is...

NEVER make this claim. New techniques, applications and computing needs are always just around the corner. It's always attractive to make this claim, but I remember people who were saying this more than ten years ago. And just try to get your work done on a ten year old computer. I'm thoroughly...

As much as I appreciate your effort, I really hope this is nowhere near how panther will look. I am one of those who have their sphincter tighten at the mere mention of brushed metal.

I can't wait to read the first user reports. I imagine it won't have been easy to make an app like this transition into a whole new world. I hope it doesn't have too many problems. Seems like some people around the web are intimating that this is in fact a 1.0 release (as in, first 0S X...

That must be you. How do you do this? Just select the song (or group of songs) you want to update the tags from and press cmd-i. This'll take you to the info pane, where you'll need the 'info' tab. Just type away and press ok. This info DOES show in other apps. Just to be sure, however...

I don't think so. They kind of left this behind with the introduction of the G3. Before the G3 (which was in fact a 75xx), you did have the PPC 6xxx and so on, named as such. This was rather confusing though, as people hardly knew what processor #6800 did more/less than some other processor...

Wouldn't it be logical for Apple to capitalise on the "64-bitness" of the 970? I think it's more likely to see either a name with 64 in it (like G64, or i64, or something like that), or they'll come up with a proper name for the thing (viz. Pentium, Itanium, Hammer, ...). So, any guesses as to...

This is actually the first time this Piles concept I've heard rumored makes any sense. Nice description.

What, however, if you don't like Amazon, or whatever company Apple might start pimping as of 10.3? I don't want to complain just yet (cuz I haven't seen the product), but wouldn't that go against the Think Different doctrine? I would like a or two step between myself and the 'Evil Corporations'...