Umbongo
May 3, 07:45 AM
Not really sure why Apple can't bring themselves to put an i7 by default in a $2,000 machine. That's kind of ridiculous.
Because it would cost them another $100 in parts without increasing sales. This way they make more money per sale and will make even more from those who want it. There would be no processor upgrade path if they put the i7 as default.
Because it would cost them another $100 in parts without increasing sales. This way they make more money per sale and will make even more from those who want it. There would be no processor upgrade path if they put the i7 as default.
extrafuzzyllama
Sep 15, 08:05 PM
picked up new ink for printer and an enclosure and two hdds
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/6171/imagetm.jpg
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/6171/imagetm.jpg
saving107
Apr 14, 02:29 PM
Lies, someone always says this with every update. The animations are still often laggy.
He/she said that the app opens faster, not that the animation bug has been fixed.
He/she said that the app opens faster, not that the animation bug has been fixed.
fatboyslick
May 4, 03:45 AM
Last quarter... people were buying iPhones at a rate of over 200,000 per day. It doesn't matter what they look like... or what time of year it is... Apple will sell iPhones.
Even if the iPhone 5 looks the same but has upgraded hardware inside when it comes out in September... someone will buy it just like someone bought the iPhone 4 from January to March.
Do you have to upgrade to a new model every year? No.
But somebody is always ready to buy a new phone.
BTW... the 3G and 3GS looked the same... and that did OK.
I personally believe these days that the look of the phone comes secondary to what is "under the hood".
Yes it helps if it's a good shape with a good screen but if Apple continue to release devices that a technically better the the rest then people will lap it up - the death grip didnt stop so many iPhone 4s being sold did it - people accepted it as the device packed a punch
Even if the iPhone 5 looks the same but has upgraded hardware inside when it comes out in September... someone will buy it just like someone bought the iPhone 4 from January to March.
Do you have to upgrade to a new model every year? No.
But somebody is always ready to buy a new phone.
BTW... the 3G and 3GS looked the same... and that did OK.
I personally believe these days that the look of the phone comes secondary to what is "under the hood".
Yes it helps if it's a good shape with a good screen but if Apple continue to release devices that a technically better the the rest then people will lap it up - the death grip didnt stop so many iPhone 4s being sold did it - people accepted it as the device packed a punch
more...
chrmjenkins
Apr 22, 11:10 AM
Of all the things that iPhone needs soon, LTE is not one of them.
We can all wait until its widespread, and usable.
It's already available to 110 Americans. It will reach over half of the US by year's end thanks to Verizon. When you look at AT&T's 3G penetration at the time of the iPhone 3G launch, it's actually not that far off.
The real issue is having a radio that allows for decent battery life. Even if they can consolidate it into 1 chip, that doesn't mean Apple will be pleased with its battery performance enough to include it in their phones.
My understanding of the MDM9615 is that it's a powerhouse.
The next generation MDM9615 will support LTE (FDD and TDD), DC-HSPA+, EV-DO Rev-B and TD-SCDMA
Basically, that means it supports LTE, super high speed 3G HSPA+ (think T-mobile's 42 mbps) and EV-DO Rev-B (CDMA). That means it should be a worldphone chip, and it's also fabbed on the brand new 28nm process, which means it will be as low power as one could expect. That makes it an excellent candidate for the 2012 iPhone 6.
The MDM9615 and MDM8215 are designed to pair up with the WTR1605 radio frequency IC and PM8018 power management IC to provide a highly integrated chipset solution. The WTR1605 will be Qualcomm’s first Radio Transceiver in Wafer Level Package and will be a highly integrated radio transceiver with multi-mode (LTE FDD, LTE TDD, CDMA, WCDMA, TD-SCDMA, GSM) and multi-band support.
TD-SCDMA is the CDMA variant they use in China. Outside of penta-band GSM (which I don't know if this offers, and I don't see why it wouldn't since the current iPhone Gobi chip offers it), this radio can be used on every damn carrier out there in the world essentially.
source (http://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2011/02/14/qualcomm-introduces-28nm-mass-market-ltedc-hspa-chipsets-mobile-broadband-0)
We can all wait until its widespread, and usable.
It's already available to 110 Americans. It will reach over half of the US by year's end thanks to Verizon. When you look at AT&T's 3G penetration at the time of the iPhone 3G launch, it's actually not that far off.
The real issue is having a radio that allows for decent battery life. Even if they can consolidate it into 1 chip, that doesn't mean Apple will be pleased with its battery performance enough to include it in their phones.
My understanding of the MDM9615 is that it's a powerhouse.
The next generation MDM9615 will support LTE (FDD and TDD), DC-HSPA+, EV-DO Rev-B and TD-SCDMA
Basically, that means it supports LTE, super high speed 3G HSPA+ (think T-mobile's 42 mbps) and EV-DO Rev-B (CDMA). That means it should be a worldphone chip, and it's also fabbed on the brand new 28nm process, which means it will be as low power as one could expect. That makes it an excellent candidate for the 2012 iPhone 6.
The MDM9615 and MDM8215 are designed to pair up with the WTR1605 radio frequency IC and PM8018 power management IC to provide a highly integrated chipset solution. The WTR1605 will be Qualcomm’s first Radio Transceiver in Wafer Level Package and will be a highly integrated radio transceiver with multi-mode (LTE FDD, LTE TDD, CDMA, WCDMA, TD-SCDMA, GSM) and multi-band support.
TD-SCDMA is the CDMA variant they use in China. Outside of penta-band GSM (which I don't know if this offers, and I don't see why it wouldn't since the current iPhone Gobi chip offers it), this radio can be used on every damn carrier out there in the world essentially.
source (http://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2011/02/14/qualcomm-introduces-28nm-mass-market-ltedc-hspa-chipsets-mobile-broadband-0)
Don't panic
Apr 26, 06:32 PM
The stories are best read when hi/drunk/tripping.
can i have a cup of tea?
can i have a cup of tea?
more...
ten-oak-druid
Apr 11, 02:57 PM
Looking forward to hard drives with this connector.
I bought two 2TB drives for my imovie library. I use one as a backup clone. I felt at the time I bought these that I was finally set. All movies on one drive for less than $100 (each). I see now that I will have an upgrade in a few years for speed purposes. By then perhaps 4TB or greater drives will be common and cheap.
The backup process will be a lot faster.
The other game changer with these drives will come with time machine backups. Right now the speed improvement by direct connection is not great enough to forgo the ease of wireless backups. Well if your hard drive changes 200gb content each day that might not be the case.
But when the thunderbolt drives come around, perhaps the speed advantage will be so great that people will opt for plugging their drives in directly once a day to backup rather than use wireless backups.
I bought two 2TB drives for my imovie library. I use one as a backup clone. I felt at the time I bought these that I was finally set. All movies on one drive for less than $100 (each). I see now that I will have an upgrade in a few years for speed purposes. By then perhaps 4TB or greater drives will be common and cheap.
The backup process will be a lot faster.
The other game changer with these drives will come with time machine backups. Right now the speed improvement by direct connection is not great enough to forgo the ease of wireless backups. Well if your hard drive changes 200gb content each day that might not be the case.
But when the thunderbolt drives come around, perhaps the speed advantage will be so great that people will opt for plugging their drives in directly once a day to backup rather than use wireless backups.
renewed
Sep 15, 07:48 PM
The bundle is 250gb.
Have to say, I'm jealous of the Reach buyers. Getting ready to move so need to stick to essential expenditures :(
I just got an email that says mine has shipped. I cannot wait! Luckily I get my 50" Plasma back tomorrow so good timing!
Have to say, I'm jealous of the Reach buyers. Getting ready to move so need to stick to essential expenditures :(
I just got an email that says mine has shipped. I cannot wait! Luckily I get my 50" Plasma back tomorrow so good timing!
more...
FX4568
Apr 19, 04:27 PM
I had to finally register to comment on the hypocrisy in this and many other threads like it. Because some people want frame rates for gaming on an MBA, then your needs for GPU performance are valid, and others who don't game but could use CPU performance have invalid needs? Rubbish.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
Well, I shall say first of all, welcome to the MacRumors forum :) I believe CPU is important to the computer as the GPU is. As current computers are, CPU have set a milestone where most users are not even able to use 100% of the capabilities hidden in such a powerful processor.
Now, you were complaining I used 100/100 in the CPU analogy? fine, I will change it. CPU will be 90/100 and GPU is 80/100 as the 30% increase in cpu and 30% decrease in gpu, we will see a difference of 117/100 and 56/100. Am I arguing that there will be nothing to be gained from a bump in processor speed? Definitely not! Who doesnt love the little extra power when we need it? Who doesnt want the latest in tech? What im saying is that the downgrading of the GPU outweights the upgrading of the CPU in terms of OVERALL performance.
Futhermore HT and Turbo dont work 100% of the times.
For you and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump will be indeed welcomed. But as of me and the I believe majority of MBA owners and will be owners, the difference of processor speed is negligible to a certain extent, but the performance lack of GPU will be noticed the moment we start using the Macbook Air.
+1, besides, the 13" MBP + 128GB SSD provide far better value-for-money than any present 13" MBA.
The cheaper solution, the 11", tells another story but even then anything past the base model comes so close to the price of a 13" MBP+SSD that it's impractical to get a 11" from a performance point of view, especially when it's equipped with the slow 1.4 C2D. The 1.4 i5 will provide far better performance (certainly far more than 40% of speed boost). We will still be able to watch FullHD movies despite the less capable IGP. Games. Don't tell me you want to play WoW on a 11" monitor.
FX4568 said "We have enough to accomplish our tasks, and any more would be an overkill in the things we need our computer to process.". Overkill means the increased processor speed will not be of any use, or, in other words, useless.
You are comparing a cheaper price point by bringing a 128 SSD into the game. You must understand that even though many people have to choose between the 13 MBA and 13 MBP, both of them are made for a different purpose. You can play WoW on a 11" monitor. Why do you chain your MBA to tasks that you only think it will be able to accomplish.
Okay, sorry about my lack of further explanation, but I dont want this to sound personal, but what you are doing is taking my statement to a whole different level. I would like to infer that your intelligence would be above the mark where I dont have to expand on every single statement that I say. When I say that the C2D is enough to accomplish tasks, I am saying that it is good enough for the higher than average person. Handbrakers of course will face a time difference on the processor speed, but as many of us know, not everyone uses Handbrake, and if we do, it is not something we do daily. Processor speed is always welcome, but at the sacrifice of GPU from 320m to the Intel GPU is the difference between the ability to play Crysis on 19.3 FPS at Medium settings and not be able to playing it at all while the performance increase in CPU is the difference between 10-30 minutes in Handbrake.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
Well, I shall say first of all, welcome to the MacRumors forum :) I believe CPU is important to the computer as the GPU is. As current computers are, CPU have set a milestone where most users are not even able to use 100% of the capabilities hidden in such a powerful processor.
Now, you were complaining I used 100/100 in the CPU analogy? fine, I will change it. CPU will be 90/100 and GPU is 80/100 as the 30% increase in cpu and 30% decrease in gpu, we will see a difference of 117/100 and 56/100. Am I arguing that there will be nothing to be gained from a bump in processor speed? Definitely not! Who doesnt love the little extra power when we need it? Who doesnt want the latest in tech? What im saying is that the downgrading of the GPU outweights the upgrading of the CPU in terms of OVERALL performance.
Futhermore HT and Turbo dont work 100% of the times.
For you and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump will be indeed welcomed. But as of me and the I believe majority of MBA owners and will be owners, the difference of processor speed is negligible to a certain extent, but the performance lack of GPU will be noticed the moment we start using the Macbook Air.
+1, besides, the 13" MBP + 128GB SSD provide far better value-for-money than any present 13" MBA.
The cheaper solution, the 11", tells another story but even then anything past the base model comes so close to the price of a 13" MBP+SSD that it's impractical to get a 11" from a performance point of view, especially when it's equipped with the slow 1.4 C2D. The 1.4 i5 will provide far better performance (certainly far more than 40% of speed boost). We will still be able to watch FullHD movies despite the less capable IGP. Games. Don't tell me you want to play WoW on a 11" monitor.
FX4568 said "We have enough to accomplish our tasks, and any more would be an overkill in the things we need our computer to process.". Overkill means the increased processor speed will not be of any use, or, in other words, useless.
You are comparing a cheaper price point by bringing a 128 SSD into the game. You must understand that even though many people have to choose between the 13 MBA and 13 MBP, both of them are made for a different purpose. You can play WoW on a 11" monitor. Why do you chain your MBA to tasks that you only think it will be able to accomplish.
Okay, sorry about my lack of further explanation, but I dont want this to sound personal, but what you are doing is taking my statement to a whole different level. I would like to infer that your intelligence would be above the mark where I dont have to expand on every single statement that I say. When I say that the C2D is enough to accomplish tasks, I am saying that it is good enough for the higher than average person. Handbrakers of course will face a time difference on the processor speed, but as many of us know, not everyone uses Handbrake, and if we do, it is not something we do daily. Processor speed is always welcome, but at the sacrifice of GPU from 320m to the Intel GPU is the difference between the ability to play Crysis on 19.3 FPS at Medium settings and not be able to playing it at all while the performance increase in CPU is the difference between 10-30 minutes in Handbrake.
chrmjenkins
Apr 29, 10:43 AM
eldiablojoe.
Although the blatant party line vote may have been a little too telling, I still think it was a genuine attempt to save a fellow wolf.
Although the blatant party line vote may have been a little too telling, I still think it was a genuine attempt to save a fellow wolf.
more...
RBR2
Apr 13, 08:39 PM
It's all rather moot till they get authentic to the standard, and use Fiber Optics!
Substituting old fashioned wire is so misleading.
A bit faster yes, but nothing like Fiber.
This is rather amusing. I found this Apple Document (http://images.apple.com/xserve/pdf/L322097A_FibrChnl_TB.pdf) about Fibre Channel. You will notice that Apple has copper cables available. It would be interesting to compare Fibre Channel with Thunderbolt. Apart from TB integrating video, TB looks a lot like an evolution of Fibre Channel.
As TB progresses the transfer rates should increase which can only be good.
Moot? Whatever.
Substituting old fashioned wire is so misleading.
A bit faster yes, but nothing like Fiber.
This is rather amusing. I found this Apple Document (http://images.apple.com/xserve/pdf/L322097A_FibrChnl_TB.pdf) about Fibre Channel. You will notice that Apple has copper cables available. It would be interesting to compare Fibre Channel with Thunderbolt. Apart from TB integrating video, TB looks a lot like an evolution of Fibre Channel.
As TB progresses the transfer rates should increase which can only be good.
Moot? Whatever.
DaveTheGrey
Jul 24, 04:35 PM
finally...
one for me plz :)
dave
one for me plz :)
dave
more...
.jpg "Johnny Depp")
JordanNZ
May 3, 08:00 AM
I see what Apple did there, substituting TFT for IPS. That's honestly a rubbish move. I won't be buying an iMac with a TFT panel. No thanks.
Read the posts above you...
You're simply confused (wrong) :cool:
Read the posts above you...
You're simply confused (wrong) :cool:
iSee
May 4, 08:57 AM
We are always skeptical about such information shared by customer-facing representatives of Apple or associated companies, as those employees are essentially never provided with that level of information ahead of any official announcement.
And this case is no different. Should not even be page 2.
And this case is no different. Should not even be page 2.
more...
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 15, 02:26 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Reports indicate that ... Front Row are exactly the same as the Tiger versions, suggesting that unannounced improvements could be in store for them by Leopard's final release.
Hmmm, why would an update of Front Row be deemed top secret...
Could this suggest that the mythical iHome might be coming soon?
Reports indicate that ... Front Row are exactly the same as the Tiger versions, suggesting that unannounced improvements could be in store for them by Leopard's final release.
Hmmm, why would an update of Front Row be deemed top secret...
Could this suggest that the mythical iHome might be coming soon?
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 12, 10:16 AM
Enjoy the version of Android that comes on that thing out of the box. With all the HTC bloatware and Android fragmentation you'll be lucky to ever see a software update. :rolleyes:
unrevoked3 + ROM Manager = Cyanogen CM7 in less than 5 minutes with little to no tech skills.
unrevoked3 + ROM Manager = Cyanogen CM7 in less than 5 minutes with little to no tech skills.
more...
ZilogZ80
Apr 14, 04:56 AM
Would only make sense when combining Mac App Store and iOS App Store someway while keeping the syncing of the iOS devices in iTunes.
Or just do away with iTunes entirely and choose which available (i.e. purchased) apps you want to install directly in App Store on the device. Let any backups be cloud or Time Machine based.
Or just do away with iTunes entirely and choose which available (i.e. purchased) apps you want to install directly in App Store on the device. Let any backups be cloud or Time Machine based.
Small White Car
Apr 12, 10:21 AM
I've read the post over again and if that was sarcasm, he's bad at it and should stop.
Well he did have the spec whore thing down and was a pretty convincing Android Fanboy as well.
The 2 things that convinced me:
1) The use of 'and...and...and' a lot. Stammering: A hallmark of sarcasm.
2) He then responded to one of my comments with a very thoughtful post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12377088&postcount=26). Hardly the type of thing and actual Android-Troll would write.
I was pretty sure based on #1 (do people really not know the stammering thing? I guess not!), but #2 was enough to make me certain.
Well he did have the spec whore thing down and was a pretty convincing Android Fanboy as well.
The 2 things that convinced me:
1) The use of 'and...and...and' a lot. Stammering: A hallmark of sarcasm.
2) He then responded to one of my comments with a very thoughtful post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12377088&postcount=26). Hardly the type of thing and actual Android-Troll would write.
I was pretty sure based on #1 (do people really not know the stammering thing? I guess not!), but #2 was enough to make me certain.
840quadra
Dec 1, 02:42 PM
No one.. and stangely it's now ON by DEFAULT in all the MacTels I've received lately. No idea why.
I do, and so does anyone who has a classic environment of System 7 and earlier for classic compatibility reasons.
Granted you can use TCP/IP on some of these, however the reliability of such extensions on early versions of Classic leaves much to be desired. I however turn off Appletalk when I am away from my home network.
I do, and so does anyone who has a classic environment of System 7 and earlier for classic compatibility reasons.
Granted you can use TCP/IP on some of these, however the reliability of such extensions on early versions of Classic leaves much to be desired. I however turn off Appletalk when I am away from my home network.
akac
Nov 4, 01:19 AM
Whatever dude. 2Ghz\2GB RAM\256MB Video\160GB HD and there is NOTHING instantaneous about Parallels at all. It takes anywhere from 1-2 minutes to resume a session and another 2+ minutes to suspend it. This is with multiple images, several OS X installs, and I know how to tweak Windows with the best of them.
Sounds like you're not talking about Parallels starting up, but a virtual machine either resuming or starting up from scratch. For me WinXP starts in about 15 seconds on a 2.16Ghz 2GB RAM or about 2 minutes if resuming. But that has NOTHING to do with Cocoa, QT, Carbon or what not. The difference between those frameworks in speed is in milliseconds and would have nothing to do with the above. Those would have everything to do with file writing to disk.
I can say that when Parallels has its VM Flags set to VM Cache as the primary caching logic, its disk speed is near native, but OS X apps slow down dramatically. Change that to Mac OS X primary caching logic and the VM's disk access slows down noticeably, but not horribly.
Sounds like you're not talking about Parallels starting up, but a virtual machine either resuming or starting up from scratch. For me WinXP starts in about 15 seconds on a 2.16Ghz 2GB RAM or about 2 minutes if resuming. But that has NOTHING to do with Cocoa, QT, Carbon or what not. The difference between those frameworks in speed is in milliseconds and would have nothing to do with the above. Those would have everything to do with file writing to disk.
I can say that when Parallels has its VM Flags set to VM Cache as the primary caching logic, its disk speed is near native, but OS X apps slow down dramatically. Change that to Mac OS X primary caching logic and the VM's disk access slows down noticeably, but not horribly.
hulugu
Dec 5, 01:10 PM
Indeed on first read, I'd say that he presents a convincing argument. I'll go along with his diagnosis that there's no hole that could open you up to arbitrary code execution. If that's your definition of a security hole, then it follows that there's no security hole there. But it's still leaving you open the possibility that the operating system may crash for no apparent reason, causing you to lose any unsaved work.
Lost work... Depending on how productive you are, that can easily result in monetary damage being done.
As I posted previously, that leaves you in no worse a situation than you always are if you're running a desktop computer without a UPS. But I think that it still warrants attention.
At best it still qualifies as an inconvenience, because the savvy user who saves her work regularly will only have lost 5 or 6 minutes of productivity including the reboot. At worst, it can result in hours of lost work for the user who doesn't understand the "save your work" mantra -- especially if we're talking about somebody who's protected by a battery backup and doesn't think that unexpected reboots should be possible on such an inherently stable operating system.
And it's undoubtedly a bug inside Apple's software that's causing this problem, therefore it is absolutely appropriate that Apple should be expected to fix it. I appreciate anybody's effort to bring such bugs to light, because that increases the probability that Apple will find out about it and fix it.
I'm saying Apple shouldn't fix it, I'm merely pointing out that many people are reacting to the MOKB as a wealth of major security flaws.
This is a bug, an annoying bug that should be fixed, but that's very different from a security flaw in which a crash can be used to inject malicious code. MOKB's author LMH was wrong about this particular instance and he did not do the research required of a security professional in this particular problem.
Again, don't dismiss the MOKB or the warnings from Secunia or F-Secure or even the demonstrations by Ellrich and Johnny Cache, instead we need to assess the problem as best we can.
I would say that you probably shouldn't be installing .dmgs while you're doing important work that hasn't been saved, that's just asking for trouble.
Lost work... Depending on how productive you are, that can easily result in monetary damage being done.
As I posted previously, that leaves you in no worse a situation than you always are if you're running a desktop computer without a UPS. But I think that it still warrants attention.
At best it still qualifies as an inconvenience, because the savvy user who saves her work regularly will only have lost 5 or 6 minutes of productivity including the reboot. At worst, it can result in hours of lost work for the user who doesn't understand the "save your work" mantra -- especially if we're talking about somebody who's protected by a battery backup and doesn't think that unexpected reboots should be possible on such an inherently stable operating system.
And it's undoubtedly a bug inside Apple's software that's causing this problem, therefore it is absolutely appropriate that Apple should be expected to fix it. I appreciate anybody's effort to bring such bugs to light, because that increases the probability that Apple will find out about it and fix it.
I'm saying Apple shouldn't fix it, I'm merely pointing out that many people are reacting to the MOKB as a wealth of major security flaws.
This is a bug, an annoying bug that should be fixed, but that's very different from a security flaw in which a crash can be used to inject malicious code. MOKB's author LMH was wrong about this particular instance and he did not do the research required of a security professional in this particular problem.
Again, don't dismiss the MOKB or the warnings from Secunia or F-Secure or even the demonstrations by Ellrich and Johnny Cache, instead we need to assess the problem as best we can.
I would say that you probably shouldn't be installing .dmgs while you're doing important work that hasn't been saved, that's just asking for trouble.
al256
Jun 6, 08:23 AM
Where's the personal responsibility/Apple shouldn't do things for their customer comments? I thought that was all the rage now a days...
Sydde
Feb 12, 07:01 PM
Ferris Bueller character? He makes me think of his father: in two or three years, Aaron Sorkin will put together a TV series where Charlie Sheen plays the (heretofore unmentioned) son of Jed Bartlett, who has somehow managed to become president...
The Wasted Wing?
The Wasted Wing?
Darth.Titan
Dec 30, 12:01 AM
Seriously, no one is questioning this? I don't care how big this woman is, no one can eat 90 pounds of food plus 2 hams and 5 loaves of bread.
I'm with you. If they took all the food they claim she ate in one sitting and piled it up, the pile would be bigger than her.
I don't care how fat you are, that's more volume than a human can consume. She would've either vomited or exploded.
I'm with you. If they took all the food they claim she ate in one sitting and piled it up, the pile would be bigger than her.
I don't care how fat you are, that's more volume than a human can consume. She would've either vomited or exploded.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق