tvachon
Jan 9, 02:38 PM
sorry about the spoiler in the ticker guys
I'm sitting here trying to do updates... that one was a mistake on my part.
Really sorry. I removed it. we'll still post the link when it comes.
arn
Thanks Arn, the people who did see it gave warning to us all.
I'm sitting here trying to do updates... that one was a mistake on my part.
Really sorry. I removed it. we'll still post the link when it comes.
arn
Thanks Arn, the people who did see it gave warning to us all.
wordoflife
Mar 17, 05:54 PM
It's probably the lines fed to them by retail employees at point of purchase. This is actually cheaper yet better than the iPhone because *insert random pro here*
It has a kickstand lol
It has a kickstand lol
dsnort
Aug 2, 07:06 AM
Does anyone know what became of the constitutional challenge to the french iTunes law? I had read somewhere that the opposition party was trying to get the law overturned, haven't seen anything more about it since.
Highland
Aug 2, 08:04 PM
Stop being such asses and realise that proprietary DRM on music, video, pictures or digital books is a really, really, ridiculously stupid thing for consumers and society. I'd rather have no DRM, but if we have to, let's make it something that everyone can use.
Also... this isn't being driven entirely by Apple. The content owners are as much, if not more to blame. We all need to start speaking up about this or we're going to REALLY regret it in a few year's time.That's just wrong on so many levels. I wish I had more time...
I dare you to try and argue against those points. Trust me, I've spent long enough in the music industry and observed all the DRM and copy protection stuff that's been happening since... well... a very long time (since DAT days etc).
#1 "proprietary DRM on music, video, pictures or digital books is a really, really, ridiculously stupid thing" -- So you don't want to have free interchange on products you own with content you've bought a license to play? I'm not saying we have a legal right to play the content where we like, I'm saying we SHOULD.
#2 "I'd rather have no DRM, but if we have to, let's make it something that everyone can use." -- I think it'd be much better to have one DRM model for all. The idea of heaps of different online stores all selling music that only works with one or two devices is just insane. And if you think that wouldn't work because it'd be cracked... well, every DRM model can and will be cracked in time. They all suffer that flaw.
#3 "Also... this isn't being driven entirely by Apple. The content owners are as much, if not more to blame." -- The DRM is there because labels want it, not because Apple does. Period. Don't even bother arguing about that one.
#4 "We all need to start speaking up about this or we're going to REALLY regret it in a few year's time." -- CDs won't be around forever. So what are we going to do when DRMed files are the ONLY choice? That's not an option I like to think about. We need to fight this right now or be in a whole lot of trouble.
Honestly, there's really not really a sane way to argue that proprietary DRM is good for consumers. There's quite a few ways to argue that it's morally not a good thing for society. There's also a few ways to argue that it breaches fair trading practices.
Also... this isn't being driven entirely by Apple. The content owners are as much, if not more to blame. We all need to start speaking up about this or we're going to REALLY regret it in a few year's time.That's just wrong on so many levels. I wish I had more time...
I dare you to try and argue against those points. Trust me, I've spent long enough in the music industry and observed all the DRM and copy protection stuff that's been happening since... well... a very long time (since DAT days etc).
#1 "proprietary DRM on music, video, pictures or digital books is a really, really, ridiculously stupid thing" -- So you don't want to have free interchange on products you own with content you've bought a license to play? I'm not saying we have a legal right to play the content where we like, I'm saying we SHOULD.
#2 "I'd rather have no DRM, but if we have to, let's make it something that everyone can use." -- I think it'd be much better to have one DRM model for all. The idea of heaps of different online stores all selling music that only works with one or two devices is just insane. And if you think that wouldn't work because it'd be cracked... well, every DRM model can and will be cracked in time. They all suffer that flaw.
#3 "Also... this isn't being driven entirely by Apple. The content owners are as much, if not more to blame." -- The DRM is there because labels want it, not because Apple does. Period. Don't even bother arguing about that one.
#4 "We all need to start speaking up about this or we're going to REALLY regret it in a few year's time." -- CDs won't be around forever. So what are we going to do when DRMed files are the ONLY choice? That's not an option I like to think about. We need to fight this right now or be in a whole lot of trouble.
Honestly, there's really not really a sane way to argue that proprietary DRM is good for consumers. There's quite a few ways to argue that it's morally not a good thing for society. There's also a few ways to argue that it breaches fair trading practices.
more...
janstett
Oct 18, 12:25 PM
[merged posts]
adder7712
Apr 6, 05:32 PM
Who likes looking at ads?
I practically have an equivalent of AdBlock on all browsers that I use regularly...
I practically have an equivalent of AdBlock on all browsers that I use regularly...
more...
macximum8
Sep 12, 07:34 AM
Apple web site also reporting It's Showtime...
http://phobos.apple.com/showtime/showtime.html
http://phobos.apple.com/showtime/showtime.html
Lord Blackadder
Aug 3, 11:20 AM
While that part is true that we would burn more fuel at power planets one advantage you are forgetting about is the power planets are by far much more efficient at producing power than the internal combustion engine on your car. On top of that it is much easier to capture and clean the pollution the power planet produces over what the cars produce. On top of that we can easily most our power over to other renewable choices.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
more...
iBeard
Oct 12, 08:48 AM
I don't understand why everybody wants a Video iPod other than the fact its a new gadget. When I watch movies/DVDs on anything smaller than my 42" plasma I'm underwhelmed by it, hahah. Why would I want to watch it on a 5" LCD?
Unless all of you travel alot and miss your shows all the time I don't see a big need for a video iPod.
I have a 5G iPod and I think I've watched 1 or 2 videos on it ever...
Unless all of you travel alot and miss your shows all the time I don't see a big need for a video iPod.
I have a 5G iPod and I think I've watched 1 or 2 videos on it ever...
jonnysods
Mar 26, 01:21 PM
I jumped in at Tiger. Couldn't believe how amazing it was when I first used it. Then Leopard, so many UI improvements and ways to look at files without opening them. It really does get better with each release....!
more...
drsmithy
Oct 5, 02:33 AM
It'd be pretty easy to check actually, and really quite legal. The part of Mac OS X that actually implements SMP is the kernel, which is part of Darwin. You can install Darwin without fear of repurcusions, on your toaster, if you want.
Isn't the version of Darwin underpinning OS X/Intel no longer Open Source ?
Isn't the version of Darwin underpinning OS X/Intel no longer Open Source ?
iliketomac
Nov 23, 05:41 PM
Has this preliminary list been published somewhere, or is this secret inside information?
I have it... just posted it above... there will be "red" signs everywhere in the retail stores tomorrow and specialists will be wearing red shirts...
btw, MBP's are not on sale since it's not on the list... just MB's (from $1099 down to $998, etc.... up to $1499 which goes down to $1398)
iMac's are on sale too.... see the posting above... I'm wondering about the Mini since it's not on that "Joy to the Wallet" sale list.
I have it... just posted it above... there will be "red" signs everywhere in the retail stores tomorrow and specialists will be wearing red shirts...
btw, MBP's are not on sale since it's not on the list... just MB's (from $1099 down to $998, etc.... up to $1499 which goes down to $1398)
iMac's are on sale too.... see the posting above... I'm wondering about the Mini since it's not on that "Joy to the Wallet" sale list.
more...
Puppies
Nov 23, 06:37 PM
Yeah, I was wondering the same thing. Otherwise it'll just be about the same as the educational discount.
I need something to tip me over the edge to get a Macbook :)
I need something to tip me over the edge to get a Macbook :)
janstett
Oct 18, 12:21 PM
[merged posts]
more...
T'hain Esh Kelch
Oct 11, 09:26 AM
I really hope the Zune becomes a real competitor and threat to Ipod. I am sick of apple sitting on their ass and giving us minimal improvements to the ipod. I want a wide screen, good battery life, THIN and sleek and sturdy. I will not buy a zune but I hope this pushes apple to bring us the goddamn widescreen ipod. :mad:
Don't get your hopes up too high, since the iPod's screen is the same resolution as the Zune, it has better battery than the Zune and its thinner than the Zune.
Don't get your hopes up too high, since the iPod's screen is the same resolution as the Zune, it has better battery than the Zune and its thinner than the Zune.
Eidorian
Nov 24, 07:33 AM
I was not able to get an EDU discount and sale discount.
BUT, if you are a gvt worker you can get both discounts.
I priced out a new 80GB ipod w/2 Evo3 skins, and the applecare protection plan and it was $30 cheaper with the GVT discount ... but no luck with EDUHopefully it still applies to corporate discounts too. Can anyone confirm what?
BUT, if you are a gvt worker you can get both discounts.
I priced out a new 80GB ipod w/2 Evo3 skins, and the applecare protection plan and it was $30 cheaper with the GVT discount ... but no luck with EDUHopefully it still applies to corporate discounts too. Can anyone confirm what?
more...
Eraserhead
Mar 4, 05:47 PM
It does not.
To expand.
According to:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10464617
Only 18 teachers have been sacked in the UK for incompetence over the past 40 years. You could increase that figure by 500x or something and even at that level it would be extremely difficult for the unions to get public sympathy for teachers being treated badly. Given there are half a million teachers in the UK, even with 500x more of them being fired for incompetence that would still only be 225 a year or 0.05% of them a year.
There is no way that the unions have that kind of power - I think its far more likely to be down to too much bureaucracy.
Teachers on average make more than private sector employees. The average in Ohio is $50,314, source
But you of course have to take education levels into account, so that isn't even true.
The two economists work out the fraction of American workers� pay that cannot be explained by factors such as differences in education and experience. This �wage premium� reflects the extent to which workers have been able to extract more pay than is merited by their qualifications. Those who believe that America�s state workers are vastly overpaid will be surprised to learn that this premium is in fact higher in the private sector than in the public sector in many American states. But states where the opposite is true are ones like California, Florida and New York
http://www.economist.com/node/18285587?story_id=18285587
To expand.
According to:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10464617
Only 18 teachers have been sacked in the UK for incompetence over the past 40 years. You could increase that figure by 500x or something and even at that level it would be extremely difficult for the unions to get public sympathy for teachers being treated badly. Given there are half a million teachers in the UK, even with 500x more of them being fired for incompetence that would still only be 225 a year or 0.05% of them a year.
There is no way that the unions have that kind of power - I think its far more likely to be down to too much bureaucracy.
Teachers on average make more than private sector employees. The average in Ohio is $50,314, source
But you of course have to take education levels into account, so that isn't even true.
The two economists work out the fraction of American workers� pay that cannot be explained by factors such as differences in education and experience. This �wage premium� reflects the extent to which workers have been able to extract more pay than is merited by their qualifications. Those who believe that America�s state workers are vastly overpaid will be surprised to learn that this premium is in fact higher in the private sector than in the public sector in many American states. But states where the opposite is true are ones like California, Florida and New York
http://www.economist.com/node/18285587?story_id=18285587
Transporteur
Apr 11, 08:54 AM
Meet my new desk mascot.
http://twitpic.com/show/thumb/4hmpd9.jpg
It even makes Angry Bird sounds!!!
Nice! Meet mine; :D
http://twitpic.com/show/thumb/4hmpd9.jpg
It even makes Angry Bird sounds!!!
Nice! Meet mine; :D
mkrishnan
Sep 7, 10:12 PM
I've never heard myself say "Yo, Yo, wut up dude?" either...
God, I hope not! :eek: ;) :D
No, I downloaded it from somewhere else.
*wink wink, nudge nudge*
Say no more! :p
God, I hope not! :eek: ;) :D
No, I downloaded it from somewhere else.
*wink wink, nudge nudge*
Say no more! :p
SeaFox
Oct 29, 01:00 AM
Why hasn't there been a 'universal' version of Photoshop yet? Because the hard core digital imaging people are hanging on to their G5's.
No, you have it backwards. Software companies don't release products because the hardware is out there. They release because they've added new features and want user to upgrade and new consumers to come. Consumers buy the hardware because the software is available for it. A computer without software is just a really expensive paper weight. It's Adobe's lack of a native Creative Suite than keeps professionals from picking up MacPros - and Apple said just that during their last financial results call.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
No, you have it backwards. Software companies don't release products because the hardware is out there. They release because they've added new features and want user to upgrade and new consumers to come. Consumers buy the hardware because the software is available for it. A computer without software is just a really expensive paper weight. It's Adobe's lack of a native Creative Suite than keeps professionals from picking up MacPros - and Apple said just that during their last financial results call.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
Chundles
Sep 12, 12:53 AM
That's no industry setting price point. For that price you can buy the DVD. watch it, load it on your ipod and the sell it on e-bay.
G'Day Tangles, welcome to the boards. You're right though, US$20 is a lot of money compared to DVD prices.
Oh I hope you get the Tangles reference, otherwise I've just made a goose of myself.
G'Day Tangles, welcome to the boards. You're right though, US$20 is a lot of money compared to DVD prices.
Oh I hope you get the Tangles reference, otherwise I've just made a goose of myself.
clintob
Oct 11, 12:09 PM
I'm not sure I understand the people who (a) don't believe this is coming soon, or (b) don't believe it's coming at all because "people won't use it - it's too small." That's garbage.
Not everything Apple releases has to be an "earth shattering" revolution. Some stuff can just have a niche market and be better than what's out there. They're in it to make money first and foremost. And frankly, if people could carry an iPod-sized object, with wireless headphones, and that could play widescreen movies on a 4" or so screen (AND, oh by the way, carry their iTunes library to boot), it would be the death of the portable DVD player.
No, that's not a huge market, or a cash cow by any means. Nor is it a revolutionary product. But at the end of the day, it's pretty damned cool which means most of us will buy it (despite our attempts not to), and it's certainly another cha-ching to add to the list for Apple.
Not everything Apple releases has to be an "earth shattering" revolution. Some stuff can just have a niche market and be better than what's out there. They're in it to make money first and foremost. And frankly, if people could carry an iPod-sized object, with wireless headphones, and that could play widescreen movies on a 4" or so screen (AND, oh by the way, carry their iTunes library to boot), it would be the death of the portable DVD player.
No, that's not a huge market, or a cash cow by any means. Nor is it a revolutionary product. But at the end of the day, it's pretty damned cool which means most of us will buy it (despite our attempts not to), and it's certainly another cha-ching to add to the list for Apple.
GoKyu
Apr 12, 11:09 PM
The Windows task bar is now by far much better with the addition of aero peek
Networking, its easier, faster and generally better then dealing with OSX.
I have to say that Networking has definitely improved from XP to Win 7, but when I switched over to OS X, one of the first things I noticed was how much *easier* and *simple* networking was on the Mac side.
And if simple isn't for you, you can always dig down and go into Terminal to *manually* set up your network. I've done that with Linux in the past, and believe me, Mac *AND* Windows are simpler than manually configuring eth0 ;)
Aero Peek looked pretty cool, but I just don't use that feature at all - I like having a quick launch bar to run most of my software in Windows (probably why I took to the Dock so quickly in OS X.)
Networking, its easier, faster and generally better then dealing with OSX.
I have to say that Networking has definitely improved from XP to Win 7, but when I switched over to OS X, one of the first things I noticed was how much *easier* and *simple* networking was on the Mac side.
And if simple isn't for you, you can always dig down and go into Terminal to *manually* set up your network. I've done that with Linux in the past, and believe me, Mac *AND* Windows are simpler than manually configuring eth0 ;)
Aero Peek looked pretty cool, but I just don't use that feature at all - I like having a quick launch bar to run most of my software in Windows (probably why I took to the Dock so quickly in OS X.)
aross99
Jan 11, 10:32 PM
At first, I got a chuckle when I read this on their site. Turning off a wall of display is one thing, but what they did to the presenters (especially Motorolla) is inexcusable. They took it way to far...
To be honest with you, I can't believe they blogged about it afterwards..
To be honest with you, I can't believe they blogged about it afterwards..
0 comments:
Post a Comment