praetorian909
Apr 21, 03:35 PM
Very interesting. This is very plausible because of Lenovo has the C20 workstation (which I picked out for myself at my work):
http://news.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/10381/637217.html
The ThinkStation is 3U rackmountable, with the CD tray vertical for the thinner chassis. Fits full-length, full-height PCIe (video) cards. They called it the "world's smallest dual CPU workstation" so Apple could definitely match it for the Mac Pro.
I'd really like to get a Mac Pro, so this would be perfect. :) The size is nice though honestly I don't really see much need for rackmounting--do companies use these in a server room with a KVM or thin client or something?http://www.lenovo.com/shop/americas/content/img_lib/products/splitter/workstations/features/c20_worlds-smallest.jpg
http://news.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/10381/637217.html
The ThinkStation is 3U rackmountable, with the CD tray vertical for the thinner chassis. Fits full-length, full-height PCIe (video) cards. They called it the "world's smallest dual CPU workstation" so Apple could definitely match it for the Mac Pro.
I'd really like to get a Mac Pro, so this would be perfect. :) The size is nice though honestly I don't really see much need for rackmounting--do companies use these in a server room with a KVM or thin client or something?http://www.lenovo.com/shop/americas/content/img_lib/products/splitter/workstations/features/c20_worlds-smallest.jpg
mozmac
Jul 29, 09:56 PM
what will become of the rockr?
Steve Jobs has stated that the ROKR was a great learning experience for Apple engineers. Apple probably licenses iTunes to Motorola for their phones, so could still exist even with an Apple competitor. Anything made by Apple will simply blow the ROKR and SLVR right out of the water. People can stick with them if they want, but they will be severely limited in comparison to what Apple makes. And if they aren't licensing iTunes to Moto right now, it's probably built into the contract that if they make their own branded phone, iTunes will become a licensed product.
Steve Jobs has stated that the ROKR was a great learning experience for Apple engineers. Apple probably licenses iTunes to Motorola for their phones, so could still exist even with an Apple competitor. Anything made by Apple will simply blow the ROKR and SLVR right out of the water. People can stick with them if they want, but they will be severely limited in comparison to what Apple makes. And if they aren't licensing iTunes to Moto right now, it's probably built into the contract that if they make their own branded phone, iTunes will become a licensed product.
Thunderhawks
Mar 29, 03:46 PM
You rang? :p
No, it was the echo:-)
No, it was the echo:-)
trip1ex
Apr 23, 05:28 PM
I could take this or leave it at this stage.
Would rather have upgradeable hard drive and even upgradeable gpu instead of twice resolution.
Would rather have anti-glare option too.
But if this means some sort of resolution independence then I'm all for it now.
Would rather have upgradeable hard drive and even upgradeable gpu instead of twice resolution.
Would rather have anti-glare option too.
But if this means some sort of resolution independence then I'm all for it now.
Popeye206
Apr 20, 05:42 AM
What will you do if Apple do make it bigger?
Well... of course I'll bail on Apple and get an Android or MS based phone!
NOT! :p
Personally, I don't think they will. I think they are more concerned about all their customers - men and woman. Large and small. They know overall feel in the hand for all their customers is important and that it's important that it slips easily in your pocket. I don't think anyone here can argue that Apple is one of the best, if not the best out there right now, at product design. This does not happen by accident... I'm sure they test and try many variations to get where they're at.
There are more important things they can do than mess with the best smart phone screen on the market.
No matter what, there's always going to be competitors with something that's bigger or more. But again, it's not about any single thing that makes the overall product. It's the overall product that makes the iPhone so great.
Well... of course I'll bail on Apple and get an Android or MS based phone!
NOT! :p
Personally, I don't think they will. I think they are more concerned about all their customers - men and woman. Large and small. They know overall feel in the hand for all their customers is important and that it's important that it slips easily in your pocket. I don't think anyone here can argue that Apple is one of the best, if not the best out there right now, at product design. This does not happen by accident... I'm sure they test and try many variations to get where they're at.
There are more important things they can do than mess with the best smart phone screen on the market.
No matter what, there's always going to be competitors with something that's bigger or more. But again, it's not about any single thing that makes the overall product. It's the overall product that makes the iPhone so great.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 7, 02:23 PM
Hmmmmm....
It really seems like a good time to retire my old MDD. Still, $5400 is a lot of money. (what you have to pay here in sweden with edu discount for a 2.66 MP, X1900 XT, 500Gb + 23'')
Hmmmmm... tempted, very very tempted.
Side note: I have actually considered buying it in US and sneak it back to Sweden if I just could figure out how to transport it....
It really seems like a good time to retire my old MDD. Still, $5400 is a lot of money. (what you have to pay here in sweden with edu discount for a 2.66 MP, X1900 XT, 500Gb + 23'')
Hmmmmm... tempted, very very tempted.
Side note: I have actually considered buying it in US and sneak it back to Sweden if I just could figure out how to transport it....
GoodWatch
Apr 21, 04:06 PM
Who said in another room? Sure if you want to operate it as a remote server, but workstations can very much benefit from being rack mountable.
I have a friend that shoots stills while being tethered to his Mac Pro. It is on a rolling standard rackmount cart but takes up a huge amount of space on it because it is too tall to lay on its side.
When he's done he rolls the cart into his edit room.
I know of other people who use Mac Pro on film shoots to offload video files from cameras and make backups, on the set. They arrive with carts and roll them around as needed. They say the same thing, "I wish it was rackmountable".
You are right, I fold. I know nothing about 19" racks (1.80 meters tall and 150 kg. in weight), and nothing about conditioned server rooms with dual power feeds at all. Flight cases with equipment I also know nothing about. I'm sorry I'm doubting your knowledge and insight.
I have a friend that shoots stills while being tethered to his Mac Pro. It is on a rolling standard rackmount cart but takes up a huge amount of space on it because it is too tall to lay on its side.
When he's done he rolls the cart into his edit room.
I know of other people who use Mac Pro on film shoots to offload video files from cameras and make backups, on the set. They arrive with carts and roll them around as needed. They say the same thing, "I wish it was rackmountable".
You are right, I fold. I know nothing about 19" racks (1.80 meters tall and 150 kg. in weight), and nothing about conditioned server rooms with dual power feeds at all. Flight cases with equipment I also know nothing about. I'm sorry I'm doubting your knowledge and insight.
entatlrg
Apr 7, 12:10 PM
RIM was the smartphone market for a brief period of time, they really should be doing better than what they are right now.
RIM didn't have any vision, though, and were eclipsed by Apple and Google.
I owned a BB Storm and it was a piece of junk, the Torch fell flat and now the Playbook has been delayed.
I wonder who is going to buy RIM out, they are in desperate need of a hit product. RIM needs a halo product as badly as Apple did before the iPod came out.
Very well said.
One Rim founder spent too much time trying to buy hockey teams, the other founder too much time building science centers .... meanwhile Steve was dreaming up cool products and turning them into reality. Well done, Steve :apple:
RIM didn't have any vision, though, and were eclipsed by Apple and Google.
I owned a BB Storm and it was a piece of junk, the Torch fell flat and now the Playbook has been delayed.
I wonder who is going to buy RIM out, they are in desperate need of a hit product. RIM needs a halo product as badly as Apple did before the iPod came out.
Very well said.
One Rim founder spent too much time trying to buy hockey teams, the other founder too much time building science centers .... meanwhile Steve was dreaming up cool products and turning them into reality. Well done, Steve :apple:
dba7dba
Apr 18, 04:53 PM
First off the Prada was officially announced by LG on January 18, 2007. The iPhone was announced by Apple on january 9, 2007. The last time that I checked, January 9th came before January 18th. THAT makes the iPhone first, sorry.
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
WRONG.
From wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_(KE850)
LG Electronics has claimed the iPhone's design was copied from the LG Prada. Woo-Young Kwak, head of LG Mobile Handset R&D Center, said at a press conference, �We consider that Apple copied the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006.�[9][10]
LG later claimed that Apple stole both the ideas and concept of the Prada phone. A lawsuit by LG had been rumored prior to this announcement; [9] however, LG has remained silent on whether or not they will file a lawsuit.
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
WRONG.
From wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_(KE850)
LG Electronics has claimed the iPhone's design was copied from the LG Prada. Woo-Young Kwak, head of LG Mobile Handset R&D Center, said at a press conference, �We consider that Apple copied the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006.�[9][10]
LG later claimed that Apple stole both the ideas and concept of the Prada phone. A lawsuit by LG had been rumored prior to this announcement; [9] however, LG has remained silent on whether or not they will file a lawsuit.
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
nmrrjw66
Apr 15, 07:17 PM
:mad::mad::mad: I am seriously starting to get pissed.
9 Things the Rich Don't Want You To Know About Taxes (http://www.wweek.com/portland/print-article-17350-print.html)
It's a long article so here are some excerpts;
3. In fact, the wealthy are paying less taxes.
The Internal Revenue Service issues an annual report on the 400 highest income-tax payers. In 1961, there were 398 taxpayers who made $1 million or more, so I compared their income tax burdens from that year to 2007.
Despite skyrocketing incomes, the federal tax burden on the richest 400 has been slashed, thanks to a variety of loopholes, allowable deductions and other tools. The actual share of their income paid in taxes, according to the IRS, is 16.6 percent. Adding payroll taxes barely nudges that number.
Compare that to the vast majority of Americans, whose share of their income going to federal taxes increased from 13.1 percent in 1961 to 22.5 percent in 2007.
(By the way, during seven of the eight George W. Bush years, the IRS report on the top 400 taxpayers was labeled a state secret, a policy that the Obama administration overturned almost instantly after his inauguration.)
4. Many of the very richest pay no current income taxes at all.
John Paulson, the most successful hedge-fund manager of all, bet against the mortgage market one year and then bet with Glenn Beck in the gold market the next. Paulson made himself $9 billion in fees in just two years. His current tax bill on that $9 billion? Zero.
Congress lets hedge-fund managers earn all they can now and pay their taxes years from now.
In Congress debated whether hedge-fund managers should pay the top tax rate that applies to wages, bonuses and other compensation for their labors, which is 35 percent. That tax rate starts at about $300,000 of taxable income�not even pocket change to Paulson, but almost 12 years of gross pay to the median-wage worker.
WTF does someone even do with 9 billion dollars?
9 Things the Rich Don't Want You To Know About Taxes (http://www.wweek.com/portland/print-article-17350-print.html)
It's a long article so here are some excerpts;
3. In fact, the wealthy are paying less taxes.
The Internal Revenue Service issues an annual report on the 400 highest income-tax payers. In 1961, there were 398 taxpayers who made $1 million or more, so I compared their income tax burdens from that year to 2007.
Despite skyrocketing incomes, the federal tax burden on the richest 400 has been slashed, thanks to a variety of loopholes, allowable deductions and other tools. The actual share of their income paid in taxes, according to the IRS, is 16.6 percent. Adding payroll taxes barely nudges that number.
Compare that to the vast majority of Americans, whose share of their income going to federal taxes increased from 13.1 percent in 1961 to 22.5 percent in 2007.
(By the way, during seven of the eight George W. Bush years, the IRS report on the top 400 taxpayers was labeled a state secret, a policy that the Obama administration overturned almost instantly after his inauguration.)
4. Many of the very richest pay no current income taxes at all.
John Paulson, the most successful hedge-fund manager of all, bet against the mortgage market one year and then bet with Glenn Beck in the gold market the next. Paulson made himself $9 billion in fees in just two years. His current tax bill on that $9 billion? Zero.
Congress lets hedge-fund managers earn all they can now and pay their taxes years from now.
In Congress debated whether hedge-fund managers should pay the top tax rate that applies to wages, bonuses and other compensation for their labors, which is 35 percent. That tax rate starts at about $300,000 of taxable income�not even pocket change to Paulson, but almost 12 years of gross pay to the median-wage worker.
WTF does someone even do with 9 billion dollars?
Becordial
May 7, 11:13 AM
Making it free would be a smart move by Apple. It would help bond iphone users more effectively to Apple ecosystem.
At the moment, I don't use the MobileMe service (though I'd like to have findmyphone and perhaps back to my mac services) but if I had it free, it would be a thing that would make it less likely that I would switch to RIM/WIN7 or Android.
Does anyone know if the Windows version of this similar service bundle is free?
EDIT: From MS
# How much does the My Phone service cost? It's free! Except for a few optional services, Microsoft does not charge for use of Microsoft My Phone. However, your mobile operator may charge for data usage so please ensure that you have an appropriate data plan. If you are unsure of your data plan coverage, contact your mobile operator.
At the moment, I don't use the MobileMe service (though I'd like to have findmyphone and perhaps back to my mac services) but if I had it free, it would be a thing that would make it less likely that I would switch to RIM/WIN7 or Android.
Does anyone know if the Windows version of this similar service bundle is free?
EDIT: From MS
# How much does the My Phone service cost? It's free! Except for a few optional services, Microsoft does not charge for use of Microsoft My Phone. However, your mobile operator may charge for data usage so please ensure that you have an appropriate data plan. If you are unsure of your data plan coverage, contact your mobile operator.
andy845
Mar 29, 09:08 AM
There is over a 120 million android devices in use? I don't mean models....
Yes there are, android are the market leaders(by volume) ~33%, Apple are third after Nokia with ~16% market share.
See http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/Android-Ships-33M-Smartphones-to-Lead-World-Canalys-162803/
first hit in google for android market share
Yes there are, android are the market leaders(by volume) ~33%, Apple are third after Nokia with ~16% market share.
See http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/Android-Ships-33M-Smartphones-to-Lead-World-Canalys-162803/
first hit in google for android market share
BruiserBear
Apr 5, 01:31 PM
Jailbreakers are funny.
notabadname
Apr 26, 02:23 PM
As relevant as saying Apple sells more phones than Android does . . . oh wait, Android isn't a phone seller/manufacturer.
Well Apple doesn't sell its software for use on any other phones (or computers), so how is it competing with software-installed numbers on all hardware types? If people were shifting from Samsung or Motorola phones with Apple iOS to Samsung or Motorola phones with Android, than Apple would be losing in the software market.
This has always be a case of apples to broccoli (yeah, it's not even a fruit versus fruit comparison).
Well Apple doesn't sell its software for use on any other phones (or computers), so how is it competing with software-installed numbers on all hardware types? If people were shifting from Samsung or Motorola phones with Apple iOS to Samsung or Motorola phones with Android, than Apple would be losing in the software market.
This has always be a case of apples to broccoli (yeah, it's not even a fruit versus fruit comparison).
tonyl
Aug 7, 03:41 PM
No, it's "TWO 2.66GHz CPUs are about $800 more expensive than TWO 2.0GHz.....".
That's what I'm saying, $400x2=$800-$300=$500 profit for Apple, That's wonderful for Apple.
That's what I'm saying, $400x2=$800-$300=$500 profit for Apple, That's wonderful for Apple.
Ryth
Apr 21, 04:53 PM
I would say make it even smaller.
Mac Pro should be based on Mac mini, but with a choice of i7 or Xeon CPU, 6 user-serviceable memory slots, 2-3 expansion slots, and choice of 256 or 512 GB SSD. Complemented by multiple Thunderbolt port, external Superdrive, and Apple's own 5-bay DAS.
Yah I agree. I think there needs to be a factor between the iMac and MacPro.
I want the power of the top of the line iMac but in a small form factor with upgradable slots for video, memory, etc.
Mac Pro should be based on Mac mini, but with a choice of i7 or Xeon CPU, 6 user-serviceable memory slots, 2-3 expansion slots, and choice of 256 or 512 GB SSD. Complemented by multiple Thunderbolt port, external Superdrive, and Apple's own 5-bay DAS.
Yah I agree. I think there needs to be a factor between the iMac and MacPro.
I want the power of the top of the line iMac but in a small form factor with upgradable slots for video, memory, etc.
OdduWon
Sep 15, 04:50 PM
I hope the 2.33GHz processor comes standard in the 17" since it�s the highest-end model...:D
i thought merom went to 2.66 :confused: or was that conroe?
i thought merom went to 2.66 :confused: or was that conroe?
nebulos
May 4, 03:16 PM
please don't show an Air on the front page again.
you're giving me almost-gasms, (i.e., tiny heart attacks).
you're giving me almost-gasms, (i.e., tiny heart attacks).
SeattleMoose
Mar 27, 10:26 AM
is already old. We already have "clouds". Apple is the "cloud" for our apps. MobileMe is the "cloud" for whatever you want to put on that "cloud" server. The AppStore is "in the cloud". There are many other examples.....
The term is getting a bit long in the tooth....
The term is getting a bit long in the tooth....
28monkeys
Apr 23, 06:21 PM
Bogus story because Apple would never fit graphics cards capable of outputting at that res in the iMacs or laptops. Plus I don't think any single monitor can have that resolution that you can buy today?
Do you understand technology?
Do you understand technology?
coder12
Mar 26, 11:45 PM
So how is that much different from them releasing new iPads 11 months later... like they just did? All the iPads in use didn't suddenly stop working.
Like I said earlier... If they are released right away in the school year, the other students and staff would be in an uproar because they would say we should have seen this coming and blah blah blah, we should have waited until the start of the year :V
11 months later gives us a greater reason to have bought them this year. I know they won't stop working, but they (staff and other students) only want the newest and best..
Like I said earlier... If they are released right away in the school year, the other students and staff would be in an uproar because they would say we should have seen this coming and blah blah blah, we should have waited until the start of the year :V
11 months later gives us a greater reason to have bought them this year. I know they won't stop working, but they (staff and other students) only want the newest and best..
ravenvii
May 3, 01:44 PM
Okay, but we start with only 1 HP. So, a number of us could die in the first round?
The villain's level doesn't matter, right? He either kills all or he loses.
If you're extremely unlucky, yes, but it'll be nearly impossible (I won't allow the villain to buy a hulking level 10 dragon for 1 point, for instance ;)).
The villain's level only matters once the heroes reaches, and battles, the villain. The villain is the "final boss" of the game.
The villain's level doesn't matter, right? He either kills all or he loses.
If you're extremely unlucky, yes, but it'll be nearly impossible (I won't allow the villain to buy a hulking level 10 dragon for 1 point, for instance ;)).
The villain's level only matters once the heroes reaches, and battles, the villain. The villain is the "final boss" of the game.
*LTD*
Apr 25, 09:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
"As many observers have noted, the iOS location database does not record exact GPS data, instead seeking to pinpoint the locations of Wi-Fi access points and cell towers that the device comes within range of"
So what's all the fuss over? It shows what cell towers you were near. OMG!!
"As many observers have noted, the iOS location database does not record exact GPS data, instead seeking to pinpoint the locations of Wi-Fi access points and cell towers that the device comes within range of"
So what's all the fuss over? It shows what cell towers you were near. OMG!!
0 comments:
Post a Comment