Dr_Maybe
Aug 2, 03:38 PM
In Apple will withdraw the iPod. Nobody needs it any more. Nobody wants it. A huge, useless, glowing apple will be all anyone will want.
Funny :D
<confused applause />
Funny :D
<confused applause />
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
shaolindave
May 4, 06:32 PM
One thing that concerns me is educational pricing.
That's something about the App Store I've been keeping an eye on since the beginning. I'm developing some educational games that I want to distribute freely to schools, and only charge for the home version. It'd be nice if the App Store could distinguish between different types of customers.
That's something about the App Store I've been keeping an eye on since the beginning. I'm developing some educational games that I want to distribute freely to schools, and only charge for the home version. It'd be nice if the App Store could distinguish between different types of customers.
wovel
Apr 7, 12:00 PM
They can have my screen. It only bleeds on the edges. Still enough real estate for a seven inch model.
Let's see a picture of you holding your iPad 2 demonstrating this :)
I don't understand, Apple can't let RIM have 12 panels? When they sell off those 12 units, Apple can let them have 12 more.
They need to make display models as well. They need 1012 to cover the display models and the 12 that will sell.
I see the short sighted Apple pom-pom shakers are once again giddy with excitement. The juvenile remarks are embarrassing.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
Strategic planning does not make a monopoly, you appear to have no concept of what a monopoly actually is.
So you want Apple to be forced by the government to reduce its manufacturing, tell its customers "sorry, no iPad for you" because the competition needs to catch up? How stupid is that?:rolleyes:
They want Apple to fall, since no one can do it in the free market, they want government intervention. They might have a point if they were engaged in anti-competitive behaviors like Microsoft did. Like telling PC manufacturers all of theirs products had to come with only Windows pre-installed. Buying capacity that is not even sufficient to meet demand is in no way anti-competitive.
I suspect THIS is why HP chose to use a 9.7" 4:3 display on their TouchPad tablet. When all of Asia is stamping out iPad screens it would be a lot easier for HP to acquire iPad panels, using the manufacturer's economies of scale, than to have them manufacture different panels alongside iPad panels.
HP and Amazon are the only ones that have any hope of competing anyway. Everyone else would just be wasting Apple's panels.
^This.
Unfortunately, most posters here think Apple always acts in the best interests of its customers. Kind of cute, actually.
Corporations tend to act in the best interest of theirs owners. It is actually a requirement for corporate officers in public companies. Having said that, Apple is the most customer focused company in the mobile device market. Sales show this and so does every independent customer satisfaction survey performed in the past few years.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
iPad 3 to be a small update like iPad 2? I wouldn't doubt it with the lack of competition.
This is just silly. They mad a 9x leap in graphics performance in less then 12 months without a single credible competitor.
Let's see a picture of you holding your iPad 2 demonstrating this :)
I don't understand, Apple can't let RIM have 12 panels? When they sell off those 12 units, Apple can let them have 12 more.
They need to make display models as well. They need 1012 to cover the display models and the 12 that will sell.
I see the short sighted Apple pom-pom shakers are once again giddy with excitement. The juvenile remarks are embarrassing.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
Strategic planning does not make a monopoly, you appear to have no concept of what a monopoly actually is.
So you want Apple to be forced by the government to reduce its manufacturing, tell its customers "sorry, no iPad for you" because the competition needs to catch up? How stupid is that?:rolleyes:
They want Apple to fall, since no one can do it in the free market, they want government intervention. They might have a point if they were engaged in anti-competitive behaviors like Microsoft did. Like telling PC manufacturers all of theirs products had to come with only Windows pre-installed. Buying capacity that is not even sufficient to meet demand is in no way anti-competitive.
I suspect THIS is why HP chose to use a 9.7" 4:3 display on their TouchPad tablet. When all of Asia is stamping out iPad screens it would be a lot easier for HP to acquire iPad panels, using the manufacturer's economies of scale, than to have them manufacture different panels alongside iPad panels.
HP and Amazon are the only ones that have any hope of competing anyway. Everyone else would just be wasting Apple's panels.
^This.
Unfortunately, most posters here think Apple always acts in the best interests of its customers. Kind of cute, actually.
Corporations tend to act in the best interest of theirs owners. It is actually a requirement for corporate officers in public companies. Having said that, Apple is the most customer focused company in the mobile device market. Sales show this and so does every independent customer satisfaction survey performed in the past few years.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
iPad 3 to be a small update like iPad 2? I wouldn't doubt it with the lack of competition.
This is just silly. They mad a 9x leap in graphics performance in less then 12 months without a single credible competitor.
Man9z0r
Mar 29, 02:16 PM
I think this is a great idea. Even more for Android devices. I don't like how hard it is to sync music on my android so this makes me stoked! I buy most of my music from Amazon as it is anyway. Pretty neat idea. I am curious what they do with your data if you have over 5 gigs and then don't want to pay for the 20 gigs. Do they just delete it?
I hope apple decides to lower the price of mobile me with this out now!
:D
I hope apple decides to lower the price of mobile me with this out now!
:D
cdallen
Mar 30, 06:38 AM
Yeah like where the heck is my iPad 2? According to the latest email manifest, at 2:03 am it was somewhere over the pacific. This isn't near enough information. I'm thinking of chartering a jet so I can fly out and track it's progress myself. Anyone else want in?
:D
WOW... what a perfect specimen you are not
:D
WOW... what a perfect specimen you are not
miloblithe
Aug 7, 02:01 PM
For those of you hoping for a mid-range tower, you're looking at it. Take the processor down from dual 2.66Ghz to dual 2.0 and the HD down from 250GB to 160, and you're looking at a $2124 machine.
I sincerely doubt Apple will introduce any new model to its current lineup of mini/pro, macbook/macbook pro. Your best hope is a supermini.
I sincerely doubt Apple will introduce any new model to its current lineup of mini/pro, macbook/macbook pro. Your best hope is a supermini.
iBug2
Mar 27, 01:47 AM
There's no way they are going to release iPad 3 in Fall after Steve said 2011 is going to be the year of iPad 2.
Tones2
Apr 26, 03:13 PM
Now all this is based on the assumption that your motivation is to have your company make billions and billions of dollars. Maybe Steve Jobs motivation is just to make the best darn tech gadgets in the world.
Boy, you are sniffing a serious amount of glue.:rolleyes: His motivation is to make brainwashed fanboys BELIEVE Apple is making the best darn tech gadgets in the world, such that Apple can make the most darn profits and he can get the biggest darn bonus. And with THAT, he is a genious.
Tony
Boy, you are sniffing a serious amount of glue.:rolleyes: His motivation is to make brainwashed fanboys BELIEVE Apple is making the best darn tech gadgets in the world, such that Apple can make the most darn profits and he can get the biggest darn bonus. And with THAT, he is a genious.
Tony
jholzner
Aug 11, 09:08 AM
It sure does. Quite exciting really. I think all consumer products will get Core 2 Duo (merom + conroe) in September. Although, seeing as Merom is socket compatable with the current line up, I dont think we will see a Conroe in the iMac.
I tend to agree that they may use Merom in the iMac but since they put Woodcrest in the Mac Pros it gives me hope that they won't use Merom in the iMac and just use it in the portable line where they really belong.
I tend to agree that they may use Merom in the iMac but since they put Woodcrest in the Mac Pros it gives me hope that they won't use Merom in the iMac and just use it in the portable line where they really belong.
portishead
Apr 26, 03:05 PM
My friend brought his Xoom over to show me. I was excited to check it out since I had never seen one. He ended up returning it and getting an iPad 2 (online order since they aren't in stock). I didn't even try to sell him on the iPad but his Xoom couldn't even play video without dropping frames and audio sync.
I'm not a huge fanboi or anything. I wish iOS was more of a real OS as opposed to mobile, and had less restrictions, but it's still way more usable than the Xoom.
I'm not a huge fanboi or anything. I wish iOS was more of a real OS as opposed to mobile, and had less restrictions, but it's still way more usable than the Xoom.
Clydefrog
Sep 15, 05:15 PM
Please don't mess with the keyboard. The Macbook keyboard wouldn't suit the Macbook Pro.
agreed, the keyboard would look FUGLY.
agreed, the keyboard would look FUGLY.
GoodWatch
Apr 5, 01:53 PM
"Toyota had agreed to do so to "maintain their good relationship with Apple," "
Toyota has a relationship with Apple, good or bad? Why? I don't see the connection.
The upcoming iPrius ;)
Toyota has a relationship with Apple, good or bad? Why? I don't see the connection.
The upcoming iPrius ;)
MacBookPro13"
Mar 31, 05:17 AM
I reckon Lion will be the last of cat names used for OS X.
They can't really call the next one Ocelot, for example.
Mac OS X Pus*y ;)
They can't really call the next one Ocelot, for example.
Mac OS X Pus*y ;)
poppe
Jul 21, 05:28 PM
[QUOTE=ebuc]
Personally, I think its about time we have a major case revision. The aluminum PowerBooks have been out for almost three years (september '03 I believe). Don't get me wrong; current design is great: its functional and elegant, but change has to come eventually.
[QUOTE]
Agreed!... But so far anytime that topic is brought up, you know what alot are saying? They say "why fix a good thing, if it isn't broken."
If they just refined it at least. You know added magnetic latch and some other stuff...
Personally, I think its about time we have a major case revision. The aluminum PowerBooks have been out for almost three years (september '03 I believe). Don't get me wrong; current design is great: its functional and elegant, but change has to come eventually.
[QUOTE]
Agreed!... But so far anytime that topic is brought up, you know what alot are saying? They say "why fix a good thing, if it isn't broken."
If they just refined it at least. You know added magnetic latch and some other stuff...
macenforcer
Aug 7, 06:46 PM
1 GB Sticks are only $125 each from Third Parties. (http://www.oempcworld.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=1.0G-PC2-5300E&Category_Code=240pin)
2x1 = 2GB = $250 vs Apples 4x 512 NOT 6x 512 = + $270
4x1 = 4GB = $500 vs. Apple's $990
I think you really should change your order to base ram and add TWO 1GB sticks for only $250 for a total of 3GB to begin with for less than the cost of TWO from Apple taking up only 4 slots. :)
But are they FB-DIMMs?
2x1 = 2GB = $250 vs Apples 4x 512 NOT 6x 512 = + $270
4x1 = 4GB = $500 vs. Apple's $990
I think you really should change your order to base ram and add TWO 1GB sticks for only $250 for a total of 3GB to begin with for less than the cost of TWO from Apple taking up only 4 slots. :)
But are they FB-DIMMs?
nodabs
Sep 11, 02:51 PM
Anyone else notice that the student/teacher discount for Office 2004 expires tomorrow?
Apple Store Link (http://store.apple.com/1-800-780-5009/WebObjects/EducationIndividual?type=higherEd&family=MSStudentTeacherOffer)
Any chance that means something?
Apple Store Link (http://store.apple.com/1-800-780-5009/WebObjects/EducationIndividual?type=higherEd&family=MSStudentTeacherOffer)
Any chance that means something?
ticman
Nov 14, 07:42 AM
Interesting Jape. Now let's see if they send us a confirmation email. They have been quite good about it the past.
Sydde
Apr 14, 11:45 AM
You can always donate to the federal reserve. Don't let me stop you!
Yes, I want to donate to the Fed (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-real-housewives-of-wall-street-look-whos-cashing-in-on-the-bailout-20110411?page=1) (so that my money can go lie on a Cayman island beach, since I never will be able to).
Yes, I want to donate to the Fed (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-real-housewives-of-wall-street-look-whos-cashing-in-on-the-bailout-20110411?page=1) (so that my money can go lie on a Cayman island beach, since I never will be able to).
KnightWRX
May 4, 07:15 PM
Quite true, I'm pretty sure it was. But at least it's possible somehow.
I don't see how Apple could get away with not having a way to make an install backup. The recovery partition is not good enough. It's a fact of life that hard drives die.
Not to mention why would I want to waste space on a recovery partition anyhow ? ;)
I do hope Apple gets a clue from how the different Linux/BSD distributions have been doing it. Just give us something to make our own installation media as a download, not some glorified app installer.
If they do, great, if they don't, I'll buy a physical copy.
I don't see how Apple could get away with not having a way to make an install backup. The recovery partition is not good enough. It's a fact of life that hard drives die.
Not to mention why would I want to waste space on a recovery partition anyhow ? ;)
I do hope Apple gets a clue from how the different Linux/BSD distributions have been doing it. Just give us something to make our own installation media as a download, not some glorified app installer.
If they do, great, if they don't, I'll buy a physical copy.
illbeback
Apr 5, 04:34 PM
Nope Apple is the ruler of all.
The master of the universe and the company that knows better than you do.
Just notice how they act.
What they censor and how hypocritical they are.
Only Uncle Steve can give you permission and he's never going to do that.
He's GOD according to many fanboys here...
All Hail Apple! (no special symbols needed). :) ha ha ha ha ha:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:
The master of the universe and the company that knows better than you do.
Just notice how they act.
What they censor and how hypocritical they are.
Only Uncle Steve can give you permission and he's never going to do that.
He's GOD according to many fanboys here...
All Hail Apple! (no special symbols needed). :) ha ha ha ha ha:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:
wclyffe
Jan 6, 04:41 PM
I've had mine since November, generally use it in the horizontal position, and haven't had problems with it rattling (and I've got a car with a not-very-smooth-ride). That would suggest that the mechanism is not always loose. I am nervous about it wearing loose over time, because it is surprisingly easy to move by hand, and seems kind of delicate.
tstreete, nice to see you are still checking in...I remember you were one of the first to get a car kit. In the landscape view, my unit does not rattle, but in the vertical position it rattles a lot and I often keep it like this to charge the phone or listen to music, etc when I'm not using the nav app. I'm going to exchange it and see how I fair while waiting to see what the word on the Magellan kit is. Thanks for your help.
tstreete, nice to see you are still checking in...I remember you were one of the first to get a car kit. In the landscape view, my unit does not rattle, but in the vertical position it rattles a lot and I often keep it like this to charge the phone or listen to music, etc when I'm not using the nav app. I'm going to exchange it and see how I fair while waiting to see what the word on the Magellan kit is. Thanks for your help.
Jape
Nov 16, 09:28 PM
well tomorrow could actually be the day BLT ships of tomtom car kits:) It seems that a lot of people have canceled, because there back ordered number went down. Hopefully they will overnight it...lol ;)
crisss1205
May 7, 05:08 PM
I say that they make it free to Mac users and like $29 a year for Windows users.