Tronic
Mar 29, 09:24 AM
As much as I hate my 3G these days (SLOW) i'd rather wait a few extra months for an LTE iPhone to last me another 2 years instead of having LTE in 2012 and feeling the need to upgrade so soon.
Hopefully iPhone 5 will be both 3G/LTE and GSM/CDMA
Hopefully iPhone 5 will be both 3G/LTE and GSM/CDMA
thereubster
Nov 7, 06:28 AM
I think Apple may at least consider putting an ATI x1400 in the top model (blackbook) but I'm afraid the Intel x3000 for Mobile chipset is not coming out until Santa Rosa. The desktop version is now available with the G965 but the mobile version is next year sorry. So its GMA950 till then or ATI x1400 if you are VERY lucky (or is there a Geforce Go 7300GS?, that would still be way better than the GMA950)
Willis
Oct 15, 05:44 PM
"It takes forever. By the time you've gone through all that, the girl's got up and left! You're much better off to take one of your earbuds out and put it in her ear. Then you're connected with about two feet of headphone cable"
Stevie has a valid point. I might have to try that :D
Stevie has a valid point. I might have to try that :D
MacRumors
Sep 22, 12:47 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
The New York Post (http://www.nypost.com/business/retail_iation_business_tim_arango.htm) reports that Wal-Mart is warning Hollywood studios against partnering with Apple's iTunes Store for movie distribution.
According to studio executives, "Wal-Mart has overtly threatened to retaliate if [studios] go into business with Apple."
While Apple has only signed one movie studio (Disney) to the iTunes store, the early success (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060919142943.shtml) has caught the attention of other studios. One executive is quoted as saying "We all want to be in the Apple business".
The threat of Wal-Mart repurcussions, however, may temper enthusiasm as Wal-Mart controls a large portion of the retail market for DVDs.
The situation between [Wal-Mart] and Hollywood has gotten so heated and so high-level that Jobs recently phoned Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott to ask him to moderate his stance, according to a source.
The New York Post (http://www.nypost.com/business/retail_iation_business_tim_arango.htm) reports that Wal-Mart is warning Hollywood studios against partnering with Apple's iTunes Store for movie distribution.
According to studio executives, "Wal-Mart has overtly threatened to retaliate if [studios] go into business with Apple."
While Apple has only signed one movie studio (Disney) to the iTunes store, the early success (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060919142943.shtml) has caught the attention of other studios. One executive is quoted as saying "We all want to be in the Apple business".
The threat of Wal-Mart repurcussions, however, may temper enthusiasm as Wal-Mart controls a large portion of the retail market for DVDs.
The situation between [Wal-Mart] and Hollywood has gotten so heated and so high-level that Jobs recently phoned Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott to ask him to moderate his stance, according to a source.
FreeState
Mar 25, 07:53 PM
The YouTube app is not letting me play a lot of content "the owner of this video does not allow playback on the iPad."
Lady GaGa's Born This Way (Country Road Version) played before I updated and now won't play in the app - it will play in Safari on YouTubes website...
Lady GaGa's Born This Way (Country Road Version) played before I updated and now won't play in the app - it will play in Safari on YouTubes website...
jgk6502
Mar 21, 11:17 PM
After he received the iPad2, he scrambled around his house looking for other things to return, with a same stickie note attached.
Playboy subscription - Wife says no. Hugh says yes, as a bunny shows up at his door.
Playboy subscription - Wife says no. Hugh says yes, as a bunny shows up at his door.
RebootD
Apr 11, 03:06 PM
Do those in the anti-piracy camp have major issues with someone who pirates Adobe products, but doesn't "profit" from them?....i.e doesn't make even enough money to cover the costs of the original products or even makes zero dollars?
Yes. It's stealing, download a trial version and if you like it buy it. If not go get a cheaper solution elsewhere.
I give it one more year, and Adobe's products will be entirely replaceable by App store Apps that will be SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper. Developers will be making their money, the apps will be cheap enough that piracy won't be as big of an issue, and everyone will be happy (except Adobe....and those heavily invested into their software model, and business).
People have been saying this for a decade and instead the competition has been eaten or don't exist anymore. There is more than Adobe's apps but the entire collaboration between native files within the suite.
Could it happen? Sure. But they will have be big enough to fight a buyout buy Adobe and/or come out with an entire suite (page layout, photo and web etc) to directly compete as a 'package' to really make in the professional realm of agencies etc.
Yes. It's stealing, download a trial version and if you like it buy it. If not go get a cheaper solution elsewhere.
I give it one more year, and Adobe's products will be entirely replaceable by App store Apps that will be SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper. Developers will be making their money, the apps will be cheap enough that piracy won't be as big of an issue, and everyone will be happy (except Adobe....and those heavily invested into their software model, and business).
People have been saying this for a decade and instead the competition has been eaten or don't exist anymore. There is more than Adobe's apps but the entire collaboration between native files within the suite.
Could it happen? Sure. But they will have be big enough to fight a buyout buy Adobe and/or come out with an entire suite (page layout, photo and web etc) to directly compete as a 'package' to really make in the professional realm of agencies etc.
leekohler
Apr 4, 03:59 PM
Uhm, yeah. Saying "this is not true and that's it" is no different than "this is true and that's it."
Well, that's what you did. You get what you give.
Well, that's what you did. You get what you give.
HyperZboy
Nov 4, 01:57 AM
Frankly, the vast majority of users, and developers, and content providers, DO NOT care what you personally want, no matter how much you roll your eyes.
Flash is on virtually every computer on Earth, and pretty soon it will be on virtually every smart phone as well. Except the iPhone, of course.
Flash works very well, for the vast majority of users. The fact that Apple has not expended the minimum effort required to get Flash working more efficiently in OS X, is mostly problem for only those relatively few of us, who prefer to use Mac OS.
(In my testing on OS 10.6.1, Safari is by far the worst of all browsers at handling Flash: it pushes the CPU to 77%, while Firefox and Camino stay at less than 49%. Safari is also by far the worst on Windows 7, where on the same video it runs to almost 30% of CPU, while IE8 is at 1%, and Firefox and Chrome are at 4%.
The vast majority of users enjoy what Flash provides.
And, Flash does things which would be impossible, or very hard, or prohibitively expensive, to do with other currently available technologies, and deploy them for all browsers and systems.
So, I repeat: the rest of the world DOES NOT care, that you, and a handful of weird backroom guys, have an irrational hatred of Flash. Move on.
The bottom line is, if Apple doesn't get Flash on the iPhone, it will quickly lose market share to Android. It's a HUGE missing feature, bigger than cut/paste and turn-by turn navigation and mms rolled together, and you can bet it will be advertised as such.
I'm amazed that you investigated so heavily the CPU usage and yet STILL came to the wrong conclusion, that this is Apple's fault.
For the record, you're completely wrong that FLASH works well on anything but Windows PCs.
Did you not notice in those numbers that FLASH doesn't work well on ALL MACS ON ALL BROWSERS ??? And FLASH is the reason for crashes on both POWERPC and INTEL Macs, even brand new Macs, from what I'm reading in other threads here on MacRumors.
So, how again is this Apple's fault that FLASH doesn't work on any recent Apple platform, iPhone, PowerPC, or INTEL?
Because Adobe doesn't care and has written crappy software. It has nothing to do with Apple.
Not much else crashes any of my Macs, so how is this Apple's fault?
Can you imagine what would happen if Apple let the current version of FLASH on the iPhone and peoples' phones started crashing like their Apple Macs are now? It would be on FOX NEWS!
Apple's making the right call here. The ball is in Adobe's court to get it right first on Macs.
Then I'll insist Apple let FLASH on the iPhone, but not a day sooner.
And I will bet dollars to doughnuts that your Android prediction turns out wrong too, FLASH or no FLASH.
I am constantly going to websites that I cannot view because the iPhone is lacking Flash player. You don't like Flash? Great, if there is something better out there, then competition will cause the better product to prevail. But for now, iPhone users are being deprived of THOUSANDS of Flash websites that other smartphone owners are able to view!!!!!!!!!! :mad:
Why is Apple blocking Flash? This is one for the FCC! Same reason that Microsoft used to block Netscape. Apple wants websites to use Apple software and not Flash. FAIL! It's a violation of free markets! Here comes a Netscape-Microsoft lawsuit in the Supreme Court, except this time with Flash-Apple.
If FLASH is an epic fail on both INTEL and POWERPC Macs and with both Safari and Firefox on Macs, how the hell do you think it's going to do on the iPhone?
This is NOT Apple's problem in my opinion. Adobe has just dropped the ball.
If FLASH crashes on most people's Macs, how do you think it will fair on the iPhone, since it's mostly the same browser?
Please people, think before you put your feet in your mouths.
Flash is on virtually every computer on Earth, and pretty soon it will be on virtually every smart phone as well. Except the iPhone, of course.
Flash works very well, for the vast majority of users. The fact that Apple has not expended the minimum effort required to get Flash working more efficiently in OS X, is mostly problem for only those relatively few of us, who prefer to use Mac OS.
(In my testing on OS 10.6.1, Safari is by far the worst of all browsers at handling Flash: it pushes the CPU to 77%, while Firefox and Camino stay at less than 49%. Safari is also by far the worst on Windows 7, where on the same video it runs to almost 30% of CPU, while IE8 is at 1%, and Firefox and Chrome are at 4%.
The vast majority of users enjoy what Flash provides.
And, Flash does things which would be impossible, or very hard, or prohibitively expensive, to do with other currently available technologies, and deploy them for all browsers and systems.
So, I repeat: the rest of the world DOES NOT care, that you, and a handful of weird backroom guys, have an irrational hatred of Flash. Move on.
The bottom line is, if Apple doesn't get Flash on the iPhone, it will quickly lose market share to Android. It's a HUGE missing feature, bigger than cut/paste and turn-by turn navigation and mms rolled together, and you can bet it will be advertised as such.
I'm amazed that you investigated so heavily the CPU usage and yet STILL came to the wrong conclusion, that this is Apple's fault.
For the record, you're completely wrong that FLASH works well on anything but Windows PCs.
Did you not notice in those numbers that FLASH doesn't work well on ALL MACS ON ALL BROWSERS ??? And FLASH is the reason for crashes on both POWERPC and INTEL Macs, even brand new Macs, from what I'm reading in other threads here on MacRumors.
So, how again is this Apple's fault that FLASH doesn't work on any recent Apple platform, iPhone, PowerPC, or INTEL?
Because Adobe doesn't care and has written crappy software. It has nothing to do with Apple.
Not much else crashes any of my Macs, so how is this Apple's fault?
Can you imagine what would happen if Apple let the current version of FLASH on the iPhone and peoples' phones started crashing like their Apple Macs are now? It would be on FOX NEWS!
Apple's making the right call here. The ball is in Adobe's court to get it right first on Macs.
Then I'll insist Apple let FLASH on the iPhone, but not a day sooner.
And I will bet dollars to doughnuts that your Android prediction turns out wrong too, FLASH or no FLASH.
I am constantly going to websites that I cannot view because the iPhone is lacking Flash player. You don't like Flash? Great, if there is something better out there, then competition will cause the better product to prevail. But for now, iPhone users are being deprived of THOUSANDS of Flash websites that other smartphone owners are able to view!!!!!!!!!! :mad:
Why is Apple blocking Flash? This is one for the FCC! Same reason that Microsoft used to block Netscape. Apple wants websites to use Apple software and not Flash. FAIL! It's a violation of free markets! Here comes a Netscape-Microsoft lawsuit in the Supreme Court, except this time with Flash-Apple.
If FLASH is an epic fail on both INTEL and POWERPC Macs and with both Safari and Firefox on Macs, how the hell do you think it's going to do on the iPhone?
This is NOT Apple's problem in my opinion. Adobe has just dropped the ball.
If FLASH crashes on most people's Macs, how do you think it will fair on the iPhone, since it's mostly the same browser?
Please people, think before you put your feet in your mouths.
SwitchingtoMAC
Jan 11, 05:00 PM
They're skipping the whole touchscreen/tablet thing and moving straight to 3D holograms that allow you to type, drag/drop and everything else by moving your hands and fingers around inside the hologram.
nah there going to introduce streaming directly into someones mind no need for a tv or anything else
:D:apple:
nah there going to introduce streaming directly into someones mind no need for a tv or anything else
:D:apple:
Prom1
Nov 11, 10:21 PM
I see this as an excuse for the developer to explore new horizons. Was it not the same "middleman process" when he first submitted the FaceBook app?? I'm sure it was; however maybe the recent changes are slowing final development to fruition & consumption.
Still the web still has a LONG way to go to become so called "best mobile app" because not all data should be sourced in real time or pulled/pushed when needed by the user. Many places where wireless provider data is STILL not truely unlimited & thus restricted (Canadian providers ALL the incumbents STILL charge & cap a specific ceiling of 1-2GB monthly with few % on the offered/pulled 6gb of data; along with tethering restrictions/allowances and so called "fair use" policies).
There are many applications that serve just as well or better with a single burst of data for 1 time & initial requests. Only specific changes in data which wold affect users are required and incremental.
Some applications, like stock data for trading applications, world news events/reports - need and require a continuous stream of data. Issue is web based cloud "apps" (more like interfaces) change not only the data presented to the end user, but many times augmenting the GUI layout which most of the times is not needed; this lacks in efficient data streaming, and more data bucket usuage & costs to the end user.
There is a HUGE reason why WML/WAP1.1 failed, and why WAP2.0 is in a static state of developmental evolution and suits feature phones, and not smartphones.
Yes I'm aware of HTML5 and what GoogleWave presents - but it proves that the GUI layout consistently changes due to new data streams and provides great event notifications - but its NOT suited for a battery packing handheld smartphone/feature phone device. To put it simply developers that code specifically to the web think of Desktops/Laptops (and recently MIDS) First & Foremost; mobile is thought up of only after mass consumption of their work is taken noticed. THAT is the issue.
Smartphones are THE MOST PERSONAL and trusted computing platform and thus heavily guarded by the end user. As such there NEEDS to be some kind of regulation, to what extent can be argued and never resolved for the next 10yrs - but it cannot nor should NOT be left to the end user!
At one point in the future, a smartphones evolution as a mobile device to a lifestyle personal companion should be as easy, as free, and as care free to use as our voices, words and hands (in any language, context & intent) and evolve as such. The only limitations are common sense, experience, and specific laws & moral aptitude for their uses.
Wow, that is thinking different. I think I'm high!!
:apple:
Still the web still has a LONG way to go to become so called "best mobile app" because not all data should be sourced in real time or pulled/pushed when needed by the user. Many places where wireless provider data is STILL not truely unlimited & thus restricted (Canadian providers ALL the incumbents STILL charge & cap a specific ceiling of 1-2GB monthly with few % on the offered/pulled 6gb of data; along with tethering restrictions/allowances and so called "fair use" policies).
There are many applications that serve just as well or better with a single burst of data for 1 time & initial requests. Only specific changes in data which wold affect users are required and incremental.
Some applications, like stock data for trading applications, world news events/reports - need and require a continuous stream of data. Issue is web based cloud "apps" (more like interfaces) change not only the data presented to the end user, but many times augmenting the GUI layout which most of the times is not needed; this lacks in efficient data streaming, and more data bucket usuage & costs to the end user.
There is a HUGE reason why WML/WAP1.1 failed, and why WAP2.0 is in a static state of developmental evolution and suits feature phones, and not smartphones.
Yes I'm aware of HTML5 and what GoogleWave presents - but it proves that the GUI layout consistently changes due to new data streams and provides great event notifications - but its NOT suited for a battery packing handheld smartphone/feature phone device. To put it simply developers that code specifically to the web think of Desktops/Laptops (and recently MIDS) First & Foremost; mobile is thought up of only after mass consumption of their work is taken noticed. THAT is the issue.
Smartphones are THE MOST PERSONAL and trusted computing platform and thus heavily guarded by the end user. As such there NEEDS to be some kind of regulation, to what extent can be argued and never resolved for the next 10yrs - but it cannot nor should NOT be left to the end user!
At one point in the future, a smartphones evolution as a mobile device to a lifestyle personal companion should be as easy, as free, and as care free to use as our voices, words and hands (in any language, context & intent) and evolve as such. The only limitations are common sense, experience, and specific laws & moral aptitude for their uses.
Wow, that is thinking different. I think I'm high!!
:apple:
Digitaljim
Nov 27, 01:07 PM
It's the sort of news that'd make my Mum buy an iPod, which is good for Apple I suppose.
NoStopN
Mar 21, 10:24 PM
That's hilarious. I needed that to clean off the rotten day I had. At least my day wasn't ruined by anything from Apple.
e-coli
Aug 8, 08:30 PM
The one thing to remember is that this is a Developer's Conference so there is not going to be a lot of pizazz with flashy announcements. There was not a whole lot of new mind-blowing things announced so he could have been a little bit bored with it.
Bored with such trivial things as THE OPERATING SYSTEM that runs his entire corporation! I highly doubt that's the case.
Bored with such trivial things as THE OPERATING SYSTEM that runs his entire corporation! I highly doubt that's the case.
kpbpsw
Nov 4, 06:07 PM
We need to get developers to use open standards and flash is not!
Besides flash being a processor hog (bad code especially on the Mac) it is bad for search engines, it is bad for web standards, it is bad for design.
At one time it was the only way to get rich media and non-refresh dynamic content on the web. Now there are much better lower overhead, open, web standards based ways of doing this. Flash should go away!
Apple taking a stand against flash is good. All the internet needs now is a open standard video codec!
What we all need to do is educate / demand that web developers / sited eliminate flash and use open standards.
Personally I do not use sites that require flash for operability - one of my favorite hotel chains "upgraded" their site to a flash based reservation system - it looks great but is slow and un-reliable, - so I stopped staying there and emailed them telling them they lost a customer due to their bad flash based reservation system!
I disagree that people don't care about flash players. Plenty of sites out there use flash extensively and do not offer a non-flash version. Adding adobe flash capability to the iphone would make it that much better in my opinion. Just because apple doesn't want it, doesn't mean it's not useful. I for one believe that apple "sometimes" listens to it's users, and if enough people complain, apple will react. Think apps for the iphone (remember apple's stand, it's an ipod, not a computer), cut/paste and push service. Background apps seem to be the next barrier to be broken, why not flash?
As far as adobe and MS "holding back" web progression, the whole point of flash is that it is a tool that makes highly interactive media sites easier to accomplish.
Besides flash being a processor hog (bad code especially on the Mac) it is bad for search engines, it is bad for web standards, it is bad for design.
At one time it was the only way to get rich media and non-refresh dynamic content on the web. Now there are much better lower overhead, open, web standards based ways of doing this. Flash should go away!
Apple taking a stand against flash is good. All the internet needs now is a open standard video codec!
What we all need to do is educate / demand that web developers / sited eliminate flash and use open standards.
Personally I do not use sites that require flash for operability - one of my favorite hotel chains "upgraded" their site to a flash based reservation system - it looks great but is slow and un-reliable, - so I stopped staying there and emailed them telling them they lost a customer due to their bad flash based reservation system!
I disagree that people don't care about flash players. Plenty of sites out there use flash extensively and do not offer a non-flash version. Adding adobe flash capability to the iphone would make it that much better in my opinion. Just because apple doesn't want it, doesn't mean it's not useful. I for one believe that apple "sometimes" listens to it's users, and if enough people complain, apple will react. Think apps for the iphone (remember apple's stand, it's an ipod, not a computer), cut/paste and push service. Background apps seem to be the next barrier to be broken, why not flash?
As far as adobe and MS "holding back" web progression, the whole point of flash is that it is a tool that makes highly interactive media sites easier to accomplish.
kminov
Nov 7, 04:43 AM
let's hope they release it soon, although it's a bit frustrating for those who bought core duo models recently for the same price. kind of drawback on apple
KnightWRX
Apr 11, 12:28 PM
No, not 100%. You can't possibly know, unless you've surveyed every CSX pirate there ever was. Case in point. You have a full time job, and in this inflating economy, it's not enough to support your family. So, you try to do a little work on the side - just to help pay the bills. Does this person have $1200 to spend on the software? No way. Would he like to? Of course, but his family comes first.
So you're saying this theoritical guy that doesn't already have a copy of the CS5 program he's talented in using wouldn't make enough money to pay for it but would make enough to support his family ?
Case in point, people who pirate the CS5 Master Suite probably don't ever use half the applications in it and probably don't have the required talent to even use it professionally. People who do either have their work pay for it or can afford themselves as freelancers.
No, again. not any goofball can learn Photoshop and Illustrator. You need to have a certain amount of talent in order to make sense of the tools your are working with. Also, each one can enhance the usability of the other over time with practice, and a lot of trial and error.
You agree with him. You're saying the same thing as he is, that without the talent and knowledge to make sense of the tool, all you're doing is clicking through the tools as the tutorials you've found dictate and not actually "designing" anything using them or even doing art at all.
IE, talentless hacks thinking that because they read through "Teach yourself Photoshop CS5 in 24 hours", they're now a graphics artist.
So you're saying this theoritical guy that doesn't already have a copy of the CS5 program he's talented in using wouldn't make enough money to pay for it but would make enough to support his family ?
Case in point, people who pirate the CS5 Master Suite probably don't ever use half the applications in it and probably don't have the required talent to even use it professionally. People who do either have their work pay for it or can afford themselves as freelancers.
No, again. not any goofball can learn Photoshop and Illustrator. You need to have a certain amount of talent in order to make sense of the tools your are working with. Also, each one can enhance the usability of the other over time with practice, and a lot of trial and error.
You agree with him. You're saying the same thing as he is, that without the talent and knowledge to make sense of the tool, all you're doing is clicking through the tools as the tutorials you've found dictate and not actually "designing" anything using them or even doing art at all.
IE, talentless hacks thinking that because they read through "Teach yourself Photoshop CS5 in 24 hours", they're now a graphics artist.
MacNut
Sep 12, 04:56 PM
So how do you work this Album Artist tag?
What I would expect is to put the artists (separated by comas or something) in that tag, and then that song will show up under all those listed artists.
The way it is now doesn't make any difference in organization/categorization of the archive.
How do you guys use it?It works for soundtracks or compilations, It is used to organize the albums better. Its very handy.
What I would expect is to put the artists (separated by comas or something) in that tag, and then that song will show up under all those listed artists.
The way it is now doesn't make any difference in organization/categorization of the archive.
How do you guys use it?It works for soundtracks or compilations, It is used to organize the albums better. Its very handy.
lizard79
Aug 24, 01:52 PM
There seem to be varying reports of the serial numbers affected, and Apple's site seems dead right now. I'm hoping my battery IS affected, because I was getting close to ordering a new battery, as my year-and three month old battery is down to 25% of it's original capacity after 440 load cycles.
The site was up briefly and claimed 4-6 weeks for the new battery to ship. That's a LONG time to go without a battery.
don't worry 'bout that. they will send you a new one and then you return the battery - at least they did it this way with my battery..
The site was up briefly and claimed 4-6 weeks for the new battery to ship. That's a LONG time to go without a battery.
don't worry 'bout that. they will send you a new one and then you return the battery - at least they did it this way with my battery..
iGary
Aug 24, 12:11 PM
Apple's having a bad day.
Creative and now this.
Creative and now this.
SandboxGeneral
Mar 21, 02:15 PM
Owned? Aside from some random dislike of the "term",
I worry about youth today.
Off topic here, but I have to say that I agree with you here. That owned or pwned terminology bugs me.
On topic, the story is good and I had to email it to a few friends of mine.
I worry about youth today.
Off topic here, but I have to say that I agree with you here. That owned or pwned terminology bugs me.
On topic, the story is good and I had to email it to a few friends of mine.
Cue
Oct 27, 03:12 AM
Although I never had a RSS, I did apply the update.
I'm curious about those temps you are mentioning though.
I have CoreDuoTemp installed and it shows 57C without doing anything fancy! Just Mail.app and Safari are open and I haven't done any serious work in the meantime.
34C seems kinda low :/
I'm curious about those temps you are mentioning though.
I have CoreDuoTemp installed and it shows 57C without doing anything fancy! Just Mail.app and Safari are open and I haven't done any serious work in the meantime.
34C seems kinda low :/
thisisahughes
Mar 28, 10:02 PM
I don't mind Radio Shack for random overpriced cables in an emergency, but I would never buy anything else in there. The salespeople are just far too pushy and circle around you like vultures attracted to a rotting carcass.
+1 kudos.
+1 kudos.
kas23
Nov 23, 07:23 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)
This just proves how idiotic humanity is. These songs have been available in multiple formats for over 40 years, but only now, since they are offered in a lossy digital file, do people buy them.
This just proves how idiotic humanity is. These songs have been available in multiple formats for over 40 years, but only now, since they are offered in a lossy digital file, do people buy them.
