adorable
New Member
For desktop, I know Windows are the majority. How you know for servers, Windows are used by most people? :think:
Adobe/Apple Relationship Takes A Turn For The Worst
- Thread starter 9V-Orion Images
- Start date
For desktop, I know Windows are the majority. How you know for servers, Windows are used by most people? :think:
cks2k2
New Member
You must be drunk and/or high. *NIX-based systems still power most services. Who is crazy enough to use Windows to run utilities and nuclear power stations?
MS did not pwn Palm OS. Palm OS pwned itself.
theonlyone
New Member
Even though IDC did publish data that MS server market share is greater, there are much debate in whether the data is accurate. For example, many servers come pre-installed with MS server operating system but the users subsequently refresh it with Linux. Many linux servers also used old machines which the study did not take into account.
However, all these counter arguments are only based circumstantial evidences. It would be disrepectful to call someone drunk or high just because you disagree with him.
wanna know why iPhone is still the best? because it can dual-boot into Android too...
check this out; http://www.quickpwn.com/2010/04/android-successfully-running-on-iphone.html
check this out; http://www.quickpwn.com/2010/04/android-successfully-running-on-iphone.html
Harry Potter
New Member
theonlyone
New Member
How come it doesn't support java? But the odin user sums it up nicely.
Someone's confusing "Open source/standard" with "Open platform".
A handy cheat sheet:
iPhone - Closed source/Closed platform
Flash - Closed source/Open platform
Android - Open source/Open platform
OSX and Windows - Closed Source/Open platform
Linux - Open Source/Open platform
nightpiper
Senior Member
Aiyo, the thread OT very jialat liao. HAHAHAHA!!!
Anyway, despite all Jobs' evil practice, i've to be totally honest with this. He's one guy who has brought lots of excitement in the computers & gadgets industry. That i must concede. Imagine w/o him & his ways, we'll stil be stuck with Windows CE in smartphones. 10 out of 10 people i asked, they all gave winmo thumbs down, i've also had an O2 b4 & didn't like it at all. The so-call smartphone is so very dumb!!
I think people have to look at apple products like a designer brand, serves its purpose at a premium. Much like those fancy Stark design can-opener vs normal $8 type. :bsmilie:
i dun mind getting a mac computer, but i find it to be of little choices. Either i go laptop & its variants (ie, in the form of mac-mini & iMac, they use laptop parts but in bigger form factor. Familiar? It's like the iPad, iPod inert but huge form factor) or go the mac pro way (ie, server/workstation class, too exp for average user) There isn't an "in-between" desktop ver as we commonly associate with likes of HP or Asus or Acer, etc. ;p
Anyway, despite all Jobs' evil practice, i've to be totally honest with this. He's one guy who has brought lots of excitement in the computers & gadgets industry. That i must concede. Imagine w/o him & his ways, we'll stil be stuck with Windows CE in smartphones. 10 out of 10 people i asked, they all gave winmo thumbs down, i've also had an O2 b4 & didn't like it at all. The so-call smartphone is so very dumb!!
I think people have to look at apple products like a designer brand, serves its purpose at a premium. Much like those fancy Stark design can-opener vs normal $8 type. :bsmilie:
i dun mind getting a mac computer, but i find it to be of little choices. Either i go laptop & its variants (ie, in the form of mac-mini & iMac, they use laptop parts but in bigger form factor. Familiar? It's like the iPad, iPod inert but huge form factor) or go the mac pro way (ie, server/workstation class, too exp for average user) There isn't an "in-between" desktop ver as we commonly associate with likes of HP or Asus or Acer, etc. ;p
night86mare
Deregistered
nightpiper
Senior Member
HAHAHAHA!! That was a funny one!!
I rem the older days of the quadro series where u can buy a 7600 or 8600 or the top end 9600 & all have the expandability options. U can buy a DSP card & run some audio apps on the 7600 603 processor or 8600 with 604 processor. These new gen of macs, u have only mac pro option & nothing in between. Kind of sad, i feel. Also back in those days, apple actually shaft a SCSI drive as the bootup, really zippy & the reliability of SCSI drives r juz so much better than IDE. Today the premium price tag hasn't change but the SCSI is now SATA. :sweat:
I hope apple can have an in-between model so anyone can add extra drives or dedicated hardware (eg, DSP card to run Logic 9 or Pro 3D cards for Cinema4D, etc) to do more stuff. The higher end mac pro shud come with SAS bootup drive as default. Sounds cool? HAHAHAHA!!! Wonder if SSD will come in SAS interface? That wud break the SATA 3 spec, 6Gb/s barrier!! :heart:
Sorry, i also OT liao.
I rem the older days of the quadro series where u can buy a 7600 or 8600 or the top end 9600 & all have the expandability options. U can buy a DSP card & run some audio apps on the 7600 603 processor or 8600 with 604 processor. These new gen of macs, u have only mac pro option & nothing in between. Kind of sad, i feel. Also back in those days, apple actually shaft a SCSI drive as the bootup, really zippy & the reliability of SCSI drives r juz so much better than IDE. Today the premium price tag hasn't change but the SCSI is now SATA. :sweat:
I hope apple can have an in-between model so anyone can add extra drives or dedicated hardware (eg, DSP card to run Logic 9 or Pro 3D cards for Cinema4D, etc) to do more stuff. The higher end mac pro shud come with SAS bootup drive as default. Sounds cool? HAHAHAHA!!! Wonder if SSD will come in SAS interface? That wud break the SATA 3 spec, 6Gb/s barrier!! :heart:
Sorry, i also OT liao.
Last edited:
theonlyone
New Member
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/
Apple has a long relationship with Adobe. In fact, we met Adobes founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Apple was their first big customer, adopting their Postscript language for our new Laserwriter printer. Apple invested in Adobe and owned around 20% of the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together to pioneer desktop publishing and there were many good times. Since that golden era, the companies have grown apart. Apple went through its near death experience, and Adobe was drawn to the corporate market with their Acrobat products. Today the two companies still work together to serve their joint creative customers Mac users buy around half of Adobes Creative Suite products but beyond that there are few joint interests.
I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobes Flash products so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven they say we want to protect our App Store but in reality it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.
First, theres Open.
Adobes Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobes Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system.
Apple has many proprietary products too. Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript all open standards. Apples mobile devices all ship with high performance, low power implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member.
Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple began with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted. Google uses it for Androids browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and RIM (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every smartphone web browser other than Microsofts uses WebKit. By making its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web browsers.
Second, theres the full web.
Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access the full web because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they dont say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with an estimated 40% of the webs video, shines in an app bundled on all Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo, Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People, National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and iPad users arent missing much video.
Another Adobe claim is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games. This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free. There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPhone, iPod and iPad than for any other platform in the world.
Third, theres reliability, security and performance.
Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst security records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We dont want to reduce the reliability and security of our iPhones, iPods and iPads by adding Flash.
In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it. Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early 2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and now they say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually ship, but were glad we didnt hold our breath. Who knows how it will perform?
Fourth, theres battery life.
To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a decoder called H.264 an industry standard that is used in every Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube), Vimeo, Netflix and many other companies.
Although Flash has recently added support for H.264, the video on almost all Flash websites currently requires an older generation decoder that is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in software. The difference is striking: on an iPhone, for example, H.264 videos play for up to 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play for less than 5 hours before the battery is fully drained.
When websites re-encode their videos using H.264, they can offer them without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like Apples Safari and Googles Chrome without any plugins whatsoever, and look great on iPhones, iPods and iPads.
...
Apple has a long relationship with Adobe. In fact, we met Adobes founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Apple was their first big customer, adopting their Postscript language for our new Laserwriter printer. Apple invested in Adobe and owned around 20% of the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together to pioneer desktop publishing and there were many good times. Since that golden era, the companies have grown apart. Apple went through its near death experience, and Adobe was drawn to the corporate market with their Acrobat products. Today the two companies still work together to serve their joint creative customers Mac users buy around half of Adobes Creative Suite products but beyond that there are few joint interests.
I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobes Flash products so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven they say we want to protect our App Store but in reality it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.
First, theres Open.
Adobes Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobes Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system.
Apple has many proprietary products too. Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript all open standards. Apples mobile devices all ship with high performance, low power implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member.
Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple began with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted. Google uses it for Androids browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and RIM (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every smartphone web browser other than Microsofts uses WebKit. By making its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web browsers.
Second, theres the full web.
Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access the full web because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they dont say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with an estimated 40% of the webs video, shines in an app bundled on all Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo, Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People, National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and iPad users arent missing much video.
Another Adobe claim is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games. This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free. There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPhone, iPod and iPad than for any other platform in the world.
Third, theres reliability, security and performance.
Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst security records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We dont want to reduce the reliability and security of our iPhones, iPods and iPads by adding Flash.
In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it. Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early 2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and now they say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually ship, but were glad we didnt hold our breath. Who knows how it will perform?
Fourth, theres battery life.
To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a decoder called H.264 an industry standard that is used in every Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube), Vimeo, Netflix and many other companies.
Although Flash has recently added support for H.264, the video on almost all Flash websites currently requires an older generation decoder that is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in software. The difference is striking: on an iPhone, for example, H.264 videos play for up to 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play for less than 5 hours before the battery is fully drained.
When websites re-encode their videos using H.264, they can offer them without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like Apples Safari and Googles Chrome without any plugins whatsoever, and look great on iPhones, iPods and iPads.
...
theonlyone
New Member
...
Fifth, theres Touch.
Flash was designed for PCs using mice, not for touch screens using fingers. For example, many Flash websites rely on rollovers, which pop up menus or other elements when the mouse arrow hovers over a specific spot. Apples revolutionary multi-touch interface doesnt use a mouse, and there is no concept of a rollover. Most Flash websites will need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices. If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?
Even if iPhones, iPods and iPads ran Flash, it would not solve the problem that most Flash websites need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices.
Sixth, the most important reason.
Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major technical drawbacks, and doesnt support touch based devices, there is an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile devices.
We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.
This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported platforms. Hence developers only have access to the lowest common denominator set of features. Again, we cannot accept an outcome where developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements because they are not available on our competitors platforms.
Flash is a cross platform development tool. It is not Adobes goal to help developers write the best iPhone, iPod and iPad apps. It is their goal to help developers write cross platform apps. And Adobe has been painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Apples platforms. For example, although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped CS5. Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac OS X.
Our motivation is simple we want to provide the most advanced and innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps the world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform so developers can create even more amazing, powerful, fun and useful applications. Everyone wins we sell more devices because we have the best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest selection of apps on any platform.
Conclusions.
Flash was created during the PC era for PCs and mice. Flash is a successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards all areas where Flash falls short.
The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Apples mobile devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch video or consume any kind of web content. And the 200,000 apps on Apples App Store proves that Flash isnt necessary for tens of thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications, including games.
New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind.
Steve Jobs
April, 2010
Fifth, theres Touch.
Flash was designed for PCs using mice, not for touch screens using fingers. For example, many Flash websites rely on rollovers, which pop up menus or other elements when the mouse arrow hovers over a specific spot. Apples revolutionary multi-touch interface doesnt use a mouse, and there is no concept of a rollover. Most Flash websites will need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices. If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?
Even if iPhones, iPods and iPads ran Flash, it would not solve the problem that most Flash websites need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices.
Sixth, the most important reason.
Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major technical drawbacks, and doesnt support touch based devices, there is an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile devices.
We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.
This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported platforms. Hence developers only have access to the lowest common denominator set of features. Again, we cannot accept an outcome where developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements because they are not available on our competitors platforms.
Flash is a cross platform development tool. It is not Adobes goal to help developers write the best iPhone, iPod and iPad apps. It is their goal to help developers write cross platform apps. And Adobe has been painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Apples platforms. For example, although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped CS5. Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac OS X.
Our motivation is simple we want to provide the most advanced and innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps the world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform so developers can create even more amazing, powerful, fun and useful applications. Everyone wins we sell more devices because we have the best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest selection of apps on any platform.
Conclusions.
Flash was created during the PC era for PCs and mice. Flash is a successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards all areas where Flash falls short.
The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Apples mobile devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch video or consume any kind of web content. And the 200,000 apps on Apples App Store proves that Flash isnt necessary for tens of thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications, including games.
New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind.
Steve Jobs
April, 2010
Most market share 'reports' look at sales. In the server market where one of the major platforms is available free and fragmented across multiple 'vendors' the figures generally get skewed badly.
If they just look at sales, probably over 50% or more Linux deployments don't get counted as their won't have been a 'sale', as something free like Debian, Ubuntu, etc was used instead of an 'enterprise' distribution like Suse or Redhat were a sale would have been booked.
Apple could still go for a massive head shot - Macs are frowned upon in the 'corporate' world but exist in many 'art' departments as 'creative types' like their Macs. But if Adobe stop releasing new versions of their 'creative suite' which most of this graphics designers use, the artists will move to Windows and the corpotate Windows addicts will never let the Macs back in...
On the other hand, Apple appears to make most of it's money out of 'consumer electronics' now and not computers. They have certainly dropped the ball on development of OSX while they forge off into ipod/iphone/ipad territory. Windows 7 seems to have well an truly caught up with the static OSX.
nightpiper
Senior Member
No matter how Jobs slams Adobe, how he's a supporter of open standards, etc... One thing i see for sure, apple grab all the goodness & advantage from the open community, repackage them, polished it, make them closed sys & sell for for loads of money. What did apple return back to the community? Nothing sadly.
OSx was from Unix or more accurately FreeBSD. Since its free, easy way out is to nip it & repackage, rebrand it & make it close then market it for loads of cash. Other eg, wud be their iPod touch UI, the iPad Library UI. How's such practice & culture of a company be good? Looking at how many top talented guy quit from PA Semi, i can already guess (besides the unhappy grants of stock options). Funny thing is, these guys went on to set up another company & was recently purchased by Google. I asked myself this question "Do i want to support a company that embrace such culture & promotes the big "I" all the time?". A simple question but not an easy answer.
Dun get me wrong. I'm not trying to give a lecture on social ethics & moral. Anyone is free to choose what they want to buy & what they want to support. Its like those green campaign shops, u can choose to buy from The Body shop or ntuc.
On the other hand, apple has indeed polished up their stuff & makes them easy to use & strong integration for both hardware & adoption. If there's really a compelling reason to get a mac now or near future, i probably will. Until then, i'm still using XP & soon Win7.
OSx was from Unix or more accurately FreeBSD. Since its free, easy way out is to nip it & repackage, rebrand it & make it close then market it for loads of cash. Other eg, wud be their iPod touch UI, the iPad Library UI. How's such practice & culture of a company be good? Looking at how many top talented guy quit from PA Semi, i can already guess (besides the unhappy grants of stock options). Funny thing is, these guys went on to set up another company & was recently purchased by Google. I asked myself this question "Do i want to support a company that embrace such culture & promotes the big "I" all the time?". A simple question but not an easy answer.
Dun get me wrong. I'm not trying to give a lecture on social ethics & moral. Anyone is free to choose what they want to buy & what they want to support. Its like those green campaign shops, u can choose to buy from The Body shop or ntuc.
On the other hand, apple has indeed polished up their stuff & makes them easy to use & strong integration for both hardware & adoption. If there's really a compelling reason to get a mac now or near future, i probably will. Until then, i'm still using XP & soon Win7.
Last edited:
cks2k2
New Member
interesting article regarding Apple shutting out 3rd party programming solutions for iPhone platform:
An antitrust app: Apple may be in the eye of regulatory storm
dunno what will come of that...
An antitrust app: Apple may be in the eye of regulatory storm
dunno what will come of that...
Last edited:
iPhone supports javascript? hmm.. How come I access some website and it says "java support not enabled"?
Like Singpass & internet banking etc.. possible to access via iPhone?
Like Singpass & internet banking etc.. possible to access via iPhone?
adorable
New Member
JavaScript and Java is totally different thing.
For Internet Banking, OCBC, POSB, DBS has Internet Banking app which you can do basic banking
http://www.mobinauts.com/topic/111094-dbsposb-now-have-iphone-app/
Last edited:
I'm aware that POSB and DBS have the Apps. But OCBC & UOB.....? I did a search on the App store and there is no results for OCBC..
How about CPF, other gov website etc..? Any way to access them? since the Singpass requires Java I guess..
How about CPF, other gov website etc..? Any way to access them? since the Singpass requires Java I guess..
adorable
New Member
9V-Orion Images
New Member
Apple God tweets:
"Apple killed the floppy disk, the trackball, the stylus and the Walkman. Flash will be dead within a year."
Don't play play with Steve Jobs wor! :nono:
"Cupidtino.com is stupid. Why do Mac fanboys need a dating site when they can meet women at Apple Stores? Give it up, Woz."
Is that how you met your wife? :think:
"The iPad nano will blow you away."
Do you mean an iPhone?
"Apple killed the floppy disk, the trackball, the stylus and the Walkman. Flash will be dead within a year."
Don't play play with Steve Jobs wor! :nono:
"Cupidtino.com is stupid. Why do Mac fanboys need a dating site when they can meet women at Apple Stores? Give it up, Woz."
Is that how you met your wife? :think:
"The iPad nano will blow you away."
Do you mean an iPhone?
Last edited:
Similar threads
