Financial Times echos much of what was reported on the Wall Street Journal about Apple hoping to launch a subscription television service in 2010.
It might be four am in the morning here, but is the grammar police wrong here?
Shouldn't it be:
A. Financial Times echos much of what was reported in the Wall Street Journal about Apple hoping to launch a subscription television service in 2010.
B. Financial Times echos much of what was reported by the Wall Street Journal about Apple hoping to launch a subscription television service in 2010.
C. Financial Times echos much of what was reported on the Wall Street Journal website about Apple hoping to launch a subscription television service in 2010.
That just bugged me for some reason...
Excellent. We should have a crippled version available in New Zealand by 2012. Right before the world ends. How apt.
Awesome! Sign me up on the waiting list! I want one!
(I heard a rumor that every Tablet will come with a complimentary Steve Jobs bobble-head. Is that true?)
Yeah, but don't you get free kangaroos?
(I heard a rumor that every Tablet will come with a complimentary Steve Jobs bobble-head. Is that true?)
NOOOOOOO, dont confuse us New Zealanders for Australia
It's remarkable. Six months ago, nobody said a tablet could be used for anything. Now everybody wants one. Did everybody drop their expectations? Still the same question: An apple tablet, for what?
The tablet isn't going to be running the iPhone OS build. That's for sure. iPhone OS is built on the core of OS X, it's just a custom slimmed down build of it. Apple will develop a custom build of OSX 10.6 for the tablet, the Dock Expose makes a nice way of using the fingers to navigate, including the Expose/Dashboard to act as the Home Screen. There has to be a Finder for the Tablet, something that iPhone still lacks. The tablet should be more multitasking capable than the iPhone OS.
I'm hoping for a device with a screen 2x as large as the iPhone that runs an iPhone-like OS.