Is Apple RAM really better than others?

I believe i may be having memory issues. I have a Spring 2011 iMac. Came with 2 sticks totaling 4G. I replaced with 16G of Corsair. After intermittent lookups I removed half (8G) and things got better but still the occasional FREEZE. I still have Apple care so I took it in. Apple will not even test the memory if it isn't Apple memory. I just found Apple memory for about $58 for 8G. Should I replace my memory with the Apple RAM? The original RAM looks like this:
What the heck is this brand?
I was thinking if I could get 2 Apple 4G sticks and use the original 4G plus the new 8G, I would have a nice 12G of memory. I use FinalCut X a lot and extra memory always helps. Any suggestions?
Thanks

Apple has been using Hynix RAM for years.
iMac's are not all that picky about brand, but they are very picky about the RAM spec's.
as per > iMac (Mid 2011): Memory specifications your 2011 iMac uses PC3-10600 1333 MHz modules.
If the Corsair RAM Modules that you bought are the correct specs? Then you should have no problem install it along with the original factory 4GB and running a total of 20GB.
I would suspect that you are having one of three different problems.
1. The Corsair RAM is not the correct spec and while it works, it is causing errors and does not work when matched up with the factory RAM.
2. The Corsair RAM is the correct spec, but one of the modules is bad. (noting that: the way your holding that Hynix module is liable to damage it)
3. You are not pushing hard enough to fully seat the modules in the slots. (try pushing real hard on each module with both thumbs as you install them)
Going on that I would install the factory modules back in the original slots that they came in and test the iMac. Then if the Corsair modules are the correct spec, install them in the empty slots and test the iMac.
Then if you are still having a problem..? Like many other RAM suppliers, Corsair does have a life time warranty.

Similar Messages

Is the apple laptop with 4gb ram and i5 better than other laptop with 6gb ram and i5

is the apple laptop with 4gb ram and i5 better than other laptop with 6gb ram and i5

Well it depends on the age. http://www.everymac.com/ should help you identify the age of the two models.
Apple may use two processors called i5, but newer models have different optimizations than older models.
The processor is usually not the main affect on speed. RAM helps, but barely unless everything is on an SSD already. Hard drive speed is usually the limiting factor of speed on computers. eSATA hard drives with higher RPM can often yield the fastest results because notebook hard drives tend to be slower that are not SSD, but for those you need either Express/34 or Thunderbolt based adapters.

What makes iPad better than other tablets

Hi there! i am planning on buying the new iPad 2 but i want to ask and talk about what makes the iPad better than other tablets particularly Android.
Since its first outing the iPad has come from strenght to strenght with featrures and apps only a smartphone (or even a PC) could dream of.
But in the past few months there has been a tsunami of Android tablets vuying to topple Apple's device. with better features like:
1. Divx support (in some devices)
2. better front & rear cameras
3. better multitasking and customisation options
4. Android being an "open" platform
5. video chat with ANY similar device (and not confined to only Android)
6. better bluetooth option and features (like sending files to ANY device and not confined to only Android)
7. full DLNA support (in almost all devices now)
......and the list goes on.
sure it's not a contest and sure some makers have "copied" features from Apple and made it into their own but i still love Apple devices not because of the lack of features but because the technology really works and the OS just flows really smooth.
so, i want to ask you guys....what makes Apple devices such as the iPad 2 special, unique, desirable and better in many ways than an Android device?
what makes the iPad an investment for me and my family?

Don't get me wrong i am fan of Android but i also am a fan of the iPad 2. but i still can't help with the things the device is lacking and lagging behind with with the Android devices.
sure, the iPad is not a Xoom or a Transformer or a Galaxy tab.
sure, the iOS is fluid and smooth and it just works
sure, Honeycomb 3.0 is full of bugs and it freezes more often than not (i heard)
sure, the Apps Store is still miles away when it comes to apps, games, etc. (although i heard it will be overtaken by the Android Markt by this year in terms of sheer numbers but also quality apps designed/dedicated for tablets by next year)
the Android Amrket might not have "rogue" apps or "stealing user data" but doesn't Apple products have that and do that as well?
sure the iPad doesn't support Flash but even though its a battery hogging software you still enjoy the "full" web (the way it was meant to be viewed) on an Android tablet.
sure, the iPad does have a below 1-megapixel camera which is jurassic really.
but it still doesn't hide the facts like what i mentioned on my previous emails.
for the cheapest wifi-only iPad 2 you pay GBP399
the equivalent 7" Galaxy Tab (which came out months before the ipad 2) you pay GBP399 and that's with 3G, better front & rear facing camera, full Divx capability (without the need of an app), full DLNA capability (without the need of a separate device or server), better and more "open" bluetooth, full Flash compatibility amongst others.
basing on my example above can someone tell me without being biased...what makes the iPad 2 better in many ways?

HT4759 Why did apple support Windows better than Mac in iCloud?

Why did apple support Windows better than Mac in iCloud?

chewy cabeza wrote:
Why did apple support Windows better than Mac in iCloud?
From your point of view and the framing of your question, Apple does indeed support WIndows better than Mac for the limited issue of iCloud.
chewy cabeza wrote:
...YET, Leopard and Snow Leopard are NOT iCloud compatible. How can that be justified? Obviously, Apple can make iCloud available to Snow Leopard, but disdains us...
Historically speaking, Apple has rarely gone backwards in its OS development. Once they have released a new OS with new technology, I can only think of one example of when they backtracked: They released TrueType technology in System 7 and then released System 6.0.8, which included TrueType technology for continuing System 6 users.
So it is part of their culture to move forward and not backwards. Other examples:
• Inclusion of the then novel SONY 3.5" disk drive in its release of the first Macintosh (and not the industry standard 5.25" drive); after its use in the Lisa and adoption for the Apple II series of computers.
• Elimination of the floppy drive completely in the release of the first iMac.
• Use of then novel AAC audio compression as "state of the art" compression for the iPod release in 2001 instead of the outdated mp3 standard.
• Refusal to allow use of FLASH in iPod Touch/iPhone/iPads.
How could they justify these decisions? The marketplace justified them for Apple!
So, yes, they could release 10.6.9 with iCloud support. But why now, if not then?

I wanna learn Oracle ADF technology, is it better than other java based f/w

hi Forum Members
I wanna learn Oracle ADF technology, is it better than other java based f/w
Thanks,
Raghava

There is a quick start guide which could help you
http://www.amazon.com/Quick-Start-Oracle-Fusion-Development/dp/0071744282
There are also tutorials on the OTN JDeveloper page (google for JDeveloper).
this should get you started.
Regards
Grant

Surfaces that dissipate heat better than others?

I notice there is a pretty noticeable difference in CPU temperature when I have a mid 2010 MBP on my lap rather than on my wooden desk.
Am I imagining things? Are some surfaces better than others when it comes to dissipating heat from the MBP?

What a lot of people don't realize is that the narrow gap between the case bottom and the surface it's on is important to cooling. If you put the laptop on a table, the gap is maintained and air can flow between the bottom and the hard surface. When you put it on your lap, or worse, on a sofa or bed, now there is no airflow between the bottom and it won't throw off heat as easily. On your lap it would be better to put it on a board or one of those lap pillows with a hard table top, both of which would preserve the airflow across the bottom of the case.
The worst case scenario would be the laptop on a bed where the blanket or comforter covers not only the bottom, but the large back vent. Then there would be no airflow at all, and nowhere for the accelerating fans to push the hot air.
As far as materials, the current aluminum's pretty good at throwing off heat. The problem is that people don't like aluminum because it gets hot to the touch. But that's because it's moving the heat to the outside, where you can feel it.

How is SAP MDM better than other tools?

Hi- I want to know how is SAP MDM better than other tools? Thx

Wrong Place to post this question.
We may better tell how BI is better than other tools.

Are Apple routers better than others?

I have wi-fi at my home and I have problems with AirPlay as it sometimes skips.
I'm thinking of buying Time Capsule and I want to know if it's powerfull enough to work in a normal size house and will it solve AirPlay problem?
Is wi-fi on Time Capsule better than on Motorola VIP1003 router?

The broadcast power of all routers is limited by law. Every manufacturer is running their products at 100%, so there will be very little difference between routers of different manufacturers.
If you have having difficulty now, replacing your router with a Time Capsule will likely not solve your problems.
Instead, you will probably need to look for "extending" or "repeating" devices to provide a stronger signal throughout your house....whether you elect to add the Time Capsule or not.

Is 1.3 Bios really better than 1.52B?? Neo2 Board and Some Observations!

Hi All... I read this post on the forums and it got me thinking and i did some fiddling and made some observations..
This is whith regard to the 1.3Bios being better than the 1.52B Bios.. because it would let you run in turbo mode...
Ok i've spent the last 60mins testing and i came up with the following..
1.3BIOS
With the 1.3Bios.. no matter what memory timings u set... it does'nt show in CPU-Z and it does'nt make a difference in the memory bandwith scores...
For example my ram was rated at 2.5-3-3-8 .. i changed it to 2.5-2-3-8 .. it did'nt change and my scores remained the same..
Going from Slow to Fast to Turbo.. did'nt incrase my scores.. actually.. donno how.. but i got a decrease in scores..
The only thing that was noticable was that MSI core-center overclocks the CPU a lil more than what is set in BIOS..
1.52B BIOS
With the 1.52B Bios... u can change the memory timings and it does show in CPU-Z and it makes a massive difference with Sisoft sandra.. 250mbps more..
What u set in the bios .. u get with the 1.52B.. Corecenter does'nt mess around and overclock it more..
Going from Slow to Turbo did give me an increase in scores.. slightly..
Im now running Ultra-Turbo.. and i get a sisoft bandwith score of 5250Mbps at 3.21G..
CONCLUSION
So infact i think the 1.52B is better than the 1.3 . I don't have a Radeon so i donno how these bios's work with the cards cause i've read about some problems... I'm getting one soon so 'ill post some info about that in a fortnight..
I personally think this board is great.. atleast the one i have.. never had a problem.. had it for 3 months.. i have a revision 1.. no DOT sticker.. and just the Neo2-S version... I've used Spectec 333 on this board too (dual) had no problems..
Wish i had some DDR-500 so i could test whether this board can do 1:1 above 250...whether it has a 1:1 limitation above 285 like some other boards.. that is my only doubt.. anywayz.. i hope atleast some of u are sailing as smoothly with this board as i have..
Get some nice ram .. this Twinmos Dual channel kit DDR400 with the Twinmos chips are really great.. and i recommend it..

Quote
Originally posted by DeReD
1.3BIOS
With the 1.3Bios.. no matter what memory timings u set... it does'nt show in CPU-Z and it does'nt make a difference in the memory bandwith scores...
For example my ram was rated at 2.5-3-3-8 .. i changed it to 2.5-2-3-8 .. it did'nt change and my scores remained the same..
Going from Slow to Fast to Turbo.. did'nt incrase my scores.. actually.. donno how.. but i got a decrease in scores..
That´s wrong. RAM-Settings are displayed fine. Turbo does make a BIG difference in scores. About 15% more performance. In Games and in benchmarks like 3dmark and sandra, too.

Apple TV - any better than an ipod?

Before I went and got an apple tv I decided to hook up my ipod video to the tv and see what the quality was like. So I ran svideo from a dock into my 32" sony lcd. It actually looked rather good for standard def programs (ie all itunes material). The Daily Show looked just fine and even The Office and The Riches playing letterboxed widescreen looked fine even when I zoomed the letterbox full screen with the tv.
I'm sticking with the ipod for now. Wondering if someone with the apple tv would like to try a comparison.

Wondering if someone with the apple tv would like to try a comparison.I find that the same file played from TV looks visibly better than when played directly from the iPod. HDTV scalers vary so results may vary with the quality of your particular HDTV/EDTV model. However, it would seem the TV is specifically enhanced for playback of such files and, in general, does a better than average job of scaling here.

Any Channel Better Than Others?

I have an AppleTv that streams thru our WiFi Airport Extreme network from my iMac in my other office. It stalls & stops alot. Someone suggested I change the channel on my Airport Extreme. There's several different channels. Any one better than another to resist interference? We do have DECT 6.0 phones.

"iStumbler didn't find any other networks."
Very good news. Check again later in the evening as there may be some other networks busy at that time. If you don't see any other networks, you are most fortunate.
Could you explain further what you mean by "The best channel is the one that is the most distance from other channels."
I know this is a bit difficult to understand because the channels interact and overlap with one another. There are really only 3 channels that do not overlap with each other... 1, 6 and 11. If you have no other channels in range and set the Airport Extreme to Automatic, it will likely choose one of these 3 channels. Give it a try.
Now if there were more channels in use around you and for example, you find that someone is using channel 6. Then your best channel choice is either 1 or 11 because they are the most distant from 6. Or, if someone is on 8, then choose 1. The real challenges start when you find out channels 2,5,7 and 10 are all in use. Then you can't choose a channel that does not overlap with one of the others.

Is Logic Expres 9 really better than 8?

I've got LE8 because I still have a Power PC iMac. I am planning on getting a new computer in the next few weeks. Should I upgrade to LE 9? Does the new version fix bugs? Is it worth the extra $100 for the upgrade?
Thanks

I think you can't say LE9 is better than LE8, because it depends on what you're doing with it.
For example, if you're editing recorded (live, not MIDI) music with it, then you're life will probably get better when using LE9, because of Flextime. Another big pro for me are the guitar/bass amp simulators and fx.
If you're not going to use the above mentioned features, than I don't think it's worth the investment for you.

Is Windows really better than a mac at running APPLE Software!!?!

Up until a month ago I was a whole hearted Windows user but after a play and some heavy convincing I decided that I would invest in my first Mac; a top-end Mac Mini with and upgraded 2gb RAM...great I thought!!!!
Once I got it set up and updated (running OS X 10.4.9) & Itunes 7.1.1 I set-up my ipod with Itunes and all could not be smoother!!
Too good to be true.....YES!
I connected my Ipod up and it showed up on the Desktop...great...so I loaded Itunes and it wasnt there?!? So after some searching on the Net I reset my ipod....and hurray it now shows up in Itunes....however when it goes to sync I get a message saying that "not everything can be synched because the software on my ipod is too old"....it does however still show as synching a vast majority....however when unplugging the ipod the files its just spent the last 5 minutes synching arent there!! Confusing!! So I go to the summary page as instructed and try to do either a software update or a restore but the options are greyed out!?!! So I reformat the Ipod....still the same problem!!!
As a last ditch effort I plug it back into my windows machine....up pops some message boxes saying that it is in Recovery Mode, Do you want to restore? Do you want to Sync? And hey presto....My music is back and everything is working again!!!
I was planning on getting rid of my PC and getting another Mac but now I am wandering whether I need to keep it to update my ipod and anything else I find!
Anyone had any similar problems or know what my issue with Itunes on the Mac is?! I find it quite odd how it is smoother on the PC than on the MAC as it is Apple Software!!!!

I managed to resolve this problem by completing an Archive Install of Mac OS X as one of the Itunes Kernel files was corrupted.

Is rank() really better than rownum for top-n-queries?

Several sources say that for Oracle databases rank() should be used instead of 'rownum <= n' for top-n-queries. But here we have an application, where we a lot of top-n queries are executed on a big table with several million rows and rank() has a quite bad performance. I get much better results when I use a query with rownum <= n but the programmer of the application doesn't want to change it in the software because of those articles about rank() and rownum. I wonder, whether it is possible, to find a better form of the rank()-query or an additional index, that gives me the same performance.
To explain my case I created the following example (if you try it, be aware that depending on the size of your dba_objects view you might need up to half a gig free space in your tablespace for this example).
create table big_objects
as
select
ascii(m.alpha)*100000+o.object_id object_id,
o.owner owner,
o.object_type,
m.alpha||'_'||o.object_name object_name,
sysdate-400+mod(100*object_id+99*ascii(m.alpha),365)+24/(o.object_id+ascii(m.alpha)) created,
o.status
from
(select distinct
upper(substr(object_name,1,1)) alpha
from
sys.dba_objects
where
upper(substr(object_name,1,1)) between 'A' and 'Z') m,
sys.dba_objects o
order by
object_name;
create index bigindex_1 on big_objects (owner, object_type, created);
analyze table big_objects compute statistics;
So my table looks a bit like dba_objects but with much more rows and I made a synthetic "created" date which is more similar to my real case, where top-n means a date selection of the newest records from a certain type.
Here is the size of the segments on an nearly empty 11gR2 database:
select segment_name, bytes, blocks from sys.dba_segments where segment_name like 'BIG%'
SEGMENT_NAME BYTES BLOCKS
BIGINDEX_1 75497472 9216
BIG_OBJECTS 142606336 17408
On my database the example table has approx. 1,9 Mio rows:
select count(*) from big_objects;
COUNT(*)
1884246
and some 1,4% of those rows have owner = 'SYS' and object_type = 'INDEX'
select
count(*)
from big_objects
where owner = 'SYS'
and object_type = 'INDEX';
COUNT(*)
25896
But I want to find only the 10 newest indexes for the owner SYS. I think the typical rank() approach would be:
select
owner,
object_type,
object_name,
object_id,
status,
created
from
( select
owner,
object_type,
object_name,
object_id,
status,
created,
rank() over (order by created desc) rnk
from
big_objects
where
owner = 'SYS'
and object_type = 'INDEX')
where rnk <= 10
order by created asc;
OWNER OBJECT_TYPE OBJECT_NAME OBJECT_ID STATUS CREATED
SYS INDEX B_COLLELEMIND 6600515 VALID 15.04.2010 19:05:55
SYS INDEX V_I_WRI$_OPTSTAT_IND_OBJ#_ST 8600466 VALID 15.04.2010 19:09:03
SYS INDEX G_I_RLS 7100375 VALID 15.04.2010 19:23:55
SYS INDEX V_I_DIR$SERVICE_UI 8600320 VALID 15.04.2010 19:31:33
SYS INDEX L_I_TSM_DST2$ 7600308 VALID 15.04.2010 19:36:26
SYS INDEX L_I_IDL_UB11 7600235 VALID 15.04.2010 19:57:34
SYS INDEX V_I_VIEWTRCOL1 8600174 VALID 15.04.2010 20:19:21
SYS INDEX L_I_TRIGGER2 7600162 VALID 15.04.2010 20:31:39
SYS INDEX L_I_NTAB1 7600089 VALID 15.04.2010 21:35:53
SYS INDEX B_I_SYN1 6600077 VALID 15.04.2010 22:08:07
10 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:00.22
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 2911012437
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 1427 | 188K| 1400 (1)| 00:00:17 |
| 1 | SORT ORDER BY | | 1427 | 188K| 1400 (1)| 00:00:17 |
|* 2 | VIEW | | 1427 | 188K| 1399 (1)| 00:00:17 |
|* 3 | WINDOW SORT PUSHED RANK | | 1427 | 79912 | 1399 (1)| 00:00:17 |
| 4 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| BIG_OBJECTS | 1427 | 79912 | 1398 (0)| 00:00:17 |
|* 5 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | BIGINDEX_1 | 1427 | | 9 (0)| 00:00:01 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
2 - filter("RNK"<=10)
3 - filter(RANK() OVER ( ORDER BY INTERNAL_FUNCTION("CREATED") DESC )<=10)
5 - access("OWNER"='SYS' AND "OBJECT_TYPE"='INDEX')
Statistics
1 recursive calls
0 db block gets
25870 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
1281 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
524 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
2 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
10 rows processed
As from the index only the first two columns are used, all the 25896 records that I found above are read and sorted just to find the ten newest ones. Many unnecessary blocks are read and luckily all needed database blocks were in memory already. In our real case quite often a lot of physical reads are performed, which makes the performance of the application even worse.
In my following example with a "rownum <= 10" all three columns of the index are used and the number of block gets is much, much smaller than in the rank() example.
select
owner,
object_type,
object_name,
object_id,
status,
created
from
big_objects
where
(owner, object_type, created)
in
( select
owner,
object_type,
created
from
( select /*+ first_rows(10) */
owner,
object_type,
created
from
big_objects
where
owner = 'SYS'
and object_type = 'INDEX'
order by
owner,
object_type,
created desc
where rownum <= 10
order by created asc;
OWNER OBJECT_TYPE OBJECT_NAME OBJECT_ID STATUS CREATED
SYS INDEX B_COLLELEMIND 6600515 VALID 15.04.2010 19:05:55
SYS INDEX V_I_WRI$_OPTSTAT_IND_OBJ#_ST 8600466 VALID 15.04.2010 19:09:03
SYS INDEX G_I_RLS 7100375 VALID 15.04.2010 19:23:55
SYS INDEX V_I_DIR$SERVICE_UI 8600320 VALID 15.04.2010 19:31:33
SYS INDEX L_I_TSM_DST2$ 7600308 VALID 15.04.2010 19:36:26
SYS INDEX L_I_IDL_UB11 7600235 VALID 15.04.2010 19:57:34
SYS INDEX V_I_VIEWTRCOL1 8600174 VALID 15.04.2010 20:19:21
SYS INDEX L_I_TRIGGER2 7600162 VALID 15.04.2010 20:31:39
SYS INDEX L_I_NTAB1 7600089 VALID 15.04.2010 21:35:53
SYS INDEX B_I_SYN1 6600077 VALID 15.04.2010 22:08:07
10 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:00.03
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 3360237620
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 10 | 760 | 17 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 1 | SORT ORDER BY | | 10 | 760 | 17 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 2 | NESTED LOOPS | | | | | |
| 3 | NESTED LOOPS | | 10 | 760 | 17 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 4 | VIEW | VW_NSO_1 | 10 | 200 | 2 (50)| 00:00:01 |
| 5 | HASH UNIQUE | | 10 | 200 | 4 (25)| 00:00:01 |
|* 6 | COUNT STOPKEY | | | | | |
| 7 | VIEW | | 11 | 220 | 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 8 | INDEX RANGE SCAN DESCENDING| BIGINDEX_1 | 1427 | 28540 | 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 9 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | BIGINDEX_1 | 3 | | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 10 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | BIG_OBJECTS | 3 | 168 | 6 (0)| 00:00:01 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
6 - filter(ROWNUM<=10)
8 - access("OWNER"='SYS' AND "OBJECT_TYPE"='INDEX')
9 - access("OWNER"="OWNER" AND "OBJECT_TYPE"="OBJECT_TYPE" AND "CREATED"="CREATED")
Statistics
1 recursive calls
0 db block gets
26 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
1281 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
524 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
1 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
10 rows processed
I made this comparison with the Oracle versions 10.2 and 11.2 and the result was more or less the same. How can I change the rank() query in a way that only the small number of really needed blocks are read from the database?

this was exactly the hint, I was looking for. Generally speaking hints are not the preferred way to go to tune queries. They can have nasty side-effects when data changes.
Now the rank()-query is similar fast and much better to read than my fast one with three nested SELECTs.
Your rownum query was needlessly complicated, and could be simplified to:
select owner, object_type, object_name, object_id, status, created
from (select owner, object_type, created
      from big_objects
      where owner = 'SYS' and
            object_type = 'INDEX'
      order by created desc)
where rownum <= 10
order by created ascand very likely get the same speed.
One more question. How did you format those sql queries and results. When I copy/paste them into the editor of forums.oracle.com the format allways gets lost.To preserve formatting use {noformat}{noformat} before and after the section you want ot keep formatted. In general, if you want to see how someone generated an effect, reply to the post and hit the quote original icon. You will see all the formatting codes used in the original.
John

Is verizon really better than AT&T?

I've seen so many ads tha say verizon is better and more reliable than AT&T. Is this really true? I've compared coverage maps, and they looks almost the same, except for LTE coverage, but as far as 3G goes, they look about the same. What makes verizon so much better?

pzjagd1 wrote:
How does JD Powers rate customer satisfaction (not coverage)? I can't imagine it being very high for Verizon.
hard to believe after reading the forums, but Verizon consistently is ranked highest in customer satisfaction of the big 4 US cellular companies. But do remember, what you see in the forum is only a small sampling of the worst problems that happen and represent a fraction of 1% of customers. Therefore it is not a scientific sample to judge the whole.

Is Apple RAM really better than others?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for