Why iSO7 is not better than its predecessor ?

my iphone working real slow since upgread, why apple did not create bett

kula78 wrote:
it would be more approprite to take the customer feedback on apple website itself iSO 6 Vs iSO7 certainly I win - thanks alot for instant reply, am trying to be more constructive here, looking forward to see more improvements !!!
I think you misunderstand the purpose of this site. This is a user-to-user technical support forum. Apple rarely participates here. Your opinion is no more or less important than mine or anyone elses. No one here is required to agree with you or act on your opinion. You've been given your technical support options.
If you want to submit feedback to Apple, use the Feedback page:
http://www.apple.com/feedback

Similar Messages

Why iPhone 5 not charge with its own charger but will with iPhone 4 charger

why iPhone 5 not charge with its own charger but will with iPhone 4 charger. Thanks to the member who posted that fix.

It sounds to me like the charger that came with the iPhone 5 is defective, or the cable is if you've been switching the cables when you switch the chargers.
Regards.

HT5731 why is apple tv better than netflix?

why is apple tv better than netflix?

Hi s13579,
Welcome to the Support Communities!
The following information will explain what the Apple TV is. Netflix is one of the services available on the Apple TV.
Apple - Apple TV - HD iTunes content and more on your TV.
http://www.apple.com/appletv/
Apple - Apple TV - Access iTunes, Netflix, and more on your HDTV.
http://www.apple.com/appletv/whats-on/
Watch everything from classics to recent Hollywood blockbusters to original programming like House of Cards and Orange Is the New Black.5 Apple TV organizes the huge catalog of streaming titles from Netflix so you can find what you want fast.
I hope this information helps ....
Happy Holidays!
- Judy

ATI Radeon HD 4870 not better than the Nvidea Geforce 120?

I bought av new ATI Radeon HD 4870 card to my MacPro. But are wery disappointed. My old NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 performes almost better than ATI. I ran Cinebench test and this is the results:
*NVIDIA GeForce*
Rendering (Single CPU): 3225 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 18880 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 5.85
Shading (OpenGL Standard): 6107 CB-GFX
*ATI Radeon HD 4870*
Rendering (Single CPU): 3218 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 18852 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 5.86
Shading (OpenGL Standard): 5846 CB-GFX
I also ran the Photoshop Actiontest from www.retouchartists.com on a large .tiff file, and my ATI Radeon used 1,10,2 and NVidea used 1,09,4. That is almost 1 second better for the old card.
Apple says that the ATI 4870 card performs 2x better than the Nvidea 120. That is not my experience!

Hello,
I currently have a 2008 3.0Ghz Harpertown mac pro and I am trying to figure out what to do here. I just purchased the 24 inch cinema display, but yet I have a nice 1GB 4870 ati radeon I got off ebay. Its more powerful than the Apple version, but lacks the mini-display port.
Currently, I have the ATI RADEON 2600 XT connected, though inactive, while my 4870 is active.
So, should I just get the Nvidia GT 120 and keep my 1GB 4870, or should I get rid of the 4870 I have and just buy Apple's? Either way, the GT 120 works in a 2008 mac pro despite what Apple says on their site that it only works in 2009 mac pros.

Why SAP ERP is Better than ORACLE ERP?????

Hi expert I need some help about the comparison study between SAP and Oracle.
One of our WOOD plantation Client have some confusion between two ERP packages.Oracle have approached them . So how can we convince them to do SAP ERP. If you have some ppt or any material please send it to me . Its urgent.
Another thing that how SAP FI is better than Oracle FI for any Wood Plantation Company.
If you gyes have any win story over Wood Plantation company then please give it to me.
Thnaks Experts for your kind Considuration

Dear Pratik,
You can find the points for your presentation from the link:
http://searchoracle.techtarget.com/generic/0,295582,sid41_gci1173173,00.html#
Well, you need to convince your client that ERP is not all about cost of implementation. There are many other areas that you need to look at - availabilty of trained staff - complexity of business processes - does your existing data/processes map into one better than the other - are you happy going Oracle Oracle or would you prefer SAP with some other database.
You can add that the majority of transactions in vanilla Oracle are more difficult than in SAP. SAP can be configured to support most of the business processes without coding.
Let me know in case of any specific queries.
Regards,
Rakesh

Why is hyper-v better than virtualbox?

We have 4-5 people in a software development environment with access to 4 servers, each with 2 quad-core or dual-core cpu's (core-based, before nehalem), and 8gb or 16gb RAM, so I think we have a good amount of power for virtualization. Total, we have a
team foundation server, oracle server, web server, 2 virtualization servers, and multiple workstations, some virtualized, some not.
When we started virtualizing about a year ago, for whatever reason, and although everyone has an MSDN sub, we started using VirtualBox instead of Hyper-V. I'm no expert (and that's why I'm here) but I think they operate at different levels of interaction
with the hardware, and that VirtualBox is a bad idea for this environment.
Can someone give some good reasons why we should be using Hyper-V? Also is it possible to convert the virtual machines?
And then I would like to know if it's okay to also be virtualizing our web server and oracle server, etc. We have only been virtualizing workstations. I think we really need to make good use of virtualization if we are going to be doing it at all.
Advice welcome also for virtualization best practices, backups, management, infrastructure design, etc. I would like to start with a domain controller, and maybe a Lync server so we can share desktops, etc. Thanks for all input!

In my opinion Hyper-V is only better if your using Hyper-V to host servers, like Microsoft SharePoint, Active Directory, Sql Server, or even MySql to provide resources.
If you intend to be using Virtualizatio to develop software, like Working with SharePoint from a developer standpoint, building asp.net web applications, or even doing C++, desktop applications, or Android, Php etc, if you are going to be physically on the
VM using it as your environment to write code and design, then Oracle VirtualBox is better than Hyper-V.
With hyper-v your limited to using The Connect console, or Remote Desktop Protocol to see the virtual machine. The RDP console leaves much to be desired. It only gives you the option to use all of your monitors or one, it won't do 2 if you have
3. I like to use my third monitor to keep my email open, and pdf documentation, or word documents and use the other two monitors for my VM so I can see multiple code windows in Visual Studio at the same time (VS2010). Oracle handles multi monitors
so much better. And if I want to surface an adroid phone through USB to my VM, oracle is the only way to go there, or maybe VMWare, but VirtualBox is free.
However, Hyper-V is now native to Windows 8 desktop version and windows 8 server version. And most companies dealing with microsoft products use Hyper-V for their VM's, so from a multi developer environment, it makes sense for us to use Hyper-V with
windows 8 because all of our servers run on Hyper-V. If we need to troubleshoot something we can grab a copy of the latest server VM backup and spin it up locally on Hyper-V with windows 8 without having to do any conversions.
But from a developer standpoint it is really hard for me to leave VirtualBox. If RDP could work my 2 of my monitors and not all 3 or 4 of them I would have no complaints. Third part RDP sofware isn't any better, it could never compare to the
deep integration and speed of windows RDP. My main issue is, if RDP can do all of my monitors why can't it do just 2 of them, seems like a big thing to leave out in my opinion, it's so frustrating. It's such an awesome part of windows with such
a huge annoying handicap. I've actually thought about just having another computer for my third monitor, like a tablet or something on a stand. Sure you can SPAN a monitor in Windows so it acts like one monitor and I can tell RDP to go full screen
but it has a width limit and then I need extra software on the VM to handle the big resolution like 2 screens instead of one.
My Blog: http://www.thesug.org/Blogs/ryan_mann1/default.aspx Website: Under Construction

Why is LR5 catalog better than PSE 12 Organiser?

Hi/
I have started using a trial version of LR5.
I have been a regular user of various versions of PSE over the years.
Generally, I have been happy with the organiser, & have various tags nested in each-other.
I have never had a problem with it being unstable, & can normally find what I am looking for,
(provided that I have correctly tagged it in the first place :-)
My first impression of the LR5 catalogue is that it is not as intuitive.
I have searched on-line for how to set-up the catalogue & much of the discussion relates to how many catalogues to have. - I've already made that decision - Just the one:
So? What features am I missing in the LR5 catalogue that make it better than the Elements Organiser?
What do you think?

I am also a happy user of the Organizer, but I also use LR 4.4.
What I find interesting in LR:
- huge amount of possible customization and options (if you need them...)
- Ability to manage jpegs just as raws (the organizer does not let you open jpegs in acr, )
- Smart ways to manage variants without copying files (virtual copies)
- More advanced metadata management
- possibility to merge catalogs
- Much more support by Adobe and user forums
- More advanced options in output in the latest versions
What can be debated is the difficulty of the learning curve as well as the 'robustness' of the software. The organizer was plagued with many bugs (it was already there many years before LR.) The problem is that having many more options makes LR much more complex. For instance the database has three times the number of tables. The result is that the LR forums are full of complaints about bugs or missing features... just because it is too rich and tries to satisfy everybody's needs.
Many cases of problems with the Organizer are related to the backup function which backs up both pictures and catalogs. Lr only backup catalogs. Backing up pictures is your responsability. If you have problems, it's not LR's fault, it's yours .
I can't find a post I made to show the possible advantages of the organizer, but that was just for the fun.

For All Entries is NOT better than INNER JOIN in most cases

I quote from Siegfried Boes' excellent post here: Will writing an inner join be better or creating a view?
For all the FOR ALL ENTRIES lovers ... there is no proof for these reappearing recommendation.
There is nearly nobody who receives forum points, who recommends FOR ALL ENTRIES instead of Joins. What is the reason ???
It is easier to prove the opposite. A Join is a nested loop inside the database, a FOR ALL ENTRIES is partly outside of the database. FOR ALL ENTRIES works in blocks, joins on totals.
FOR ALL ENTRIES are not recommded on really large tables, because the chances are too high that
too many records are transferred.
People prefer FOR ALL ENTRIES, because JOINs are not so easy to understand. Joins can go wrong, but with a bit of understanding they can be fixed.
Some Joins are slow and can not be fixed, but then the FOR ALL ENTRIES would be extremely slow.
There are several kinds of views:
- projection views, i.e. only one table involved just fields reduced
- join views, several tables, joins conditions stored in dictionary
- materialized views, here the joined data are actually stored in the database. Storing and synchronisation has to be done manually.
Only the last one creates real overhead. It should be the exception.
Join Views and Joins are nearly identical. The view is better for reuse. The join is better in complicated, becuase if the access goes wrong, it can often be fixed by adding a hint. Hints can not be added to views.
Abraham Bukit points out:
If it is cluster table, (you can't use join). If it is buffered table, I would also say avoid join.
If they all are transaction table which are not buffered and are not cluster tables.
He further supports Siegfried's statement that FAE is easier to undestand than INNER JOINs.
Thomas Zloch says, regarding buffered tables:
At least think twice, maybe compare runtimes if in doubt.
So, unless someone has some EVIDENCE that FOR ALL ENTRIES is better, I don't think we want to see this discussed further.
Kind regards
Matt

To give food for thought here's an example I gave in a thread:
If you have a statement like
SELECT ... FOR ALL ENTRIES IN FAE_itab WHERE f = FAE_itab-f.
SAP sends it to the database depending how the parameter rsdb/prefer_union_all is set:
rsdb/prefer_union_all = 0 =>
SELECT ... WHERE f = FAE_itab[1]-f
          OR    f = FAE_itab[2]-f
          OR    f = FAE_itab[N]-f
You have some influence of the generated statement type: Instead of OR'ed fields an IN list can be used
if you have only a single coulmn N to compare:
rsdb/prefer_in_itab_opt parameter:
SELECT ... WHERE f IN (itab[1]-f, itab[2]-f, ..., itab[N]-f)
rsdb/prefer_union_all = 1 =>
SELECT ... WHERE f = FAE_itab[1]-f
UNION ALL SELECT ... WHERE f = FAE_itab[2]-f
UNION ALL SELECT ... WHERE f = FAE_itab[N]-f
see: Note 48230 - Parameters for the SELECT ... FOR ALL ENTRIES statement
As you can see for the 2nd parameter several statements are generated and combined with a UNION ALL,
the first setting generates statements with OR's (or uses IN if possible) for the entries in FAE_itab.
I give you a little example here (my parameters are set in a way that the OR's are translated to IN lists; i traced the execution in ST05)
Select myid into table t_tabcount from mydbtable
for all entries in t_table    " 484 entries
    where myid = t_table-myid .
ST05 trace:
|Transaction SEU_INT|Work process no 0|Proc.type DIA|Client 200|User |
|Duration |Obj. name |Op.    |Recs.|RC    |Statement|
| 640|mydbtable |PREPARE|   | 0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( :A0 , :A1 , :A2 , :A3 , :A4 ) AND "myid" = :A5|
| 2|mydbtable |OPEN   |   | 0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ) AND "myid" = 72 |
| 2.536|mydbtable |FETCH |    0| 1403|   |
| 3|mydbtable |REOPEN |   | 0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ) AND "myid" = 72 |
| 118|mydbtable |FETCH | 0| |
| 2|mydbtable |REOPEN | | 0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ) AND "myid" = 72     |
| 3|mydbtable |REOPEN | | 0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 475 , 476 , 477 , 478 , 479 ) AND "myid" = 72 |
| 94|mydbtable |FETCH | 0| 1403|   |
| 2|mydbtable |REOPEN |   | 0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 480 , 481 , 482 , 483 , 484 ) AND "myid" = 72 |
You see the IN list contained 5 entries each , wich made up about 97 statements for all 484 entries.
For every statment you have a single fetch operation wich means a separate access to the database.
If you would replace the FAE with a join you would only have one fetch to the database.
With the example above we can derive these observations:
1. From database point of view these settings kill performance when you access a big table and/or have a lot of entries or columns in your FAE_itab. Furthermore, you hide information what data you will access
at all and thus you block the database from creating a more efficient execution plan because it DOESN'T KNOW wich data you will select in the next step. I.e. it may be more efficient to scan the table in one shot instead of having many index accesses - but the database can make this decision only if it can examine ONE statement that has ALL the information of what data to retrieve.
2. A second impact is that with every statement execution you trigger the allocation of database resources
wich will contribute to the overhead described above.
Said that, FAE can never be a replacement for joining big tables (think of having a table with thousands of records in a FAE table )
Edited by: kishan P on Nov 2, 2010 2:16 PM - Format Fixed

Why are two queries better than one

I'm trying to help out our developers who are struggling with the performance of a very simple select statmenent that for some reason is exhibiting some very inexplicable results.
I'll show the SQL as a single statement first.....
select * from transaction1 t where t.hid in (select distinct h.hid from history1 h,filter1 f where h.fid = f.fid and f.match='value');
transaction 1 has 250k records, history1 has about 100k as does filter1. We know generally the subselect will only return a total of half a dozen or less records (only 1 in our testing here).
Running the above query takes around 7 seconds.
Changing this to a with clause.....
WITH a as (select distinct h.hid from history1 h,filter1 f where h.fid = f.fid and f.match='value') select * from transaction1 t where t,hid in (select a.hid from a);
and the runtime drops to 3 seconds. But then re-running the first statement again also now takes 3 seconds (so I guess there's some caching going on there).
Now what really puzzles is if we split this into two queries.....
select distinct h.hid from history1 h,filter1 f where h.fid = f.fid and f.match='value';
This takes .1 of a second,
select * from transaction1 t where t.hid in (12345);
And this takes .1 of a second.
So why when run seperately are they so fast, yet combined they take so long. I'm a bit baffled by this. We've rewritten the same SQL in half a dozen different ways with the same result and also done the same thing with other tables as well. Is it an optimisation issue?

Appologies for not following protocol, my first time posting on here.
Oracle 10g clustered.
We have limited access as it's a customers server, but the explain plan comes back as....
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
Plan hash value: 898894568
| Id | Operation            | Name              | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)|Time     |
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT     |                   | 49553 |    37M| 7075   (2)|00:01:25 |
|* 1 | HASH JOIN RIGHT SEMI|                   | 49553 |    37M| 7075   (2)|00:01:25 |
|   2 |   VIEW               | VW_NSO_1          | 26131 |   331K|   476   (4)|00:00:06 |
|* 3 |    HASH JOIN         |                   | 26131 |   791K|   476   (4)|00:00:06 |
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
|* 4 |     TABLE ACCESS FULL| FILTER1           | 26131 |   484K|   246   (4)|00:00:03 |
|   5 |     TABLE ACCESS FULL| HISTORY1          |   104K| 1225K|   227   (3)|00:00:03 |
|   6 |   TABLE ACCESS FULL | TRANSACTION1      |   199K|   150M| 6593   (1)|00:01:20 |
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   1 - access("T"."TID"="$nso_col_1")
   3 - access("H"."HID"="F"."ID")
   4 - filter("F"."MATCH"='value')
20 rows selectedI'll admit, I'm not completely clear on what I'm reading here, other than the fact there are some big differences in the timing values
We don't have privaleges to run trace, so I'm a bit stuffed there as I'm on the clients site, however I will get my developers to try this on our local server.
Edited by: user1410957 on 15-Sep-2009 06:14

I'm on my second Revolutiona and it's not better than the first one.

I am having the same problems as the rest of you with the revolution and also I'm paying for mobile hotspot with phone and it keeps dropping the internet or says web page cannot be displayed. This is not on a certain page it's all the web pages I visit.

Welcome to Apple Discussions.
I would think that a charger would have its own warranty - probably either 3 months or 1 yr. Check with the store you bought from. I would delay this until you have your new battery as the old battery might be causing the light problem because it's feeding corrupt information through the software. If you can, borrow a good battery from a friend and check whether the power unit behaves correctly.
Your second problem looks like a swollen battery. Very minor swelling can occur with heat but more significant swelling is a faulty battery. If this is the original battery you should check its health using System Profiler. If it has exceeded 300 cycles you should replace it immediately at your own expense. In any case you should remove it and replace it as swollen batteries are a serious risk to the computer should they burst.
Neville

Why is Private Browsing better than just clearing History daily?

I heard that you should do your online banking and other financial activities in Private Browsing mode. I always clear history when I turn off the computer anyway. And getting the Private Browsing to accept my previously bookmarked locations has been unsuccessful. I can re-bookmark from Private Browsing, of course. But I just wondered if this is really necessary, or more for folks with computers on networks, or shared computers?
You may not get at my computer--troubleshooting information. I'm using Windows 7 operating system and the latest version of Mozilla Firefox.

You aren't on the latest version of Firefox, please update to Firefox 22 [[Update Firefox to the latest version]] (you are on Firefox 21).
There is no real difference between using Private Browsing and clearing your history everyday, it's just personal preference around workflows.

Why HCM Extracts is better than HCM BI Report?

Hi All,
I have simple question that why we use HCM extracts at time extracting data from HCM?
any suggestion will be helpful to me.
Thanks & Regards,
Shramistha

Hi Shramshitha,
The main difference is that using HCM extract you can prepare changes only reports, but you cant do the same in BI unless you have access to database.
Thanks,
Vinod

Why RBO might be better than CBO ?

Hi ,
I have a query that references 4 base tables , indexes have been created and analyzed
but when using CBO it's is very slow and it's fast when using the RULE hints.
is this something to do with the logic of the query ?
pls advise
tks & rdgs

hi ,
fyi its the same queries with 2 mode
-- using CHOOSE
SELECT
PT.PT_ID,
PD_INST.CALL_PD_NAME,
RCP.RCP_ID,
RCP.RCP_TITLE,
PD.PD_TITLE,
RCP.EQP_TYPE
FROM
PT,
PD_INST,
RCP,
PD,
PD_INST_RS
WHERE
( PT.PT_ID = PD_INST.PD_ID )
AND ( PD.PD_ID = PD_INST_RS.PD_ID )
AND ( (RCP.RCP_NAME = PD_INST_RS.RCP_NAME) AND (RCP.RCP_AF = 'A') )
AND ( (PD.PD_ID LIKE PD_INST.CALL_PD_NAME || '.%') AND (PD.PD_AF = 'A') )
AND (
( PT.PT_AF = 'A' )
AND ( PT.OF <> 'Y' )
AND ( PD.PD_AF = 'A' )
AND ( PD.OF <> 'Y' )
AND ( RCP.RCP_AF = 'A' )
AND ( RCP.OF <> 'Y' )
AND PD_INST.INST_NUM = 'ab3e12'
AND ( PD_INST_RS.HIE = 'Y' )
AND ( PD_INST_RS.MP = 'Y' )
AND PT.PRODSTATUS = 'A'
SELECT STATEMENT, GOAL = CHOOSE     Cardinality=1     Cost=268     Optimizer=CHOOSE
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID     Cardinality=139     Cost=2     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST
NESTED LOOPS     Cardinality=1     Cost=268
   MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN     Cardinality=4     Cost=267
    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID     Cardinality=1     Cost=3     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST_RS
     NESTED LOOPS     Cardinality=1     Cost=181
      MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN     Cardinality=29     Cost=111
       TABLE ACCESS FULL     Cardinality=1     Cost=25     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=RCP
       BUFFER SORT     Cardinality=67     Cost=86
        TABLE ACCESS FULL     Cardinality=67     Cost=86     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD
      INDEX RANGE SCAN     Cardinality=227     Cost=3     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST_RS_PK
    BUFFER SORT     Cardinality=165     Cost=264
     TABLE ACCESS FULL     Cardinality=165     Cost=86     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PT
   INDEX RANGE SCAN     Cardinality=1     Cost=2     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST_PK
-- using RULE
SELECT /*+ RULE */
PT.PT_ID,
PD_INST.CALL_PD_NAME,
RCP.RCP_ID,
RCP.RCP_TITLE,
PD.PD_TITLE,
RCP.EQP_TYPE
FROM
PT,
PD_INST,
RCP,
PD,
PD_INST_RS
WHERE
( PT.PT_ID = PD_INST.PD_ID )
AND ( PD.PD_ID = PD_INST_RS.PD_ID )
AND ( (RCP.RCP_NAME = PD_INST_RS.RCP_NAME) AND (RCP.RCP_AF = 'A') )
AND ( (PD.PD_ID LIKE PD_INST.CALL_PD_NAME || '.%') AND (PD.PD_AF = 'A') )
AND (
( PT.PT_AF = 'A' )
AND ( PT.OF <> 'Y' )
AND ( PD.PD_AF = 'A' )
AND ( PD.OF <> 'Y' )
AND ( RCP.RCP_AF = 'A' )
AND ( RCP.OF <> 'Y' )
AND PD_INST.INST_NUM = 'ab3e12'
AND ( PD_INST_RS.HIE = 'Y' )
AND ( PD_INST_RS.MP = 'Y' )
AND PT.PRODSTATUS = 'A'
SELECT STATEMENT, GOAL = HINT: RULE               Optimizer=HINT: RULE
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=RCP
NESTED LOOPS
   NESTED LOOPS
    NESTED LOOPS
     NESTED LOOPS
      TABLE ACCESS FULL               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST
      TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PT
       INDEX UNIQUE SCAN               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PT_PK
     TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD
      INDEX RANGE SCAN               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_IK03
    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST_RS
     INDEX RANGE SCAN               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST_RS_PK
   INDEX RANGE SCAN               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=RCP_NDX_1tks & rgds

Why are Ipod Apps better than Iphone Apps?

There are some really nice apps available to the ipod touch that aren't available to the Iphone. Go search Ipod apps in the Itunes store and you will see what I am talking about. How come the same apps aren't available for both devices?

oops, they are not on the touch they are for the nano, and reg ipod. Still I am sure there is a way to develope them for the iphone.

Why does Adobe not care about its users?

I had tech support take over my computer but unwilling to help with adobe flash and reader because they are free. Keep in mind that I do have a trail CC, that I will not re-new. I waited for three hours, and when I asked if there was a cc similar that he could help me with all he said was no. I am in such despair.

If you need help wioth Flash Player and Acrobat Reader you should try the forums for them.
Flash Player:
Downloads: http://www.adobe.com/support/flashplayer/downloads.html
Install Forum: http://forums.adobe.com/community/flashplayer/installing_flashplayer
Using Forum: http://forums.adobe.com/community/flashplayer/using_flashplayer
Acrobat Reader:
Download: Adobe - Adobe Reader download - All versions
Forums: Acrobat Reader

Why iSO7 is not better than its predecessor ?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for