Michal Ždanský The October keynote at which Apple is to present the latest generation of iPads already has another, as yet unofficial, date. The first date, October 21, was soon refuted Jim Dalrymple with his signature "Nope". The new term has now come from John Paczkowski of Code/Red, who has reliable sources at Apple and a good reputation for unconfirmed predictions.
Apple should introduce the new generation of its tablets on October 16, i.e. somewhat unorthodoxly on a Thursday. In less than a fortnight, we could see the new iPad Air and iPad mini. Both tablets should receive the Apple A8 processor, which already beats in the iPhones introduced last month. Furthermore, iPads should receive Touch ID, probably better camera optics and perhaps even better storage options, similar to iPhones. Along with iPads, they should be new Macs were also introduced, specifically the iMac, which should receive a Retina display. However, it is not clear if it will be available in both sizes. The Mac mini has also been waiting for an update for two years. There will also be OS X Yosemite, which could officially arrive on Mac users' computers not long after the keynote.
The event should take place in the more intimate setting of the Town Hall Auditorium in Cupertino, which is part of the Apple building. The date of the keynote has not yet been confirmed, we will probably have to wait for Jim Dalrymple's verdict, or Apple's official invitation.
Correct the month of the event in the article :)
Do you think it will be possible to buy the new iPad before Christmas in Slovakia?
Is U2 not popular anymore or what?
you are there on August 16 and you had the tablets
I also think that digging into U2 is not very new.
“FORMERLY POPULAR GROUPS”??? What do you have with you, Mr. Žďánský, that you became a music critic??? Ugh, that's a load again...
"Previously popular groups" ... well, you've "earned" an adblock with adblock. This is really rubbish!
I don't like what you are able to write about U2 at all... Not everyone may like it, but that doesn't give you the right to write biased nonsense..
Obviously it's not in the article anymore, but what's wrong with the wording "formerly popular group"? After all, it's just stating the facts. U2 isn't doing much anymore today, which is also proven by the fact that many teenagers didn't even know what artist appeared on their iPhone. I'm 28 and I have a lot of people around me who can't remember a single song of theirs. Their glory days are long gone. And I say that in spite of the fact that I like a lot of their songs.
You're talking nonsense, their 2011/2012 tour became the most successful world tour in music history ( http://www.lidovky.cz/u2-maji-nejuspesnejsi-turne-vsech-dob-dwc-/kultura.aspx?c=A110412_082827_ln_kultura_pks ). The tour earned over KC 10 billion.
Popularity really does not mean that everyone and every age group has to know and listen to it. If we determine popularity according to how many fans come to concerts all over the world and are willing to spend money, then at least in 2012 U2 was the most popular group in history.