dethmaShine
Apr 18, 07:40 AM
Wow, so the finder is finally giving us, what other OS' had for years. I wonder what the fanboys will say now, after defending this lack of a feature for years.
I suspect along the lines that apple innovates again and creates a brand new feature :p
I don't know which iPhone users were you talking about.
Everyone wanted multi-tasking; there are hypocrites, but can't believe any body touting that multi-tasking is bad or could be bad.
I suspect along the lines that apple innovates again and creates a brand new feature :p
I don't know which iPhone users were you talking about.
Everyone wanted multi-tasking; there are hypocrites, but can't believe any body touting that multi-tasking is bad or could be bad.
bdj21ya
Oct 10, 05:20 PM
They can't be bummed since they aren't advertising it. The average consumer probably couldn't even tell it's been upgraded (except for the screen brightness)
Hey now, don't forget games, search feature, and alpha transparency letter scrolling :rolleyes:.
No, I think that this was just a stop gap to keep demand up at least a little more while they get the real update ready for market. However, I don't think that real update is coming until at least January, unless this last update was really just to get rid of excess components. But then, I'm with those who say the new update will be released above the current model's price point, not as a replacement (though that would be a few too many models for Steve to think we could comprehend).
Hey now, don't forget games, search feature, and alpha transparency letter scrolling :rolleyes:.
No, I think that this was just a stop gap to keep demand up at least a little more while they get the real update ready for market. However, I don't think that real update is coming until at least January, unless this last update was really just to get rid of excess components. But then, I'm with those who say the new update will be released above the current model's price point, not as a replacement (though that would be a few too many models for Steve to think we could comprehend).
RawBert
Apr 25, 12:00 PM
Fake. Display looks like paper / printed.
That's what I'm seeing too.
That's what I'm seeing too.
tktaylor1
Apr 11, 02:54 PM
New glasses. I have to pick up another pair in 2 weeks.
more...
Lord Blackadder
Aug 8, 12:43 PM
The problem with the US is out transportation system was never laid out for a good mass transit. We have massive urban sprawl and no real way solve that problem. Add in the fact that rail systems were never designed into the system so retrofitting them is will be very costly and very difficult to do.
We have plenty of rail, and we are building more. The problem is that people don't ride it. Just as we have plenty of fuel efficient cars, and more are coming to market - but people are still buying SUVs. We [rightly] blame oil companies for being grasping and short-sighted. But consumers also bear much of the blame.
As for the mass eletric cars I think you pass over my point about how most of them will be charged at night during off peak hours which means for the most part the grid can take a a huge number of them before we will start having a real issue.
It still would not even begin to handle the strain generated by millions of new electric cars suddenly appearing in driveways across America. Large-scale adoption of electric cars would just make coal and oil get burned faster by power companies. Yes, power plants are more efficient than most cars in producing energy. But we are still burning fossil fuels and polluting. Also, has anyone done a study to compare the true efficiency of the best full electrics vs an efficient, equivalent diesel or gas car? For example, given an identical amount of oil, which vehicle uses it more efficiently? A diesel hatchback or an electric that gets it's juice from a power plant burning oil? I'd be curious to see the results. I'm not trying to sound skeptical - I just don't know what the comparison would reveal.
We need something to replace the use of gas. Hybrids I will say are a great thing to bridge between our combustion engine and what ever is next. Things like the volt I think are the best examples of the bridge because we just need to replace the power generator and that is fairly easy to do compared to having to figure out some other type of engine to move the car. We have electric motors that we can advance for moving.
GM's European arm Opel created a concept diesel series hybrid, the stupidly named Flextreme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opel_Flextreme), which promises dramatically improved fuel economy over the Volt. I just feel like any series hybrid that uses a gasoline engine is a foolishly crippled piece of technology when appropriate diesels are available and would deliver far superior fuel economy.
Reducing our usage of fuel I would argue is a dead end tech. All it will do is delay the problem but not solve it. Hybrids bridge us to the solution.
Reducing our fuel consumption is not a solution, but it is the first crucial step in bridging the gap between fossil fuels and whatever alternative we develop. We need time to transition, and if everyone practices conservation we buy more time to transition.
As yet, no hybrids on the market outperform straight diesel engined cars consistently, so the hybrid concept is still very much in its infancy. I have yet to be convinced, especially with the cost and [lack of efficiency] of the battery packs. They may ultimately meet expectations, but they haven't yet.
We have plenty of rail, and we are building more. The problem is that people don't ride it. Just as we have plenty of fuel efficient cars, and more are coming to market - but people are still buying SUVs. We [rightly] blame oil companies for being grasping and short-sighted. But consumers also bear much of the blame.
As for the mass eletric cars I think you pass over my point about how most of them will be charged at night during off peak hours which means for the most part the grid can take a a huge number of them before we will start having a real issue.
It still would not even begin to handle the strain generated by millions of new electric cars suddenly appearing in driveways across America. Large-scale adoption of electric cars would just make coal and oil get burned faster by power companies. Yes, power plants are more efficient than most cars in producing energy. But we are still burning fossil fuels and polluting. Also, has anyone done a study to compare the true efficiency of the best full electrics vs an efficient, equivalent diesel or gas car? For example, given an identical amount of oil, which vehicle uses it more efficiently? A diesel hatchback or an electric that gets it's juice from a power plant burning oil? I'd be curious to see the results. I'm not trying to sound skeptical - I just don't know what the comparison would reveal.
We need something to replace the use of gas. Hybrids I will say are a great thing to bridge between our combustion engine and what ever is next. Things like the volt I think are the best examples of the bridge because we just need to replace the power generator and that is fairly easy to do compared to having to figure out some other type of engine to move the car. We have electric motors that we can advance for moving.
GM's European arm Opel created a concept diesel series hybrid, the stupidly named Flextreme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opel_Flextreme), which promises dramatically improved fuel economy over the Volt. I just feel like any series hybrid that uses a gasoline engine is a foolishly crippled piece of technology when appropriate diesels are available and would deliver far superior fuel economy.
Reducing our usage of fuel I would argue is a dead end tech. All it will do is delay the problem but not solve it. Hybrids bridge us to the solution.
Reducing our fuel consumption is not a solution, but it is the first crucial step in bridging the gap between fossil fuels and whatever alternative we develop. We need time to transition, and if everyone practices conservation we buy more time to transition.
As yet, no hybrids on the market outperform straight diesel engined cars consistently, so the hybrid concept is still very much in its infancy. I have yet to be convinced, especially with the cost and [lack of efficiency] of the battery packs. They may ultimately meet expectations, but they haven't yet.
Ugg
Apr 18, 12:35 AM
We should add left handed history ahead of gay history, before you bash me, let me explain..........
Because of these horrible things perpetuated on left handed people I request that left handed people are mentioned in history.
How was that?
Any basic history textbook will include basic information about a person. Left handedness often is mentioned, so is deafness, blindness and other physical differences. Homosexuality isn't in the same league, now is it?
Why do so many people have a difficult time acknowledging the unique contributions of gay people?
Have you heard of Wounded Knee? This country has a horrible problem in dealing with minorities an those on the right seem most interested in suppressing anyone who doesn't fit into their narrow and erroneous interpretation of American demographics.
It's very, very sad.
Because of these horrible things perpetuated on left handed people I request that left handed people are mentioned in history.
How was that?
Any basic history textbook will include basic information about a person. Left handedness often is mentioned, so is deafness, blindness and other physical differences. Homosexuality isn't in the same league, now is it?
Why do so many people have a difficult time acknowledging the unique contributions of gay people?
Have you heard of Wounded Knee? This country has a horrible problem in dealing with minorities an those on the right seem most interested in suppressing anyone who doesn't fit into their narrow and erroneous interpretation of American demographics.
It's very, very sad.
more...
gamezealot
Oct 7, 08:05 AM
Too bad that Map is a load of BS... I live in Coral Springs FL, just north of Ft Lauderdale... Verizons map says there is 3g coverage there... In my house and anywhere around my house i get 1 bar.... 1 lowzy bar!!! I switched back to AT&T and whoa, 5 bars, full signal, all the time! I don't understand why people bitch about AT&T... No phone company is any better... They all suck... Pull your panties up and move on...
turbobass
Apr 5, 03:27 PM
brilliant! i find myself "surfing" free apps to find certain iAds. I've always wanted a database of all of the iADs in one place to reference and inspire. I see 2 in the macrumors screen shot that I personally have worked on. Cool!
Congratulations sir or ma'am, you are the one human being on the planet who can actually call this "brilliant" and have a use for it that is not completely retarded and/or make me wish a meteor would hit earth.
Congratulations sir or ma'am, you are the one human being on the planet who can actually call this "brilliant" and have a use for it that is not completely retarded and/or make me wish a meteor would hit earth.
more...
Dagless
Nov 24, 07:08 AM
Why don't Apple do anything like that outside of their own country, god knows they're cheaper in America than here.
Globalisation with none of the benefits.
Globalisation with none of the benefits.
killuminati
Sep 7, 08:19 PM
are you kidding me? So you're saying that it was just a publicity stunt? Just cuz kanye's black? :(
more...
*LTD*
Mar 10, 07:52 AM
The Click Wheel interface was/is an abomination and exactly the opposite of a "good" interface. It's a horrible mess. The only usable iPod is the iPod Touch.
The click wheel interface was, in fact, a key element in the astounding (and that's putting it mildly) success of the iPod.
I thought everyone knew this already. :confused:
Apple used to innovate, right now they have acheived the goal of any capitalist company, they've hit the big time with the iPhone and are resting on their laurels.
In case you haven't noticed, they've redefined computing almost overnight. They're now building on that. They've got the competition completely flummoxed. They're pushing the industry forward with their apparent non-innovations.
The click wheel interface was, in fact, a key element in the astounding (and that's putting it mildly) success of the iPod.
I thought everyone knew this already. :confused:
Apple used to innovate, right now they have acheived the goal of any capitalist company, they've hit the big time with the iPhone and are resting on their laurels.
In case you haven't noticed, they've redefined computing almost overnight. They're now building on that. They've got the competition completely flummoxed. They're pushing the industry forward with their apparent non-innovations.
dicklacara
Jul 21, 11:38 AM
.
Here's a post at another site that saya it best:
bbrewer 1 hour ago
2 people liked this.
Antenna-gate was a non-issue to start with. If anything it may end up helping Apple meet demand at some point. Right now they are not able to make them fast enough anyway.
The external antenna is great. You won't drop a call no matter how you hold it if you have a decent signal. If you are in a weak signal area, you might not even have a signal on another phone. Of the iPhone 4, if you have one bar, avoid touching the strip near the bottom of the left side. If you can tie your own shoes, you can probably manage this. Or get a (free) case. Gee, what a crisis.
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100721/apple-earnings-no-better-antennagate-deodorant-than-success/#comments
.
Here's a post at another site that saya it best:
bbrewer 1 hour ago
2 people liked this.
Antenna-gate was a non-issue to start with. If anything it may end up helping Apple meet demand at some point. Right now they are not able to make them fast enough anyway.
The external antenna is great. You won't drop a call no matter how you hold it if you have a decent signal. If you are in a weak signal area, you might not even have a signal on another phone. Of the iPhone 4, if you have one bar, avoid touching the strip near the bottom of the left side. If you can tie your own shoes, you can probably manage this. Or get a (free) case. Gee, what a crisis.
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100721/apple-earnings-no-better-antennagate-deodorant-than-success/#comments
.
more...
JohnnyQuest
Mar 17, 01:20 AM
He probably did pocket the cash, since he asked if everything was cool when he handed me the bag, that def ran through my mind a few times.
Seriously?
:rolleyes:
Seriously?
:rolleyes:
Popeye206
Mar 29, 08:03 AM
1. You intentionally ignored the point that referred to Apple's Terms of Service. For example, applications like VMWare Fusion, Parallels Desktop or even SuperDuper! could never be distributed through the Mac AppStore because they belong in a category that Apple does not ALLOW in their AppStore. As a matter of fact, even their own Xcode violates their TOS. But they wouldn't be Apple if the same rules also applied to themselves...
2. There won't be a Microsoft AppStore for Windows INTEGRATED INTO WINDOWS. EVER. Why? Because they can't for LEGAL reasons. Anti-trust lawsuits, anyone? Microsoft would only get away with that if they implemented a "choose your AppStore" program that would let the people choose which online store they want to use - just like they had to do it for the web browsers. I think that Apple should also be forced to do the same. After all, there is at least one other "AppStore" for the Mac out there that is even OLDER than Apple's own AppStore, and Apple misuses their power to drive those guys out of business. People stopped using Netscape when Internet Explorer came pre-installed on the operating system. Now people will not even try to look for another online store when the AppStore and iTunes are pre-installed on their computers. The same thing. The same rules should apply to Apple as they obviously apply to Microsoft.
Winni.... you're obviously playing lawyer and have no idea what you're talking about. Microsoft could do what Apple is doing. There is nothing illegal or anti trust about distributing software. They just have to play by the same rules as everyone else. If Apple was to give away the distribution, that would be more in line with anti-trust because then they would be using their power to give something that others pay for. As long as Microsoft would keep their rules within the boundaries of the industry practice, they would be fine to do the same.
Things change and companies with the better idea's thrive while others go away. Music stores are dying. Video stores are dying. Book stores are dying and software distribution stores are dying. But not because of just Apple.... because with the digital age many companies are by-passing channel completely and going direct. What Apple does would be no different than Ford or Mercedes distributing 3rd party accessories through their dealerships to their customers.
Also.... your rights on software depends on what's in the license when you buy it. If it's non-transerable, it's non-transferable. That's why you can get away with buying some of this software for $5. But it's not your legal right to resell. That depends on the license you agree to.
Whoa! The jury is still out as to whether the Mac App Store is a success. While a few apps at the top have trumpeted their success, I dare say there is a far greater mass of apps that are doing less business than before the Mac App Store opened.
In my own market segment the Mac App Store has reduced the cash flow for everyone due largely, among other factors, to the increased and sustained visibility of the freebies. It is crazy for Apple to court developers and then throw up a list of freebies alongside my own paid offering. Thanks so much -- for nothing! Where are the free alternatives to Garage Band, Keynote, or Numbers? You can be sure they are not on the same page in the Mac App Store...
As far as I am concerned as a developer, the Mac App Store is a waste of time unless we can all go write $1.99 apps that get downloaded by a million people (good luck!). Anything that requires significant development time is a loss. Plus, anything that costs real money can't be tried first from the Mac App Store. Developers still have to maintain websites, demos, and bandwidth but then pay Apple 30% for the sale in an environment that depresses prices. Success? By what measure and for whom?
I hear your point, but disagree. Putting your software in the App store will not guarantee success or failure. People buy what's worth it to them. They will pay for what meets their needs. Also, they have to know you exist too. Yes, the App Store can give you exposure, but you still have to market and sell your solution for people to find you or want you. Plus, the AppStore is one outlet and your other outlets should never be abandoned.
However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced. And as you point out... that is hard to compete in too.... back to my first point.
Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.
2. There won't be a Microsoft AppStore for Windows INTEGRATED INTO WINDOWS. EVER. Why? Because they can't for LEGAL reasons. Anti-trust lawsuits, anyone? Microsoft would only get away with that if they implemented a "choose your AppStore" program that would let the people choose which online store they want to use - just like they had to do it for the web browsers. I think that Apple should also be forced to do the same. After all, there is at least one other "AppStore" for the Mac out there that is even OLDER than Apple's own AppStore, and Apple misuses their power to drive those guys out of business. People stopped using Netscape when Internet Explorer came pre-installed on the operating system. Now people will not even try to look for another online store when the AppStore and iTunes are pre-installed on their computers. The same thing. The same rules should apply to Apple as they obviously apply to Microsoft.
Winni.... you're obviously playing lawyer and have no idea what you're talking about. Microsoft could do what Apple is doing. There is nothing illegal or anti trust about distributing software. They just have to play by the same rules as everyone else. If Apple was to give away the distribution, that would be more in line with anti-trust because then they would be using their power to give something that others pay for. As long as Microsoft would keep their rules within the boundaries of the industry practice, they would be fine to do the same.
Things change and companies with the better idea's thrive while others go away. Music stores are dying. Video stores are dying. Book stores are dying and software distribution stores are dying. But not because of just Apple.... because with the digital age many companies are by-passing channel completely and going direct. What Apple does would be no different than Ford or Mercedes distributing 3rd party accessories through their dealerships to their customers.
Also.... your rights on software depends on what's in the license when you buy it. If it's non-transerable, it's non-transferable. That's why you can get away with buying some of this software for $5. But it's not your legal right to resell. That depends on the license you agree to.
Whoa! The jury is still out as to whether the Mac App Store is a success. While a few apps at the top have trumpeted their success, I dare say there is a far greater mass of apps that are doing less business than before the Mac App Store opened.
In my own market segment the Mac App Store has reduced the cash flow for everyone due largely, among other factors, to the increased and sustained visibility of the freebies. It is crazy for Apple to court developers and then throw up a list of freebies alongside my own paid offering. Thanks so much -- for nothing! Where are the free alternatives to Garage Band, Keynote, or Numbers? You can be sure they are not on the same page in the Mac App Store...
As far as I am concerned as a developer, the Mac App Store is a waste of time unless we can all go write $1.99 apps that get downloaded by a million people (good luck!). Anything that requires significant development time is a loss. Plus, anything that costs real money can't be tried first from the Mac App Store. Developers still have to maintain websites, demos, and bandwidth but then pay Apple 30% for the sale in an environment that depresses prices. Success? By what measure and for whom?
I hear your point, but disagree. Putting your software in the App store will not guarantee success or failure. People buy what's worth it to them. They will pay for what meets their needs. Also, they have to know you exist too. Yes, the App Store can give you exposure, but you still have to market and sell your solution for people to find you or want you. Plus, the AppStore is one outlet and your other outlets should never be abandoned.
However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced. And as you point out... that is hard to compete in too.... back to my first point.
Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.
more...
chrmjenkins
Apr 25, 11:52 AM
I don't know if I'd even want them to bother if it's only going from 3.5 to 3.7. Doesn't seem like the difference would be noticeable.
I just hope they don't call it the 4s. Just use sequential numbers so we don't have model confusion again like the 3g/3gs caused with people expecting 4g to be next.
I just hope they don't call it the 4s. Just use sequential numbers so we don't have model confusion again like the 3g/3gs caused with people expecting 4g to be next.
NewSc2
Oct 3, 06:08 PM
hi,
The people I have spoken to who use PC's are not nerds or power users, however, they do have monitors that work perfectly fine and want to use them. Why would someone purchase a 20" iMac when they already have sitting on their desk a 12 month old 19" LCD? They may not all need expandability (or really understand what that means) but they are of the mind set that they must have the option. These people are simply not considering Apple computers because of the lack of an upgradeable computer that is under $1500 (the mini is not easily upgradeable unless you happen to be one of those nerds you are refering to). The gap between the mini and the Mac Pro is enormous in both power and price yet there is nothing in the middle price/power range. Simply dismissing this catagory of people will not convince them to buy an iMac. Further, saying the operating system will convince them to switch is a moot point if they never buy the computer in the first place.
My friends, family, and co-workers are all interested in this "OS X thing" but get turned off at the price of the Pro, the lack of power of the mini, and the all in one of the iMac. This is what I am seeing, and Apple is losing sales because of it.
s.
The Mini is pretty powerful. Sorry to discount your argument, but I think that it's more than enough for people out there that aren't power users/computer nerds. Heck, my dad runs engineering software all day long on his Pentium 3 733mhz, 256MB RAM computer and doesn't feel the need to upgrade.
It being in a small case is even better for the common user. Maybe to us, a small case seems like a bad computer, but the specs are similar to MacBook specs, which seems like enough for almost all users out there.
The people I have spoken to who use PC's are not nerds or power users, however, they do have monitors that work perfectly fine and want to use them. Why would someone purchase a 20" iMac when they already have sitting on their desk a 12 month old 19" LCD? They may not all need expandability (or really understand what that means) but they are of the mind set that they must have the option. These people are simply not considering Apple computers because of the lack of an upgradeable computer that is under $1500 (the mini is not easily upgradeable unless you happen to be one of those nerds you are refering to). The gap between the mini and the Mac Pro is enormous in both power and price yet there is nothing in the middle price/power range. Simply dismissing this catagory of people will not convince them to buy an iMac. Further, saying the operating system will convince them to switch is a moot point if they never buy the computer in the first place.
My friends, family, and co-workers are all interested in this "OS X thing" but get turned off at the price of the Pro, the lack of power of the mini, and the all in one of the iMac. This is what I am seeing, and Apple is losing sales because of it.
s.
The Mini is pretty powerful. Sorry to discount your argument, but I think that it's more than enough for people out there that aren't power users/computer nerds. Heck, my dad runs engineering software all day long on his Pentium 3 733mhz, 256MB RAM computer and doesn't feel the need to upgrade.
It being in a small case is even better for the common user. Maybe to us, a small case seems like a bad computer, but the specs are similar to MacBook specs, which seems like enough for almost all users out there.
more...
e12a
Nov 16, 04:03 PM
I'll throw up at the notion of having a Turion in any apple. Those things blow.
Leemo
Sep 12, 03:55 AM
I genuinely think that if Apple are introducing a movie store today they're going to have something rather special up their sleeve - I think pricing should be extremely competitive compared to DVDs otherwise what's the point?
Digital downloads of films (sorry, movies) needs to be made appealing to the masses in the same way music was, with cheap individual prices that compared favourably to CDs - people have gotten used to owning only digital copies of their music, however movies are still in that tangible area of hard media, and I feel Apple are going to have to really be priced competitively to alter public perception of digital distribution of movie content.
Not that they *won't* of course, but I don't think it's going to be necessarily easy.
If they introduce HD content I'll be a very happy bunny.
-Leemo
Digital downloads of films (sorry, movies) needs to be made appealing to the masses in the same way music was, with cheap individual prices that compared favourably to CDs - people have gotten used to owning only digital copies of their music, however movies are still in that tangible area of hard media, and I feel Apple are going to have to really be priced competitively to alter public perception of digital distribution of movie content.
Not that they *won't* of course, but I don't think it's going to be necessarily easy.
If they introduce HD content I'll be a very happy bunny.
-Leemo
scotthew1
Nov 23, 06:10 PM
will the sale discounts be added in with outher discounts, such as educator's discounts?
Chundles
Sep 12, 08:33 AM
You are really disenchanted by this thread arent you?
But at the end of the day its your fault. You are the leader you must take responsibility.
I sure am, just a broken, shadow of my former self.
As the highest-posting 68040 I feel distraught at my ineptitude as leader. but in about 13 more posts I'll be the most junior 601 and then I'll pass the buck up the line. :D
But at the end of the day its your fault. You are the leader you must take responsibility.
I sure am, just a broken, shadow of my former self.
As the highest-posting 68040 I feel distraught at my ineptitude as leader. but in about 13 more posts I'll be the most junior 601 and then I'll pass the buck up the line. :D
TheMacBookPro
Mar 18, 10:51 AM
That was exactly my point. I don't see why people care so much about what phone someone else has. It's only the Android folks that engage in this, I have yet to see an iPhone owner behave so pathetically.
Seriously?
You're behaving pretty pathetically too. What are you trying to gain from this thread? The approval of other Apple fanboys? Or are you trying to make yourself feel better about your purchase?
Take a look through the forums, and you'll find plenty of people 'behaving so pathetically' in plenty of threads. Including this one!
FTR I have two iPhone 4's, a Nexus S and a LYNX 3D (SH-03C). There goes your theory that Android device owners are all too poor to afford an iPhone :rolleyes:
Several things:
Never had Angry Birds run at '2FPS' and I have the 'original Google phone'- a HTC G1. Runs nice and smooth on 2.2 (general usage and games). My iPhone 3G OTOH...
Doing the same things (heavy web browsing, 1~2 hours of talk time, 1 hour of A2DP BT music streaming in my car) I get just under 1 days' battery life on both my NS and iPhone 4.
As for the screen- less pixel dense on my NS obviously but in direct sunlight the NS's SAMOLED is way better than my iPhone.
Love the 3D on my SH-03C. Mobile ASV on it is as good, if not better than, the iPhone's IPS technology.
I gotta admit that my 4's screen is crisper. Shame they can't produce them all the same (my 32GB is pee-yellow while my 16GB is very white).
You're either a balanced 'reviewer' or an Apple apologist (plenty of them here!). I'm leaning towards the latter. ;)
Seriously?
You're behaving pretty pathetically too. What are you trying to gain from this thread? The approval of other Apple fanboys? Or are you trying to make yourself feel better about your purchase?
Take a look through the forums, and you'll find plenty of people 'behaving so pathetically' in plenty of threads. Including this one!
FTR I have two iPhone 4's, a Nexus S and a LYNX 3D (SH-03C). There goes your theory that Android device owners are all too poor to afford an iPhone :rolleyes:
Several things:
Never had Angry Birds run at '2FPS' and I have the 'original Google phone'- a HTC G1. Runs nice and smooth on 2.2 (general usage and games). My iPhone 3G OTOH...
Doing the same things (heavy web browsing, 1~2 hours of talk time, 1 hour of A2DP BT music streaming in my car) I get just under 1 days' battery life on both my NS and iPhone 4.
As for the screen- less pixel dense on my NS obviously but in direct sunlight the NS's SAMOLED is way better than my iPhone.
Love the 3D on my SH-03C. Mobile ASV on it is as good, if not better than, the iPhone's IPS technology.
I gotta admit that my 4's screen is crisper. Shame they can't produce them all the same (my 32GB is pee-yellow while my 16GB is very white).
You're either a balanced 'reviewer' or an Apple apologist (plenty of them here!). I'm leaning towards the latter. ;)
noodlelegs
Jan 8, 10:47 AM
Interesting that the original post in this thread states that it is indeed an LTE Verizon iPhone. That seems to coincide with the video of the parts that were leaked on youtube a couple days ago, showing a sim card slot on the new phone. I think I read somewhere that LTE phones require a sim card, and also, LTE is capable of simultaneous voice/data. The stars seem to be aligning.
secondhandloser
Mar 11, 01:42 PM
Milestone 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0FtgZNOD44
Milestone 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftf4riVJyqw
Milestone 3 (the most recent):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBhYxj2SvRI
Any questions?
[Citation needed]
Fun fact: Showing SJ talk does not mean Apple has "redefined" computing. They have helped evolve it, as a player in the industry, of course. Hardly anything that could be called redefining.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0FtgZNOD44
Milestone 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftf4riVJyqw
Milestone 3 (the most recent):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBhYxj2SvRI
Any questions?
[Citation needed]
Fun fact: Showing SJ talk does not mean Apple has "redefined" computing. They have helped evolve it, as a player in the industry, of course. Hardly anything that could be called redefining.
zombitronic
Oct 6, 11:00 AM
It was a good message until they stated "Before you pick a phone, pick a network." That would be valid in an iPhone-less world. They would still be selling us phones based on a spinning CGI rendering of a phone's outer shell. "Look! A plastic candy bar! You like candy, don't you? Then you'll love our rectangular phone! Brand new features like rounded edges and three colors!"
Apple changed the game. The device should now be the focus. The service should be an afterthought in the background.
Apple changed the game. The device should now be the focus. The service should be an afterthought in the background.
0 comments:
Post a Comment