Renverse
Apr 17, 12:59 PM
Google needs to get their **** together if they want to keep competing. Everyone I know that has an Android carries around an iPod too.
Microsoft has Zune, and it's WP7 phones and Apple has iTunes. Google has to rely on Amazon, and even then the Android MP3 App is by far the worst of the 3.
Microsoft has Zune, and it's WP7 phones and Apple has iTunes. Google has to rely on Amazon, and even then the Android MP3 App is by far the worst of the 3.
lostprophet894
Apr 15, 05:16 PM
If they're going to go with an aluminum design, it should look like this, but maybe with rounded edges:
http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2010/03/30/iphone-4g-aka-hd-mock-up-design-and-details-photo/
That homescreen is nice. Not sure how I feel about the casing.
http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2010/03/30/iphone-4g-aka-hd-mock-up-design-and-details-photo/
That homescreen is nice. Not sure how I feel about the casing.
Nekbeth
Apr 28, 09:31 PM
For example, here's a thread I started earlier this month: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1133446 I was playing with some code from various tutorials that was no longer functional, found a way to fix it and chose to give that solution back to the 'net and it was immediately useful for another user.
B
That is good balamw, very good of your part to give back. But I decided to give back to only those who stayed with me to the End and showed true patience. Besides, this code is a piece of cake for all you.
*If your a beginner, just send me an E-mail and I will help you, PATIENTLY.
B
That is good balamw, very good of your part to give back. But I decided to give back to only those who stayed with me to the End and showed true patience. Besides, this code is a piece of cake for all you.
*If your a beginner, just send me an E-mail and I will help you, PATIENTLY.
franmatt80
Apr 26, 11:08 AM
Apart from in this thread, I've hardly seen the system in use. Perhaps I'm just not visiting the right boards? Does it seem to be popular?
more...
StuPidQPid
Jan 13, 01:34 PM
I beg to differ.:)
Actually he's right! I just tilt my PowerBook screen and can read the white on color #FAFAFA with no problem :-)
Actually he's right! I just tilt my PowerBook screen and can read the white on color #FAFAFA with no problem :-)
woody888
Mar 17, 05:42 PM
true story, I walked into Apple store today. I saw a nice iPad on the display. I like it a lot, but I really just do not have the money to pay for it. I "rigged" it out of the anti-theft device and nobody was looking at me. everybody seemed busy doing their own thing. I then proceeded to take the iPad to the front of the store. I had the iPad in my jacket. And no alarm sounded! wow, I had just walked off with a new iPad. well, it is a display model, but hey, it is free. $230 for an iPad? I think I got the better deal than you......
OP, you obviously knew you did the wrong thing, because all along you knew about it. as soon as you walked out of Best Buy, you knew what is going on, so why not do the right thing? just a suggestion. it's not like any of us that have the most morale, but it just seem like a right thing to do. why make the cashier take the fall? sure, they may be stoned according to you, but it sounds to me that you are taking advantage of others on purpose. ok, my lame morale speech is over. I'm going to go into AT&T store now and see if I can take some display U-Verse boxes home. my jacket have plenty of pockets!
OP, you obviously knew you did the wrong thing, because all along you knew about it. as soon as you walked out of Best Buy, you knew what is going on, so why not do the right thing? just a suggestion. it's not like any of us that have the most morale, but it just seem like a right thing to do. why make the cashier take the fall? sure, they may be stoned according to you, but it sounds to me that you are taking advantage of others on purpose. ok, my lame morale speech is over. I'm going to go into AT&T store now and see if I can take some display U-Verse boxes home. my jacket have plenty of pockets!
more...
mrblack927
Apr 25, 12:09 PM
No it will go from 4S to 5 lol
I don't think so... They skipped iPhone 2 and iPhone 3 and went right to "iPhone 4" because it was the 4th generation. Why wouldn't they call it iPhone 6 if it's the 6th generation?
I don't think so... They skipped iPhone 2 and iPhone 3 and went right to "iPhone 4" because it was the 4th generation. Why wouldn't they call it iPhone 6 if it's the 6th generation?
Retrosonic
Dec 18, 08:15 PM
Super interesting thread here. Very enjoyable reading, at least for most of the messages. (except for the ditzo who cant see why Apple would have two seperate iphone upgrade dates, one in Jan and one in June.....it makes complete business sense).
The minute I saw Verizons announcement out of nowhere about rolling out the LTE network in 1/3 of the country on Dec 5, my ears went up. I mean why do that if there isnt something following it soon after? It sure SEEMs like they are "setting the table" for something.
I guess we'll find out soon enough.
I just really hope the Verizon Iphone is available in White from Day One. The white is sharp looking.
The minute I saw Verizons announcement out of nowhere about rolling out the LTE network in 1/3 of the country on Dec 5, my ears went up. I mean why do that if there isnt something following it soon after? It sure SEEMs like they are "setting the table" for something.
I guess we'll find out soon enough.
I just really hope the Verizon Iphone is available in White from Day One. The white is sharp looking.
more...
8CoreWhore
Apr 12, 03:43 AM
There is the objective and the subjective. Objectively, one might say - hey, W8 is stable, and functional, etc...
Subjectively, people like what they like...
Subjectively, people like what they like...
flopticalcube
Apr 21, 12:07 PM
Vote count before you vote: 2
Vote count after you vote down: 1 (net change: -1)
Vote count after you vote up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote down, then up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote up, then down: 1 (net change: -1)
The net effect of you voting is only a +1 or -1. Remember, you don't know who else clicked the vote button on that same post just before you did. When you load a page, the current vote loads. If you take a minute or even a few seconds to read a post and vote, others could have voted during that time. The vote counter doesn't dynamically update every time someone votes; it does only when you vote or refresh the page.
So it's a like/dislike system that nets the like/dislikes to a numerical value, assuming the dislikes are negative. That is why when you change from a vote down to an up, you are removing your dislike and adding a like. Correct?
EDIT: Counts are update after you make a selection so it may appear that your vote was not counted but the count may not be accurate on your page when you make the vote. Got it.
Vote count after you vote down: 1 (net change: -1)
Vote count after you vote up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote down, then up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote up, then down: 1 (net change: -1)
The net effect of you voting is only a +1 or -1. Remember, you don't know who else clicked the vote button on that same post just before you did. When you load a page, the current vote loads. If you take a minute or even a few seconds to read a post and vote, others could have voted during that time. The vote counter doesn't dynamically update every time someone votes; it does only when you vote or refresh the page.
So it's a like/dislike system that nets the like/dislikes to a numerical value, assuming the dislikes are negative. That is why when you change from a vote down to an up, you are removing your dislike and adding a like. Correct?
EDIT: Counts are update after you make a selection so it may appear that your vote was not counted but the count may not be accurate on your page when you make the vote. Got it.
more...
MrSmith
Jan 11, 07:13 PM
I think the "hilarious" part must have slipped me by. :confused:
schwell
Oct 22, 07:29 PM
Thanks. However, that site doesn't seem to update its information. Some of it dates back at least five years.
For example, I looked around my area, and most of the well known dead zones marked on the map were resolved a few years ago with new towers.
The site does update the information. Zoom in and click on the "deadspots" The date reported is shown. I clicked on 25 for Verizon and 25 for AT&T they were all reported in 2008 or 2009.
For example, I looked around my area, and most of the well known dead zones marked on the map were resolved a few years ago with new towers.
The site does update the information. Zoom in and click on the "deadspots" The date reported is shown. I clicked on 25 for Verizon and 25 for AT&T they were all reported in 2008 or 2009.
more...
puuukeey
Jan 9, 03:19 PM
http://www.insideout-tees.com/sucktees/well_this_sucks.gif
AtHomeBoy_2000
Sep 28, 01:24 PM
Thats not apart of what a home should be. Homes are for eating, sleeping, loving, and relaxing. A screening room is for... Well, none of those.
I 100% agree
I 100% agree
more...
sikuss
Apr 8, 07:28 PM
Refurbed iPad1 after I gave my previous ipad to my grandmother to use
http://i.zdnet.com/blogs/apple-ipad-official-04.jpg
http://i.zdnet.com/blogs/apple-ipad-official-04.jpg
Lord Blackadder
Aug 10, 01:10 PM
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
more...
QCassidy352
Sep 28, 01:05 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
Now hopefully these pretty town bureaucrats approve this in short order and then get back to their usual important functions, like telling people what colors they can paint their mailboxes.
It that an iPhone autospell or are they really good looking. :D
The former :o
Now hopefully these pretty town bureaucrats approve this in short order and then get back to their usual important functions, like telling people what colors they can paint their mailboxes.
It that an iPhone autospell or are they really good looking. :D
The former :o
fungus
Apr 25, 05:42 PM
Eventually it just has to be called "iPhone". No numbers, and certainly no asinine feature indicators. Internally it will be "iPhone (nth generation)", and the previous model on sale for $99 (or $49) will be "iPhone (previous generation)", just like iPods. Same goes for the iPad. Seriously, 10 years from now what are they going to call it... the iPhone 14s? This makes sense how?
Rm.237
Apr 8, 01:00 PM
I wonder what the special promotion is.
No kidding. Seems fishy.
And this doesn't change the fact that the practices mentioned in the other thread are not taking place. Or the fact that they will continue to do so.
No kidding. Seems fishy.
And this doesn't change the fact that the practices mentioned in the other thread are not taking place. Or the fact that they will continue to do so.
neiltc13
Apr 10, 06:10 AM
You do know that Windows had an App Store before OS X, but it got axed due to it being badly implemented which resulted in lack of custom? All they are doing there is returning and improving one of their own features, not copying Apple.
If we consider only games, Microsoft's own game store has been running since December 2009. Games for Windows LIVE Marketplace.
If we consider only games, Microsoft's own game store has been running since December 2009. Games for Windows LIVE Marketplace.
SkippyThorson
Apr 15, 12:41 PM
Is it just me, or is the writing on the 3rd photo a bit skewed, or rotated in an odd way?
You're entirely right, it does. It makes sense that the awkward image is the oldest too, since that was the earliest image. The other ones are a bit better because they obviously took time. The angles however on the back of the device, going from the middle out to the corners, are just awkward though.
I don't see how they would go back to angles after touting the more curved and comfortable 3G / 3GS back. There was a big focus on how much more comfortable the new iPhone was to hold compared to the first.
Regardless of the validity, I personally think the chances are very high for a unibody type iPhone, it only makes sense. Apple did a unibody macbook (plastic). Its Apple, everything standardizes and is consistent, otherwise Steve's head will explode.
You could be right too, especially that last line. Things are almost always uniform. However, when the iPod Classic went to metal, and the iPhone went to plastic, that was an unexpected switch. The iPhone has never really been "in line".
You're entirely right, it does. It makes sense that the awkward image is the oldest too, since that was the earliest image. The other ones are a bit better because they obviously took time. The angles however on the back of the device, going from the middle out to the corners, are just awkward though.
I don't see how they would go back to angles after touting the more curved and comfortable 3G / 3GS back. There was a big focus on how much more comfortable the new iPhone was to hold compared to the first.
Regardless of the validity, I personally think the chances are very high for a unibody type iPhone, it only makes sense. Apple did a unibody macbook (plastic). Its Apple, everything standardizes and is consistent, otherwise Steve's head will explode.
You could be right too, especially that last line. Things are almost always uniform. However, when the iPod Classic went to metal, and the iPhone went to plastic, that was an unexpected switch. The iPhone has never really been "in line".
sparkleytone
Oct 28, 03:51 PM
Its not that big of a deal. Every "OSx86" release we have seen so far share the same fundamental problem: they are "one-off" builds.
This means they are not upgradeable via Software Update and the build can be easily obsoleted by a subsequent Apple release. This combined with the fact that Joe User wouldn't touch this with a 10ft pole means that it can't really harm Apple very much. In fact, until it is truly hacked, OSx86 builds will probably contribute more to Apple sales than hurt them.
This means they are not upgradeable via Software Update and the build can be easily obsoleted by a subsequent Apple release. This combined with the fact that Joe User wouldn't touch this with a 10ft pole means that it can't really harm Apple very much. In fact, until it is truly hacked, OSx86 builds will probably contribute more to Apple sales than hurt them.
BJNY
Jan 14, 10:10 AM
I'm in if the iPhone gets:
• push email
• 16GB
• better camera
I'd like to see the 17" Macbook Pro get L.E.D. backlighting as well as:
• industrial design similar to iPod Touch
• 32GB flash drive
• easy access to hard drive
• 2nd battery bay if optical goes external
• displays STAY matte, with glossy option
Hopefully, the Airport Express will go 802.11n, and the Hi-Fi gets Wifi
• push email
• 16GB
• better camera
I'd like to see the 17" Macbook Pro get L.E.D. backlighting as well as:
• industrial design similar to iPod Touch
• 32GB flash drive
• easy access to hard drive
• 2nd battery bay if optical goes external
• displays STAY matte, with glossy option
Hopefully, the Airport Express will go 802.11n, and the Hi-Fi gets Wifi
Eidorian
Nov 24, 10:39 AM
Or you could call the store.
Apple does not suspend normal discounts because they are having a "sale".I'm about to hit the store. I asked last year about doubling up my education discount and the Black Friday one. I was told that I couldn't. :(
The EPP still seems valid today though according to the web store. My brother has an EPP through this company vs. the government. It'll hopefully still hold true.
I'll be going up to the Apple Store within the hour. I'll post from there. :D
Apple does not suspend normal discounts because they are having a "sale".I'm about to hit the store. I asked last year about doubling up my education discount and the Black Friday one. I was told that I couldn't. :(
The EPP still seems valid today though according to the web store. My brother has an EPP through this company vs. the government. It'll hopefully still hold true.
I'll be going up to the Apple Store within the hour. I'll post from there. :D
No comments:
Post a Comment