MongoTheGeek
Nov 16, 12:58 PM
The Register called shenanigans on this. I would have sent it to Arn to post but the whole thing seems absurd. I'd wager Apple's contract stipulates going all the way to Intel and probably a certain duration as well at least a year of selling all computers with Intel chips.
AMD somehow got behind Intel in terms of power and I've seen no signs of catch up. Not to say that in a year or two they won't be ahead, but not any time soon.
Apple won't introduce a AMD based machine until late 2008 at the earliest. I would almost expect a return to PPC first.
AMD somehow got behind Intel in terms of power and I've seen no signs of catch up. Not to say that in a year or two they won't be ahead, but not any time soon.
Apple won't introduce a AMD based machine until late 2008 at the earliest. I would almost expect a return to PPC first.
aristobrat
Jan 12, 08:09 PM
the iphone, while impressive, really isnt it. a fullscreen ipod i think woulda been nice, that with the iphone woulda earned this keynote a very high ranking.
So are you doubting that the next generation of iPods won't be full screen? ;)
So are you doubting that the next generation of iPods won't be full screen? ;)
Flowbee
Jan 12, 03:52 PM
Equating destruction of physical property to turning off tv sets is a stretch.
Obviously.:rolleyes: I was responding to the idea that is was somehow ironic (and funny) that such a low-tech device could disrupt such a high-tech show. There are many other low-tech ways to cause problems for exhibitors. You can't have an open, accessible show floor and protect against everyone's idea of a "prank." Exhibitors have to be able to trust that attendees, especially press credentialed attendees, won't make them look foolish in order to drive traffic to their blogs.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
If pranks like these become more common, companies and trade shows will start to put severe restrictions on who's allowed to attend their events.
That's nothing to laugh about.
Obviously.:rolleyes: I was responding to the idea that is was somehow ironic (and funny) that such a low-tech device could disrupt such a high-tech show. There are many other low-tech ways to cause problems for exhibitors. You can't have an open, accessible show floor and protect against everyone's idea of a "prank." Exhibitors have to be able to trust that attendees, especially press credentialed attendees, won't make them look foolish in order to drive traffic to their blogs.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
If pranks like these become more common, companies and trade shows will start to put severe restrictions on who's allowed to attend their events.
That's nothing to laugh about.
quagmire
Nov 14, 10:37 PM
Actually a crappy story is held against many movies, tv shows, books, and etc. That's why we call them crappy and they fail. Case in recent point, the drubbing that Skyline is getting, besides it's spectacular trailer. It looks good, but it came in fourth in movies this week, and word of mouth may make that as high as it goes. The complaint? Weak stories, characters, and a truly stupid & frustrating ending.
Like I said, most movies, tv show, etc has some sort of ridiculous illogical event going on to move the storyline along. Just as long as it isn't so ridiculous, they can get away with it. I don't think MW2 storyline had anything that was that ridiculous to make it bad.
I pity anyone trying to figure MW2's story that hasn't played the original MW. I admit I was surprised to find out that MW2's story had something to do with the first one. Not because it was a clever plot twist, but because it was pulled out of thin air. There was no fore shadowing allowing the player a chance to figure things out, as usual stories do, it was just BAM!
Why were you surprised? Black Ops was just a continuation of WaW with a focus on the Cold War this time. Why is it ridiculous to think MW2 would be tied to MW's storyline?
The first MW was more stream lined with only two storylines, eventually dovetailing into one. Things were easier to follow, and the moments far more memorable. That race thru the tilted ship, the crawling thru the grass by the Russian army, holding them off later by yourself, and that final car chase were truly memorable moments. MW2 and now Black Ops are just one forgettable blur, that I only recall the trudging thru, not the fascination of what I saw.
MW2 will be remembered for me at least because of the vivid battle scenes in DC since I am from the DC area and constantly passed by the buildings you see in the game. Then you have No Russian because of the shock of what that mission "made" you do( A) They gave you the option to skip it B) You didn't have to shoot to pass the mission).
Like I said, most movies, tv show, etc has some sort of ridiculous illogical event going on to move the storyline along. Just as long as it isn't so ridiculous, they can get away with it. I don't think MW2 storyline had anything that was that ridiculous to make it bad.
I pity anyone trying to figure MW2's story that hasn't played the original MW. I admit I was surprised to find out that MW2's story had something to do with the first one. Not because it was a clever plot twist, but because it was pulled out of thin air. There was no fore shadowing allowing the player a chance to figure things out, as usual stories do, it was just BAM!
Why were you surprised? Black Ops was just a continuation of WaW with a focus on the Cold War this time. Why is it ridiculous to think MW2 would be tied to MW's storyline?
The first MW was more stream lined with only two storylines, eventually dovetailing into one. Things were easier to follow, and the moments far more memorable. That race thru the tilted ship, the crawling thru the grass by the Russian army, holding them off later by yourself, and that final car chase were truly memorable moments. MW2 and now Black Ops are just one forgettable blur, that I only recall the trudging thru, not the fascination of what I saw.
MW2 will be remembered for me at least because of the vivid battle scenes in DC since I am from the DC area and constantly passed by the buildings you see in the game. Then you have No Russian because of the shock of what that mission "made" you do( A) They gave you the option to skip it B) You didn't have to shoot to pass the mission).
Chip NoVaMac
Mar 9, 11:06 PM
It's Apple's philosophy. It comes down to building priorities around it and executing on them.
<snip>
It's not marketing-speak or hyperbole for the camera. It's an artist speaking about his work. Can you identify with this?
Apple operates from a completely different place and mindset from everyone else.
Why?
Simple. They actually give a damn about the User Experience. They understand that tech is used by PEOPLE, and people have lives to get on with. So . . . simplify, simplify, simplify; cut, cut cut; and then work to perfect what's left over.
That's the beauty of it. It's very Zen. Perfection - or rather, sublimity - is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing more to take away.
Why doesn't the competition do this or think this way?
1) Their priority is to make as much money in as little time as possible and to do it as cheaply as possible.
2) They're stupid.
Most of the time, #1 happens because of #2.
And there is no cure for #2.
Very well put... it is Apple's attention to the user experience that keeps us buying Apple products that we never knew we wanted or needed. Only time will tell if Steve Jobs is/was the visionary that brought Apple to the heights it now enjoys. IMO he is... he brought Apple back from near bankruptcy.
To be honest, I yawned when the first iPod was released. But then I finally bit the "Apple" and was won over. Smartphones left me wanting. Tried the Windows and Palm smartphones and they left me wanting. Till I got the 1st gen iPhone. This was what I expected a smartphone to be like. Three years later I upgraded to the iPhone 4.
To be blunt, there have been some misses. The first ATV was nice but could not see it for the price and the limits it had out of the box. But the ATV2 gave me what I was looking for at a price that made it a no brainer for me.
Some call me an Apple fanboy. To me that is not fair. Some feel that Apple offers products that exists in a closed system that Apple controls, and that is true. But it is that closed system that I believe helps in some ways the user experience and safety from malware.
And in some ways it hurts the user experience at the same time. Example is with ATV2 and Netflix. I can not search for GLBT titles from ATV2 as a genre.
Is Apple perfect in their business model? No, but I am willing to accept it for the overall user experience....
<snip>
It's not marketing-speak or hyperbole for the camera. It's an artist speaking about his work. Can you identify with this?
Apple operates from a completely different place and mindset from everyone else.
Why?
Simple. They actually give a damn about the User Experience. They understand that tech is used by PEOPLE, and people have lives to get on with. So . . . simplify, simplify, simplify; cut, cut cut; and then work to perfect what's left over.
That's the beauty of it. It's very Zen. Perfection - or rather, sublimity - is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing more to take away.
Why doesn't the competition do this or think this way?
1) Their priority is to make as much money in as little time as possible and to do it as cheaply as possible.
2) They're stupid.
Most of the time, #1 happens because of #2.
And there is no cure for #2.
Very well put... it is Apple's attention to the user experience that keeps us buying Apple products that we never knew we wanted or needed. Only time will tell if Steve Jobs is/was the visionary that brought Apple to the heights it now enjoys. IMO he is... he brought Apple back from near bankruptcy.
To be honest, I yawned when the first iPod was released. But then I finally bit the "Apple" and was won over. Smartphones left me wanting. Tried the Windows and Palm smartphones and they left me wanting. Till I got the 1st gen iPhone. This was what I expected a smartphone to be like. Three years later I upgraded to the iPhone 4.
To be blunt, there have been some misses. The first ATV was nice but could not see it for the price and the limits it had out of the box. But the ATV2 gave me what I was looking for at a price that made it a no brainer for me.
Some call me an Apple fanboy. To me that is not fair. Some feel that Apple offers products that exists in a closed system that Apple controls, and that is true. But it is that closed system that I believe helps in some ways the user experience and safety from malware.
And in some ways it hurts the user experience at the same time. Example is with ATV2 and Netflix. I can not search for GLBT titles from ATV2 as a genre.
Is Apple perfect in their business model? No, but I am willing to accept it for the overall user experience....
Chef Medeski
Nov 25, 05:57 PM
$100 off MacBook. I wish I had bought.
killuminati
Sep 7, 10:39 PM
I can never have any respect or even try to understand for any one to say "******* the police thats how we treat 'em" Now, is that not bad boy enough.
It's a bit deeper then that though, he says
******* the police that's how we treat 'em
we buy our way out of jail, but we can't buy freedom
He's not just saying F the police just because they're the police.
It's a bit deeper then that though, he says
******* the police that's how we treat 'em
we buy our way out of jail, but we can't buy freedom
He's not just saying F the police just because they're the police.
Bonte
Oct 29, 02:24 PM
They will take "because it'll kill Apple's hardware business, which is where Apple makes most of their money" as an answer, however.
Apple's interests lie in selling high-margin solutions, not bottom-of-the-market extremely low margin PCs.
Think of Dell as Ford, and Apple as BMW.
The computer - car analogy has to stop, it makes no sense at all. The most reliable car is the Toyota Corolla because it is the longest in production and has the errors worked out a long time ago, worst reliable cars are short production but expensive models like the Ferrari. Ford has less luxury options but may well be more reliable than BMW, price and luxury isn't the key factor here.
As for the "high-margin solutions" Apple has a good position at the moment, price is competitive and high standard. It looks like Apple wants to keep a firm grip on the top end models but losing it on the low end, there is no sub $500 Mac! (except maybe the "iTV") Licensing an OS has a typical $80 price point and that is more than they make on a Mac Mini (hard- and software together) so it makes sense to me.
A few years back Steve said that Apple would focus more on software than on hardware (and brought the iPod on the market :) ), the release of 10.5 may well be the turning point for the OS. If Mac sales go the way of the iPod then i agree there is no need to license but if not i see no other option. Its not if but when.
Apple's interests lie in selling high-margin solutions, not bottom-of-the-market extremely low margin PCs.
Think of Dell as Ford, and Apple as BMW.
The computer - car analogy has to stop, it makes no sense at all. The most reliable car is the Toyota Corolla because it is the longest in production and has the errors worked out a long time ago, worst reliable cars are short production but expensive models like the Ferrari. Ford has less luxury options but may well be more reliable than BMW, price and luxury isn't the key factor here.
As for the "high-margin solutions" Apple has a good position at the moment, price is competitive and high standard. It looks like Apple wants to keep a firm grip on the top end models but losing it on the low end, there is no sub $500 Mac! (except maybe the "iTV") Licensing an OS has a typical $80 price point and that is more than they make on a Mac Mini (hard- and software together) so it makes sense to me.
A few years back Steve said that Apple would focus more on software than on hardware (and brought the iPod on the market :) ), the release of 10.5 may well be the turning point for the OS. If Mac sales go the way of the iPod then i agree there is no need to license but if not i see no other option. Its not if but when.
Ommid
Apr 25, 12:15 PM
I don't get the fascination with a marginal bigger screen, if I need a bigger screen I get my iPad.
Its all about losing the border, and getting a marginless screen
Its all about losing the border, and getting a marginless screen
roadbloc
Apr 12, 09:09 AM
Agreed. I feel like Wordpad, with the ability to open .doc and .docx files, would suffice.
And have Graphpad, a basic spreadsheet app, with the ability to open .xls and .xlsx for excel. :)
And Slideshow, a basic presentation app, with the ability to open .ppt and .pptx for PowerPoint. :)
Oh... hang on. That sounds awfully familiar. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Works)
And have Graphpad, a basic spreadsheet app, with the ability to open .xls and .xlsx for excel. :)
And Slideshow, a basic presentation app, with the ability to open .ppt and .pptx for PowerPoint. :)
Oh... hang on. That sounds awfully familiar. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Works)
emmawu
Jan 12, 07:57 PM
Have you forgotten that the first thing Jobs and Woz did was phone phreaking with Captain Crunch? Could this possibly be a wish fulfillment of having the coolest phone and because he is now a grown up not making prank calls to the Pope. I thought the whole talk was remeiniscent of the ultimate (legal) phone phreak. I was hoping Woz would've been on stage because you can probaly bet your bottom buck he's going to get one.
Right now it's a little too pricey for me but if there's one true thing about electonics, things always go down in price. The first Mac after all was $2,495 and it had no hard drive, just floppies. Still, tres macnifique! :cool:
Right now it's a little too pricey for me but if there's one true thing about electonics, things always go down in price. The first Mac after all was $2,495 and it had no hard drive, just floppies. Still, tres macnifique! :cool:
vendettabass
Nov 16, 04:33 PM
Nope. Wouldn't put the store down at 5:30 pm on a Thursday (EST) for maintenance. My money is on either a major failure (unlikely) or a PRODUCT(RED) MacBook.
EDIT:
Or, come to think of it, Quad Core Mac Pros.
awe dude now ive gotta stay up and find out! (its 10:30pm UK time!)
EDIT:
Or, come to think of it, Quad Core Mac Pros.
awe dude now ive gotta stay up and find out! (its 10:30pm UK time!)
mmcc
Mar 29, 03:54 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Windows Live Marketplace in Windows Vista a integrated (badly integrated but still integrated), App Store before it was discontinued due to lack of consumers and made to redirect to a Microsoft website that sold some products?
I believe Microsoft did partner with Digital River to bring 3rd party products to such a store. However it was badly organized, poorly promoted and ultimately drew little business as you indicate since it offered customers little or no benefit over direct purchases from the developer. Developers lost interest. It morphed into the current MS/DR relationship where DR handles much of the on-line sales of MS products.
I sort of hope developers lose interest in the Mac App Store as well. ;) Unfortunately, consumers love the basement pricing.
I believe Microsoft did partner with Digital River to bring 3rd party products to such a store. However it was badly organized, poorly promoted and ultimately drew little business as you indicate since it offered customers little or no benefit over direct purchases from the developer. Developers lost interest. It morphed into the current MS/DR relationship where DR handles much of the on-line sales of MS products.
I sort of hope developers lose interest in the Mac App Store as well. ;) Unfortunately, consumers love the basement pricing.
NoSmokingBandit
Nov 14, 09:47 PM
MW2's plot wasn't too ludicrous. You infiltrate a Russian terrorist cell, you're commanding officer betrays you, starts a war between the US and Russia. The only ludicrous part that I can remember is a nuke blowing apart the ISS.
There are many things wrong with MW2's plot. Instead of typing them all out i'll just copypasta them.
�As the mission opens, we�re treated to General Shepherd reciting a litany of Makarov�s excesses over a montage of shocking headlines. Makarov is an internationally known figure of menace, then, with a Russian military record. So when he confidently machineguns his way through the airport without even bothering to put on a mask, are we to believe that the Russian authorities weren�t able to identify him from security camera footage?
Instead, Russia blames a nobody CIA agent found dead at the scene who was killed by a point-blank pistol shot to the head. That doesn�t raise any red flags at all? The obvious conclusion is that the whole thing was an American plot, and that a full-scale invasion of the continental US is the appropriate response. The transition to the Takedown favela mission begets more confusion, such as: how did Shepherd tie the shell casings to Rojas? Meticulous analysis of the cutscene indicates that he actually re-created a 3D model of a shell casing from security camera footage, which was sufficiently hi-rez to make a match against a big bullet database. So the Russians, who had the actual shell casings to analyze, couldn�t figure that out? The security footage was crisp enough to recreate minute detail on a spent shell casing, but not of sufficient quality to identify Makarov�s face. Conclusion: Makarov�s face is smaller than a bullet.
�When the warriors of 141 get to South America, they make short work of tracking down their man. Unfortunately, HQ won�t send a helicopter to extract them from the favela so Soap rings up his old pal Nikolai on a payphone. Luckily, the Russian informant just so happens to be tooling around Rio in a chopper and pops right over to pick them up. The mission itself, dashing weaponless across rooftops and frantically leaping to safety, was brilliant fun in the heat of the moment. But upon reflection, we must concede that nothing about the scenario makes a bit of sense. But look, it�s Nikolai!!
�With his newfound freedom, Price�s first order of business is to launch a nuclear warhead at the east coast of the United States, with the goal of snuffing out the Russian invasion. Of course, he wasn�t planning to nuke America outright. When a nuclear explosion occurs in space, the only effect is an EMP blast that destroys all unshielded electronics in its line of sight.
While it made for an intensely dramatic scene as the burst rippled across America and demolished the ISS, there�s no way Price could have launched a missile from a Russian nuclear sub by himself. Did he just ring up Nikolai on a payphone to get the launch codes? How did he singlehandedly defeat the physical safety measures? You don�t just push the glowy red button with the mean face on it. There are elaborate control systems in place to prevent just such unauthorized launches.
http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb/GamesRadar/us/Games/M/Modern%20Warfare%202/Everything%20else/plot%20holes/Finished/112009_modernwarfare2_obs06--article_image.jpg
Above: Two people have to turn launch keys simultaneously to fire a real nuclear missile
One more thing: how did Price get it to detonate in space, anyhow? We�re pretty sure that wasn�t part of the missile�s original instructions. Regardless, if the Russians were serious about their �kill America� plan from the get-go, they probably would have launched HEMP and nuclear strikes of their own as a precursor to the invasion.
�Once the Russians have been successfully repelled, Shepherd and Task Force 141 get down to the business of mopping up Makarov. Shepherd calls out two potential hiding places, the �last safe havens on earth for Makarov and his men.� Incidentally, no one stopped to wonder how Shepherd suddenly uncovered these safe havens or, if he knew about them all along, why they weren�t investigated after the airport massacre. But wait! Intel gathered at one of the safehouses links Makarov to Shepherd: cue the shocking murder of Ghost and Roach at Shepherd�s hands.
Devastated, Price and Soap moan about how they�re all alone in the world with no one to turn to. Umm, guys? Aren�t you technically still officers in the British Armed Forces? Sure Shepherd was calling the duo �terrorists,� but America�s credibility on the world stage was shot to hell after the airport incident. Someone over at SAS would remember the heroes who gunned down Zakhaev and send help. No? OK, better just grab Nikolai and go after the bad guy yourselves.
Theres more you can read on your own, but these are the biggest imo.
http://www.gamesradar.com/f/modern-warfare-2s-glaring-plot-holes-exposed/a-20091120123332495077/p-1
There are many things wrong with MW2's plot. Instead of typing them all out i'll just copypasta them.
�As the mission opens, we�re treated to General Shepherd reciting a litany of Makarov�s excesses over a montage of shocking headlines. Makarov is an internationally known figure of menace, then, with a Russian military record. So when he confidently machineguns his way through the airport without even bothering to put on a mask, are we to believe that the Russian authorities weren�t able to identify him from security camera footage?
Instead, Russia blames a nobody CIA agent found dead at the scene who was killed by a point-blank pistol shot to the head. That doesn�t raise any red flags at all? The obvious conclusion is that the whole thing was an American plot, and that a full-scale invasion of the continental US is the appropriate response. The transition to the Takedown favela mission begets more confusion, such as: how did Shepherd tie the shell casings to Rojas? Meticulous analysis of the cutscene indicates that he actually re-created a 3D model of a shell casing from security camera footage, which was sufficiently hi-rez to make a match against a big bullet database. So the Russians, who had the actual shell casings to analyze, couldn�t figure that out? The security footage was crisp enough to recreate minute detail on a spent shell casing, but not of sufficient quality to identify Makarov�s face. Conclusion: Makarov�s face is smaller than a bullet.
�When the warriors of 141 get to South America, they make short work of tracking down their man. Unfortunately, HQ won�t send a helicopter to extract them from the favela so Soap rings up his old pal Nikolai on a payphone. Luckily, the Russian informant just so happens to be tooling around Rio in a chopper and pops right over to pick them up. The mission itself, dashing weaponless across rooftops and frantically leaping to safety, was brilliant fun in the heat of the moment. But upon reflection, we must concede that nothing about the scenario makes a bit of sense. But look, it�s Nikolai!!
�With his newfound freedom, Price�s first order of business is to launch a nuclear warhead at the east coast of the United States, with the goal of snuffing out the Russian invasion. Of course, he wasn�t planning to nuke America outright. When a nuclear explosion occurs in space, the only effect is an EMP blast that destroys all unshielded electronics in its line of sight.
While it made for an intensely dramatic scene as the burst rippled across America and demolished the ISS, there�s no way Price could have launched a missile from a Russian nuclear sub by himself. Did he just ring up Nikolai on a payphone to get the launch codes? How did he singlehandedly defeat the physical safety measures? You don�t just push the glowy red button with the mean face on it. There are elaborate control systems in place to prevent just such unauthorized launches.
http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb/GamesRadar/us/Games/M/Modern%20Warfare%202/Everything%20else/plot%20holes/Finished/112009_modernwarfare2_obs06--article_image.jpg
Above: Two people have to turn launch keys simultaneously to fire a real nuclear missile
One more thing: how did Price get it to detonate in space, anyhow? We�re pretty sure that wasn�t part of the missile�s original instructions. Regardless, if the Russians were serious about their �kill America� plan from the get-go, they probably would have launched HEMP and nuclear strikes of their own as a precursor to the invasion.
�Once the Russians have been successfully repelled, Shepherd and Task Force 141 get down to the business of mopping up Makarov. Shepherd calls out two potential hiding places, the �last safe havens on earth for Makarov and his men.� Incidentally, no one stopped to wonder how Shepherd suddenly uncovered these safe havens or, if he knew about them all along, why they weren�t investigated after the airport massacre. But wait! Intel gathered at one of the safehouses links Makarov to Shepherd: cue the shocking murder of Ghost and Roach at Shepherd�s hands.
Devastated, Price and Soap moan about how they�re all alone in the world with no one to turn to. Umm, guys? Aren�t you technically still officers in the British Armed Forces? Sure Shepherd was calling the duo �terrorists,� but America�s credibility on the world stage was shot to hell after the airport incident. Someone over at SAS would remember the heroes who gunned down Zakhaev and send help. No? OK, better just grab Nikolai and go after the bad guy yourselves.
Theres more you can read on your own, but these are the biggest imo.
http://www.gamesradar.com/f/modern-warfare-2s-glaring-plot-holes-exposed/a-20091120123332495077/p-1
MacRumors
Nov 23, 04:14 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
On November 24th Apple will be holding their annual Day After Thanksgiving sale (U.S. only) which is a one day event. What's notable about this event is that Apple rarely discounts their products, normally strictly following their manufactuer suggested retail prices. That being said, once sales tax and/or shipping costs and factored in, individual customers may still do better when purchasing from other online retailers.
Like last year (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=1934318&postcount=69), Apple will only be offering savings on specific products. A preliminary list available at this time reveals the following sales:
$11 off of iPods and iPod nanos
$20 off of Adobe Elements
$69 for .Mac
Unspecified discounts on the MacBook and Shure headphones
Final prices and offers will be posted when made available. The sale will be offered at their retail stores as well as the online Apple Store.
On November 24th Apple will be holding their annual Day After Thanksgiving sale (U.S. only) which is a one day event. What's notable about this event is that Apple rarely discounts their products, normally strictly following their manufactuer suggested retail prices. That being said, once sales tax and/or shipping costs and factored in, individual customers may still do better when purchasing from other online retailers.
Like last year (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=1934318&postcount=69), Apple will only be offering savings on specific products. A preliminary list available at this time reveals the following sales:
$11 off of iPods and iPod nanos
$20 off of Adobe Elements
$69 for .Mac
Unspecified discounts on the MacBook and Shure headphones
Final prices and offers will be posted when made available. The sale will be offered at their retail stores as well as the online Apple Store.
moiety
Dec 13, 09:52 AM
This is utter ********. The experience is key, and LTE hardware is nowhere near advanced enough to guarantee the experience that Apple would demand for a device the stature of the iPhone.
Remember: we're talking about the company that withheld phone wallpapers on the Original and 3G iPhones because the experience would have been several milliseconds too slow.
Fact: Verizon is not expecting LTE-capable hardware until mid-2011. There's no way Apple magically has an LTE phone ready to go while everyone else won't have one for 6 months.
Fact: Apple declined to integrate 3G into the iPhone when 3G was already available, because the hardware wasn't power-efficent enough. One of the main distinguishing features of the iPhone is its battery life. They're not going to tarnish that image by hacking first-generation, power-hogging LTE hardware into the phone, in ADDITION to CDMA, which is another radio tech they're only now deploying.
These sources are full of ****. QED.
Remember: we're talking about the company that withheld phone wallpapers on the Original and 3G iPhones because the experience would have been several milliseconds too slow.
Fact: Verizon is not expecting LTE-capable hardware until mid-2011. There's no way Apple magically has an LTE phone ready to go while everyone else won't have one for 6 months.
Fact: Apple declined to integrate 3G into the iPhone when 3G was already available, because the hardware wasn't power-efficent enough. One of the main distinguishing features of the iPhone is its battery life. They're not going to tarnish that image by hacking first-generation, power-hogging LTE hardware into the phone, in ADDITION to CDMA, which is another radio tech they're only now deploying.
These sources are full of ****. QED.
SevenInchScrew
Mar 10, 11:01 AM
In case you haven't noticed, they've redefined computing almost overnight.
What was the "old" definition of computing, and what is it now?
What was the "old" definition of computing, and what is it now?
firsttube
Sep 12, 08:38 AM
*SMACK!*
Those are Movie Trailers for the iPod.
Yeah, I just posted that same response on digg, right before it went down for maintenance. One of those "CONFIRMED" headlines saying they had confirmation of the iTMovieStore. Makes me want to roll my... oh yeah :rolleyes:
Those are Movie Trailers for the iPod.
Yeah, I just posted that same response on digg, right before it went down for maintenance. One of those "CONFIRMED" headlines saying they had confirmation of the iTMovieStore. Makes me want to roll my... oh yeah :rolleyes:
arkitect
Apr 21, 11:25 AM
Ha!
So someone voted my post -1 and I managed to bump it back to 0�
Of course I am quite sure it'll be back to -10 soon. :D
So someone voted my post -1 and I managed to bump it back to 0�
Of course I am quite sure it'll be back to -10 soon. :D
Motionblurrr
Mar 17, 07:28 PM
I get it a lot too but I just say "nah, this phone sucks it's the worst phone in the world" and they usually shut up.
They shut up because they have an insecurity about their phone and the iPhone 4 is the better phone. Shooting down a better phone makes their phone seem even worse. It's like a double headshot.
I hate to say it again but haters gon hate! It happens with ANYTHING. If you buy a BMW, Audi owners will waltz in saying "SEE MY CAR HAS THIS STANDARD IT'S WAY BETTER THAN BMW!!!!". If you buy a Rolex you get Omega and TAG Heuer owners going "MY WATCH IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN ROLEX BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER AND IT HAS MORE THINGS IN IT!!!".
It's a thing you have to live with if you buy the most popular, top-of-the-line luxury things. If you can afford it, why not buy it?
the whole thing makes my brain hurt because it's so stupid and I don't care if the guy next to me had an Evo or an iPhone 4. :rolleyes:
They shut up because they have an insecurity about their phone and the iPhone 4 is the better phone. Shooting down a better phone makes their phone seem even worse. It's like a double headshot.
I hate to say it again but haters gon hate! It happens with ANYTHING. If you buy a BMW, Audi owners will waltz in saying "SEE MY CAR HAS THIS STANDARD IT'S WAY BETTER THAN BMW!!!!". If you buy a Rolex you get Omega and TAG Heuer owners going "MY WATCH IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN ROLEX BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER AND IT HAS MORE THINGS IN IT!!!".
It's a thing you have to live with if you buy the most popular, top-of-the-line luxury things. If you can afford it, why not buy it?
the whole thing makes my brain hurt because it's so stupid and I don't care if the guy next to me had an Evo or an iPhone 4. :rolleyes:
MacFan26
Aug 10, 04:49 PM
w00t. I'll be buying a 23" real soon at the edu price. I'm excited! I was hoping they'd add built in iSight or the ability to use Front Row with it, but oh well, It'll be sweet to use with my powerbook. I doubt they'd update them soon, seems like they would have just released new ones with the Mac Pro if they were going to do that.
Liquorpuki
Mar 7, 12:21 AM
Why is Apple the only tech company that makes unique products? All the other big ones seem to just drop in behind Apple after they invent something... Examples:
�Phones that are designed to simply compete with the iPhone.
�Pretty much every non-Apple tablet.
�iMac lookalikes.
�I've even seem some unibody copy cats...
Why don't they try and come up with something of their own instead of trying to "make a better Apple product"? Its annoying... :mad:
You know... tech consists of much more than just smartphones and personal computers
Look at mobile gaming. Apple being in the market is actually screwing it up
�Phones that are designed to simply compete with the iPhone.
�Pretty much every non-Apple tablet.
�iMac lookalikes.
�I've even seem some unibody copy cats...
Why don't they try and come up with something of their own instead of trying to "make a better Apple product"? Its annoying... :mad:
You know... tech consists of much more than just smartphones and personal computers
Look at mobile gaming. Apple being in the market is actually screwing it up
sjo
Oct 28, 04:38 PM
The thin veneer is off the vast majority of people that clamor for OSS.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
I don't blame Apple. The OSS community abused what they had and turned to piracy by stealing the GUI. Kudos Apple.
OSX as we know it would not exist without the work "OSS crowd" did and does. So it's only appropriate for Apple to contribute back to the community, as it has done and hopefully continues to do.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
I don't blame Apple. The OSS community abused what they had and turned to piracy by stealing the GUI. Kudos Apple.
OSX as we know it would not exist without the work "OSS crowd" did and does. So it's only appropriate for Apple to contribute back to the community, as it has done and hopefully continues to do.
Yakuza
Apr 16, 07:34 AM
This shell may be fake, in terms of design I also think it looks a bit archaic, "squared", but looking back at this last iMac and the iPad (with the aluminum back cover) i guess that's the way Apple will go with the next iphone.
It'll look DAMN sexy :D
Way to go Malim :). Can it be a first prototype?
It'll look DAMN sexy :D
Way to go Malim :). Can it be a first prototype?
