steadysignal
Apr 1, 08:51 AM
2011. People are still watching TV? Scary.
indeed. the day will come that it wont matter what you watch content on, just how it gets paid for...
wishing that advertising would just die is fun. pipe-dream, but fun nonetheless. everyone wants to be paid.
indeed. the day will come that it wont matter what you watch content on, just how it gets paid for...
wishing that advertising would just die is fun. pipe-dream, but fun nonetheless. everyone wants to be paid.
deefnasty
Apr 13, 07:50 AM
Just checked into an Apple Store in Salem, NH - they have high end Verizon iPad 2 and they have had them regularly. Asians have been scooping up the stores other versions each morning in cash sales (or purchasing mall gift cards and Apple gift cards).
They said consumer demand is much greater for AT&T (GSM) iPad 2 than Verizon.
I'll wait for my wifi iPad 2 to arrive in the mail sometime next week.
They said consumer demand is much greater for AT&T (GSM) iPad 2 than Verizon.
I'll wait for my wifi iPad 2 to arrive in the mail sometime next week.
ChrisA
Oct 9, 03:37 PM
I agree, except for one little thing===> HD Content distribution. No real solution for that one yet.
If you can watch an HD movie over your satilite or cable system then somehow the cable or stilite company found a way to electronically distribute the HD content to you. That 25GB of data found a way to get into your house. Not only did it get into the huse but it did it in real time
If you can watch an HD movie over your satilite or cable system then somehow the cable or stilite company found a way to electronically distribute the HD content to you. That 25GB of data found a way to get into your house. Not only did it get into the huse but it did it in real time
Hans Brix
Apr 21, 09:38 PM
Paid $4.159 for 87 octane on 04/18/2011 in Northern California.
more...
rhett7660
Apr 8, 12:00 AM
50 billion out of a budget of what? A trillion and a bit? What's really ridiculous is all the petty bitching coming out of DC over what amounts to less than 5% of the total. The Titanic is hit and two engineers are fighting over whether or not to turn on one pump.
If the government "shuts down", not much will change. Life will continue.
Not if you count on your paychecks coming from them. Life will continue sure, but it will be a hell of a lot harder.
This has happened before and it is crap anyway you look at.
If the government "shuts down", not much will change. Life will continue.
Not if you count on your paychecks coming from them. Life will continue sure, but it will be a hell of a lot harder.
This has happened before and it is crap anyway you look at.
mofunk
Nov 28, 12:59 AM
Yeah I wish this case was out when I got my iPod. The back of mine has a few scratches on it. I've had this case for a few days now and I love it. The cut is perfect.
more...
Apple OC
Mar 11, 10:19 PM
Ok now- let's just make one thing clear. :D
I'm single. I need a sexy car, not a four door. :)
They don't come any sexier than an American Corvette
I'm single. I need a sexy car, not a four door. :)
They don't come any sexier than an American Corvette
redeye be
Jun 25, 05:11 AM
Like have the 24 hr average on the main section, because this is what I look at when I look at our team.
That's what the 'details' are for. I don't want to clutter the widget with to much information, unless you ask for it by expanding it.
If a lot of people would like this i would be forced to implement though ;).
Also a way to see the graphs would be great, but that might be a problem.
I have been playing with this though from the beginning, there are some issues.
First, and most important: EOC might not like this, they still like getting hits on their webpage. I really don't want to piss them off since they are the ones providing the info.
Second: A log would have to be kept with all data, for the desired period of time. For this to work the widget would have to be able to download the xml file every 3 hours, making the graphs useless when you miss an update.
Maybe in the future, when somebody donates a server to host our own stats... :rolleyes:
By the way, if you ever need some help, don't be afraid to give me a shout
I'll keep that in mind, thx! What are you good at? ;)
For now, the biggest support anyone can give me is using the widget, keeping this thread alive and spreading the word (maybe even signature wise like some people do).
That's what the 'details' are for. I don't want to clutter the widget with to much information, unless you ask for it by expanding it.
If a lot of people would like this i would be forced to implement though ;).
Also a way to see the graphs would be great, but that might be a problem.
I have been playing with this though from the beginning, there are some issues.
First, and most important: EOC might not like this, they still like getting hits on their webpage. I really don't want to piss them off since they are the ones providing the info.
Second: A log would have to be kept with all data, for the desired period of time. For this to work the widget would have to be able to download the xml file every 3 hours, making the graphs useless when you miss an update.
Maybe in the future, when somebody donates a server to host our own stats... :rolleyes:
By the way, if you ever need some help, don't be afraid to give me a shout
I'll keep that in mind, thx! What are you good at? ;)
For now, the biggest support anyone can give me is using the widget, keeping this thread alive and spreading the word (maybe even signature wise like some people do).
more...
spazzcat
Aug 19, 08:49 PM
It's working here in Cleveland, Ohio
fox10078
Mar 26, 04:13 PM
After all the posts on Apple v. Google, this should really be pg. 1 news...
Agreed, but they need the drama to attract views.
Agreed, but they need the drama to attract views.
more...
chrmjenkins
Apr 21, 05:24 PM
There's a huge difference between SUPPORTING the a-5 (or retina display) and REQUIRING.
Look, I'm not against the A-5. Whatever. Knock yourselves out with it. I'm just saying that when push comes to shove, you're going to wish you had LTE compatability more than an A-5 processor.
All the processing speed in the world can't save you if your phone can't access content fast enough -- and with the move to cloud-based storage on the horizon, anyone carrying a 3G phone is going to have a miserable experience.
Any issues I've ever had with streaming have been related to my signal or being in a dense area for tower usage. Adding 4G/LTE capability solves neither of these problems. 3G is sufficient for streaming music files and videos. If you're wanting to stream >= 720p content over the air, you're a bit crazy anyway given that you're going to have data caps staring you in the face on any LTE plan.
Look, I'm not against the A-5. Whatever. Knock yourselves out with it. I'm just saying that when push comes to shove, you're going to wish you had LTE compatability more than an A-5 processor.
All the processing speed in the world can't save you if your phone can't access content fast enough -- and with the move to cloud-based storage on the horizon, anyone carrying a 3G phone is going to have a miserable experience.
Any issues I've ever had with streaming have been related to my signal or being in a dense area for tower usage. Adding 4G/LTE capability solves neither of these problems. 3G is sufficient for streaming music files and videos. If you're wanting to stream >= 720p content over the air, you're a bit crazy anyway given that you're going to have data caps staring you in the face on any LTE plan.
MikeTheC
Nov 3, 01:19 AM
I'd like to tackle a few points in the discussion here.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
more...
toddybody
May 2, 02:36 PM
Since when are white ones ever bigger than black ones?
Oh my, you went there:o
Oh my, you went there:o
spillproof
Feb 18, 10:33 PM
Jobs is a robot sent from another planet, all they have there are black turtle necks and jeans.
Stevey is ballin.
Stevey is ballin.
more...
AaronEdwards
Feb 18, 11:45 AM
And as I wrote in another thread, those photos are not enough to judge how he currently looks, nor if it's him or not in the NE photos.
The photos from the Obama meet has been chosen to be published, he's sitting down, it's dark, and you can only the the side of his head since it's taken from behind. The other photo just shows part of the top of his head.
The tabloid is said to release more photos from the Cancer center in the print edition. I guess those would make it clearer if it's him or not.
Or if more photos are released from the meet that would make things clearer too.
The photos from the Obama meet has been chosen to be published, he's sitting down, it's dark, and you can only the the side of his head since it's taken from behind. The other photo just shows part of the top of his head.
The tabloid is said to release more photos from the Cancer center in the print edition. I guess those would make it clearer if it's him or not.
Or if more photos are released from the meet that would make things clearer too.
tyr2
Sep 20, 04:58 PM
I would say it still wouldn't work, as the OS X RAID implementation is software RAID. Hence, OS X has to boot to get the RAID array working.
In the case of RAID 1 if it did work it might break the mirror (no big deal).
Give it a shot. Worse case it won't work; shouldn't affect your data at all.
Cheers for your comments Abulia, I thought I'd give it a go anyway but you're right it didn't work. I just get the flashing power light, a loud beep then the Mac startup chime and a normal boot up. Strange. Oh well will wait for a fix from Apple I guess.
In the case of RAID 1 if it did work it might break the mirror (no big deal).
Give it a shot. Worse case it won't work; shouldn't affect your data at all.
Cheers for your comments Abulia, I thought I'd give it a go anyway but you're right it didn't work. I just get the flashing power light, a loud beep then the Mac startup chime and a normal boot up. Strange. Oh well will wait for a fix from Apple I guess.
more...
majorp
Sep 1, 04:09 AM
Update away. Those of you running illegal copies of the WWDC (torrent) will be happy to know that your IP and other system/contact info is automatically logged and forwarded to Apple Legal by the Leopard Software Update. :eek:
"Enjoyed the preview? Good. We'll be contacting you soon..."
yeah, it would only cost them $1000+ to have someone come round to my house and do something about it, well worth the �59 they would sell the end product for :rolleyes:
do they check everybodys IP, how do they know i wasn't at wwdc.
"Enjoyed the preview? Good. We'll be contacting you soon..."
yeah, it would only cost them $1000+ to have someone come round to my house and do something about it, well worth the �59 they would sell the end product for :rolleyes:
do they check everybodys IP, how do they know i wasn't at wwdc.
dethmaShine
May 2, 12:59 PM
You mean this was not the right tool?
Image (http://cdn.pocket-lint.com/images/AkRf/white-iphone-4-thicker-black-0.jpg?20110429-125543)
/Sarcasm
Lol. That's Engadget.
Image (http://cdn.pocket-lint.com/images/AkRf/white-iphone-4-thicker-black-0.jpg?20110429-125543)
/Sarcasm
Lol. That's Engadget.
leekohler
Apr 23, 09:28 AM
No- he's a jerk.
Scottyk9
Oct 16, 04:37 PM
every time a rumor comes up regarding "the" iPhone I will vote negative for it. i just can't hear it anymore.
If they release one, good, but please stop the rumors.
ummm....
..... you do know the name of the website where you are reading / posting? This may give you some indication as to whether or not you will be exposed to rumor - mongering.
:D
If they release one, good, but please stop the rumors.
ummm....
..... you do know the name of the website where you are reading / posting? This may give you some indication as to whether or not you will be exposed to rumor - mongering.
:D
gnd
Mar 16, 12:02 PM
I know I'm a bit late, but I took this on saturday partially with this challenge in mind. What do you think?
http://gnd.homedns.org/PassingTheGate_1000.jpg
http://gnd.homedns.org/PassingTheGate_1000.jpg
Grimace
Nov 16, 09:32 PM
One thing that is important to investors is the ranking of units shipped (in comparison to other companies.) Apple is currently 4th behind Gateway -- but VERY close!! Q4 2006 should bring Apple to the 3rd place for US shipments in America, behind Dell and HP. That will turn a lot of heads. Q3 Shipments (http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/gartner_apple_mac_grabbed_61_of_us_market_share_in_q3_06/)
JAT
Apr 13, 12:23 AM
Why would customers be preferring the Verizon iPad? The (factory unlocked) GSM iPad can be used in nearly every country, and domestically AT&T has faster 3G service if I recall correctly. Although Verizon has better voice and better coverage, I can't see people in metropolitan areas actually being better off with the CDMA iPad. Since the iPad data payment can't be tied to a pre-existing AT&T or Verizon cell phone plan, I just don't see much advantage to getting a Verizon iPad unless you live in an area without AT&T service. Thoughts?
Well, I can get 22% off a Verizon plan, that sort of thing might matter. Although, I don't want a 3G iPad, so....no matter to me.
One point I would like to make is that for normal surfing the speed difference really doesn't matter much. My ViPhone is about as fast for average webpages as my 30x faster home internet. Math: I regularly get 33Mbps or more at home (got 37 just now), testing with speedtest.net, still haven't broken 1Mbps on V 3G in various places around town.
But I digress...it hardly matters because webpages are simple text. You all can measure your di...er...downloads all you want, but loading a couple text files takes almost no throughput. Video streaming and action gaming are different, of course, but those are not the most common uses of a smartphone or iPad.
I could measure the difference in speed to load a page, say this page of this forum, and it would be obviously faster at home. But it's still only seconds, maybe fractions of seconds. I read fast, but not so fast that 2 seconds or so can change my life. For most people, this is the reality that makes it not matter.* No, I'm not going to choose 3G for Netflix vs my home internet. But then, 90" screen is better for TV than 3.5", anyway.
The only usage of my iPhone so far where I've truly noticed the slower speed is app downloading. Which is not a major part of my life. If it's massive-upgrade-day for my apps, I'll wait til I'm on wifi at home to download them.
* Also, crap DNS speed really throws many people for surfing, anyway. The internet's dirty little secret. I wonder how many millions don't realize they could be faster by typing a couple digits into setup.
Well, I can get 22% off a Verizon plan, that sort of thing might matter. Although, I don't want a 3G iPad, so....no matter to me.
One point I would like to make is that for normal surfing the speed difference really doesn't matter much. My ViPhone is about as fast for average webpages as my 30x faster home internet. Math: I regularly get 33Mbps or more at home (got 37 just now), testing with speedtest.net, still haven't broken 1Mbps on V 3G in various places around town.
But I digress...it hardly matters because webpages are simple text. You all can measure your di...er...downloads all you want, but loading a couple text files takes almost no throughput. Video streaming and action gaming are different, of course, but those are not the most common uses of a smartphone or iPad.
I could measure the difference in speed to load a page, say this page of this forum, and it would be obviously faster at home. But it's still only seconds, maybe fractions of seconds. I read fast, but not so fast that 2 seconds or so can change my life. For most people, this is the reality that makes it not matter.* No, I'm not going to choose 3G for Netflix vs my home internet. But then, 90" screen is better for TV than 3.5", anyway.
The only usage of my iPhone so far where I've truly noticed the slower speed is app downloading. Which is not a major part of my life. If it's massive-upgrade-day for my apps, I'll wait til I'm on wifi at home to download them.
* Also, crap DNS speed really throws many people for surfing, anyway. The internet's dirty little secret. I wonder how many millions don't realize they could be faster by typing a couple digits into setup.
bmustaf
Apr 5, 10:27 AM
I'm a *total* Apple fan. I love everything from my MBP, iPhones, iPads....but the Xoom is a *damn* good device. I mean, seriously good.
It's not ready for the masses yet, but if you know even the slightest about tech (in its use, not in more technical aspects), it *really* is a superior device at the moment.
There are a few software quirks, but a sw upgrade or two and those are gone. Besides, the list of "quirks" in iOS/iPhone OS is still large :).
I own all of them and by business develops & deploys our services for the iOS platform, but the Xoom was given to me to convince me to port at least a UI of our backend service to the Android by a partner - and I'm *VERY* impressed by where the Android 3 platform and the Xoom is going. Enough to consider putting dev resources towards building an Android port.
Apple better watch out, they're flying high and iPad 2 is good, but Consumer Reports is right, the Xoom is good, and it won't take much more to make a good competitor. iPad 3 and iOS 5 better be a *huge* leap forward (and shed some of this Jobsian hubris he has from his ego, I love the guy and what he's accomplished, but his ego gets in the way sometimes, and I see it becoming more and more troublesome for AAPL).
Motorola Xoom?
It's not ready for the masses yet, but if you know even the slightest about tech (in its use, not in more technical aspects), it *really* is a superior device at the moment.
There are a few software quirks, but a sw upgrade or two and those are gone. Besides, the list of "quirks" in iOS/iPhone OS is still large :).
I own all of them and by business develops & deploys our services for the iOS platform, but the Xoom was given to me to convince me to port at least a UI of our backend service to the Android by a partner - and I'm *VERY* impressed by where the Android 3 platform and the Xoom is going. Enough to consider putting dev resources towards building an Android port.
Apple better watch out, they're flying high and iPad 2 is good, but Consumer Reports is right, the Xoom is good, and it won't take much more to make a good competitor. iPad 3 and iOS 5 better be a *huge* leap forward (and shed some of this Jobsian hubris he has from his ego, I love the guy and what he's accomplished, but his ego gets in the way sometimes, and I see it becoming more and more troublesome for AAPL).
Motorola Xoom?
No comments:
Post a Comment